January 3, 2012 – Tonight on the Dark Side with Kira Davis we’ll talk Iowa caucuses and Santorum’s surge, plus Newt’s slide. Also, Happy New Year! Its 2012,, the year it all ends according the the “History” Channel’s version of the Mayan predictions. How are you preparing for the end of the world? Join us tonight at 10pm ET, 7pm Pacific. No cookies. New Year’s resolution ; )
Tag Archives: Iowa
These are the famous lyrics from the first ensemble tune of the classic “The Music Man”, set in 1912. The con-artist Harold Hill strolls into a rural Iowa town ready to spring his latest gimmick on an unsuspecting people. It’s almost a challenge from his fellow matchstick men to try to conquer the folks of River City who, being forewarned by his colleagues may be simple, but not stupid. This is not going to be an easy con.
Yet the words in this little ditty are quite revealing in their contradictory message – you’re always welcome here, but we’ll basically keep you at arms length. What worked for Meredith Willson’s plot setting also seems to be the backdrop for the “first in the Union” Iowa Caucuses. So, if we were to combine the two, we can indeed celebrate the Centennial of Iowa Stubborn.
As one experiences Willson’s great musical, one will realize that the term “Iowa Stubborn” is eventually one of endearment. As unusual as the townsfolk seem to be to outsiders, they also eventually approve to be genuine. At the same time, however, they also prove to have a gullible side, at least temporarily. Such can also be said of the very long processes of the Iowa Caucus.
For years (not quite a hundred), Iowa has been at the epicenter of the presidential primary universe because of its placement among the respective caucuses and primaries. Candidates who are truly serious about their party’s nomination will not just visit, but virtually inhabit the small, rural state in the heartland – shaking hands, kissing babies and consuming all manner of fried foods (hopefully not getting the three confused – shaking babies and kissing food is frowned upon in these parts). Yet despite the pre-season polls and the self-anointed talking heads making grandiose predictions, Iowa often seems to flash that “stubborn” to the rest of the nation at the last minute.
Perhaps it is not as random or naïve as one may think either. These are down to earth folks who know all too well that come January 4th, the political spring will dry up and the state will be hard pressed to see hide nor hair of a candidate except on television. As ingratiating (ok, brown-nosing) as the candidates have been and will be for the next several days, Iowans know that their small but significant mark on the political stage has an expiration date and they have perfected the art of keeping the candidate’s attention for as long as they can.
At the same time, the people of Iowa can allow the occasional “Harold Hill” to stir them up. All too often has the political snake-oil salesman been successful in convincing Iowans to buy their elixir in bulk. Sometimes, this boost out of the gate will propel these folks to eventual victory by way of their party’s nomination, but more often than not, it only results in a pop-shot that ends with a quiet thud out in the desert.
Still, the caucuses have yielded the intended fruit in times past. For the Democrats, the last three caucuses have produced nominees, dating back to the last century (if that doesn’t make you feel old..) and for the GOP, it goes back to 1992, with the exception of Mike Huckabee’s seeing-eye single that stranded him on first in 2008.
However, the question is, now that the GOP has moved to a more proportional system of appointing delegates, similar to that of the Democrats (I think I just tasted my lunch again), can Iowa stay the power player it has been in past election cycles or will the caucuses wonder into a far less relevant role? With our Centennial celebration of Iowa Stubborn, does this also mark the end of the reign of said stubbornness? What will the face of Iowa politics look like in 2016?
Unorthodox, stubborn, salt-of-the-earth or just downright quirky – this could possibly be the end of the Iowa heyday when it comes to the primary politics. But while the folks of the Hawkeye state have been a combination of inviting, yet standoffish, wise, yet gullible, there are one thing – enduring.
Still, you know, you ought to give Iowa, a try!
Until we find a full length recording available to the public, here is the debate in 4 parts:
Fox News and the Republican party of Iowa will be hosting Thursday night’s GOP Presidential candidate debate in Sioux City, Iowa at 9pm Eastern.
Attending the debate will be Michelle Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Jon Huntsman, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum and Rick Perry.
With former Newt Gingrich still holding the top spot in Iowa polls, albeit by a slim margin over Rep. Paul, he is likely to be the target in another game show style debate.
With only 3 weeks to go before Iowans choose their nominee, the race in that state has tightened. According to a PPP poll, Gingrich is holding the top spot at 22%, Paul at 21%, Romney at 16%, 11% for Bachmann and the rest of the field ending in the single digits with Gary Johnson in last place with only 1% of the survey.
Where to Watch
The debate video below is the entire debate, plus pre-debate commentary from FoxNews.
WASHINGTON, Dec. 12, 2011 — Press conference with Randall Terry (photo) at White House, 12:00 Noon Monday, December 12, to discuss the new ads, and the strategy to cause 7% – 8% of Catholics who voted for Obama in 2008 to forsake him in 2012, and thereby aid Obama’s defeat in the general election.
Two new ads are on the front page of www.TerryForPresident.com
Ad 1: Obama, Sharia Law, & Funding Terrorists.
Ad 2: Sharia Law Nightmare: “Once upon a time there was a bad President…”
Randall Terry states: “President Obama’s foreign policy and oil policy are a frontal assault on human rights in Islamic countries, and a threat to American civilians and military. By forcing Americans to buy oil from Saudi Arabia – which is the largest financier of terrorism in the world – he insures that our money will go to terrorists who kill Americans, and other innocents throughout the world. Beyond that, Obama calls Islamic nations ‘friends’ in the ‘war on terror’ while their leaders terrorize minorities within their borders.
“The proposed pipeline from Canada to Texas would be a great step toward energy independence, as well as a means of cutting off funding to Islamic terrorists. Tragically, Obama doesn’t appear to give a damn about human rights, cutting of funds to terrorists, or energy independence. His policies are suicide on the installment plan.
“These TV ads say what millions of Americans already believe…that there is a dangerous link between Obama and the Islamic world.
“We will run these ads in New Hampshire, just as we are running the pro-life ads in Iowa.”
ABC held yet another Republican debate at Drake University in Iowa Saturday. Diane Sawyer moderated along with George Steph….. oh you know who he is, don’t make me spell the whole thing. The GOP field is becoming smaller and it seems to make for a much more interesting debate process. There was arguing, bickering and even a few jokes. All the candidates seemed to appreciate the extra time less contenders in the field produced and they all took full advantage.
Cranky Uncle Newt showed up straight from the family Thanksgiving gathering where he spent the whole weekend cranking at cousin Jimmy for being a lazy, slacker, mama’s boy and fussing at Aunt Linda for being 40 years old and still single. Newt has that air – he’s one of the most intelligent political candidates in modern history but he always sounds like he’s in a bad mood. Personally I find it charming; some of my favorite relatives are cranky old people. I don’t know how it washes with the rest of the electorate, however. Also, there was the issue of Newt’s hair. His typically well-groomed, silky white mane was looking extra helmet-y on Saturday. It was strange and distracting for this blogger who is weirdly obsessed with presidential/political manes. Is Newt auditioning for Galaxy Quest 2?
Newt’s hair aside, the Speaker’s Saurday debate performance was that of a man who know he is surging in the polls and understands the importance of winning in Iowa. No doubt, Newt would kill Obama (metaphorically, liberals. Don’t get your chemical-free, dye-free panties in a bunch) in a debate, but do Americans want a Debater-in-Chief or something more? Time will tell.
I get tired of saying this about Romney, but he was quite polished, as usual. Mitt Romney worked very hard to reassure voters that he is not the establishment candidate many conservatives are worried about. He has a private sector record, didn’t you know? Oh, yes…Romney worked in the private sector for 25 years. Also, Romney was a private sector businessman for 25 years. And don’t forget, for 25 years Mitt Romney worked in the private sector, that’s run privately, and not by government. As always, Romney was clear and succinct and even got a few good-natured barbs in there. He continues to lay out a platform for the general elections, should he receive the nomination.
Rick Perry seems much more relaxed in a debate setting where he is afforded more time to answer questions. Perry is as solid on his positions as the day he announced, but the real question is this: Will Americans be more interested in his actual policy and political platform than his debate performances?
Ron Paul was there and so were many, many, many of his supporters – as usual. Ron Paul wants to end the Fed. He wants to end the Fed and American involvement in foreign issues of any kind, forever. Of all the candidates I think Paul is the most consistent. He never backtracks and never changes his tune. I may tire of hearing him talk about the Fed, but at least I know Ron Paul hates the Fed. No one can lie or say otherwise.
Rick Santorum had a good night, but he continues to see less screen time than his opponents and have fewer questions directed toward him. At this point Santorum is known as the ‘social conservative’ candidate and he seems comfortable with that. Santorum had many good moments on Saturday night. One came when Diane Sawyer was becoming perturbed that none of the candidates would give a firm number on the amount of jobs they would create in their first term as President. Santorum basically said its not the President’s job to make promises like that because the President can’t create jobs; private sector citizens create jobs and all the government can do is get out of their way. I like that answer. Government doesn’t create anything, Diane! Except red tape; they are good at that.
Michele Bachmann gave a very good performance Saturday as well. Iowa is her home state and she certainly looks at home when she is campaigning there. As a former tax lawyer and IRS employee, Bachmann has a very unique position. She’s been on the inside of our tax code and she knows how devastating it is for working families. She knows the dangers of Obamacare and Obama’s tax policies in general. Bachmann is extremely intelligent. Those Americans that live on the coasts may feel she is dumb because her A’s are flat and she talks like she’s from Iowa. I think those people should stop being such snobs. Quit listening to her (very American) accent and listen to the content of her words. Bachmann may have a very slim chance of winning this primary, but she seems more than qualified to be in this race. Her experience as a midwestern girl on the inside of Washington makes her one of the more genuine candidates, in my opinion. The Iowa primary will be very telling for Bachmann. If she does not do well there, its likely her campaign ends. Bachmann did manage to salute her tea party compatriot, Herman Cain. As she said, its just not a debate anymore unless someone mentions 9-9-9. I agree! I missed the Herminator. I did not miss Jon Huntsman.
Sawyer and George (sorry, I just can’t type that whole name) did a satisfactory job moderating, although Sawyer was very condescending when she opened with a comment to Iowa voters telling them how IMPRESSED she was at how seriously they take their primary process. Imagine that, Diane! A bunch of mid-west country hicks who don’t shop designer stores or have issues with trans-fats actually like to take part in the political process. How cute! Yes, Diane – Iowans vote. They love to vote. They love America and they care about what happens here. Shocking news to an East coast elitist, mainstream media diva, I know.
It has been awhile since I recapped a debate. Mostly because of that pesky drinking rule that came with “9-9-9″, but since it was only invoked two or three times tonight, I am still sober enough to present to my twelve loyal readers a recap of the debate @GaltsGirl style! If you are interested in what people other than myself think about the debate, (unlikely, I know) you can search the twitter timeline for the finally settled on hashtag #IowaDebate or check out @VodkaPundit’s ever entertaining live drunk blog of the whole mess here.
Without further delay, some of my favs from the night:
No Johnson. No Huntsman. #GOP2012
Sawyer says “Jobs in America” like it’s a mythical unicorn… wait…
Paul on Jobs: Know why we have a recession, and yanno…correct and don’t repeat. Bubble, bubble, toil and trouble!
Santorum on jobs: I campaigned EVERYWHERE in Iowa. There are no jobs… I double checked
Romney: See Newt’s big gov’t record. Gingrich and I disagree: like Moon Rocks! Children as slaves! Eat the rich!
Newt Rebuttal to Romney: You lost to Kennedy in ’94. So you had to get a real job. #FACT.
Paul on Newt: Single Payer, TARP support. Freddie Mac (hiiiissssssss) , and how’s that taxpayer dividend working for ya?
Newt to Paul: Heck yeah, I wanna audit the Fed. And yeah… I advised Freddie. It was a J O B. .. now let’s break em up!
Bachmann: Im 55 and a Constitutional Conservative ( nevermind me getting into your bedroom and marriage! )
Bachmann: Newt wanted Obamacare before Obama did. Romney did Obamacare! Newt / Romney are our problem **Kudos here to Bachmann for creating the fastest meme in history
( there was some #debatepillowtalk in my timeline here… also, I think I poured drink #4 about then)
Romney: I’m not Newt! But I play him on the campaign trail!
Romney to Perry: You’re kinda right, except where you aren’t. Obamacare is FAR worse than Romneycare! So there!
Santorum: I’m a leader… just dont check the polls!
Ron Paul: I take my oath(s) very seriously. Seriously enough that I sometimes end up voting by myself. Jerks
Gingrich: Yep, Ive made mistakes, and I go to God for forgiveness. So there. **This was on the fidelity question. Smart play by Newt, because … who is gonna argue with God?
Dear Ron Paul: Mitt Romney just expressed your FP in 30 seconds… please, tell me you took notes! ** To recap here.. I agree’d with Mitt!!! The stance on standing by our allies but not speaking for them was pretty gutsy by Mitt.. even if Paul has been saying it since the wheel was invented.
Romney: I didnt grow up poor, but my Daddy was. So, I am not a witch, I am you!
Romney: “States can do whatever the heck that they want to do.” *** Yes, that is an actual quote. Which rocked.. then he started talking about RomneyCare and I kinda zoned out a little.
And then, somehow, ABC decided that a debate should be a love-fest and tried to make each of the candidates say something nice about the other candidates. Ron Paul got lots of love.. and then Bachmann trotted out the 9-9-9 one final time. It was all really kinda of gross and not informative. I also may have gotten my last drink at some point here.
ABC commentators called Newt as the winner almost immediately. I’m not 100% sure I agree. Santorum did pretty well here ( it is, after all, time for his 15 minutes and I am doing my part) and Romney scored some points with me on his foreign policy statements. Ron Paul got the most applause, as usual. His people where there. Of course!
So that’s it, folks. Only 343,994 more debates to go… or something.
For someone who seems to know so much about accusing people of flip flopping, it seems surprising that Mitt has let himself be strung up by this very same tactic, himself. What do ya’ll think? Is this irony? Poetic justice? Or is Mitt just not very good at dealing with his own PR?
As always, you can let us know in the comments below or Facebook.
In the continual march of “inevitability”, Mitt Romney picks up another big name endorsement. Sometime today, Senator John Thune (R-SD) is expected to announce his support of presidential hopeful Mitt Romney. The following excerpt is from DesMoinesRegister.com.
“Mitt Romney has shown throughout his life in the private sector, as leader of the Olympics, as governor, and in this campaign that he will not back down from difficult challenges. His plans to revitalize the private sector and restore our country’s fiscal health are drawn from his 25 year career as a conservative businessman.” -Sen John Thune
Is Mitt the “inevitable” candidate? Or do these endorsements, ultimately, amount to nothing? Let us know what you think in the comments below.
Last night, at a banquet for the Iowa Faith And Freedom Coalition, Rick Santorum brought a crowd to their feet and tears to their eyes, when he discussed both his faith and a personal story of how he and his wife lost their child within hours of being born. Here’s an excerpt of Rick discussing the birth (and sadly) the death of his son.
He was delivered in the middle of the night. He was born alive, but far too young to survive. And we held him for two hours. It was two hours, where he knew only love. Not a bad life.
The next day, we took him home, so our children could know that they had a little brother. That he was real. He was a person. He had dignity, and he was part of our family.
Video of this speech is actually hard to find at the moment, so I’ll have to direct you to TheRightScoop.com in order for you to see all of what Santorum said, but I found much of his speech to be worthwhile. I’m not sharing this so much to have a “political” discussion, as much as I am to have a “human” discussion. It’s not common to see a candidate speak so candidly and with their guard down. If you’d like to skip to the story about Rick’s son, it starts at about the 14:25 mark.
It is now official: The Sunshine State of Florida will hold it’s Republican Presidential Primary on Jan 31st, 2012.
While GOP establishment operatives across America have expressed a wide variety of complaints about Florida’s decision to hold their Primary on Jan 31st, this Floridian believes this is simply a matter of Florida’s right to decide when to hold their primaries, not the decision of outsiders from other states or establishment GOP operatives who, frankly haven’t been doing so well for America in recent years.It was that kind of elitist mentality that inspired the Tea Party groups across America to take it upon themselves to restore true conservative principles back into American politics, which they did in the historic 2010 elections. Since this whole debate is about Florida’s decision to hold their primary earlier than the GOP establishment would like, so let’s see what actual Florida politicians had to say were the reasons for the date change shall we? We will leave the national kingmakers of the GOP establishment’s opinions for the end of this article.
NOTE: This major decision to change Florida’s Primary date in 2012 came about with the creation of a state law that required a committee to be formed that required Governor Rick, House Speaker and Senate President Mike Haridopolos to each nominate 3 choices to serve on the committee, one of which must be a Democrat, thus the committee had 9 republicans and 3 Democrats on it. The final vote that decided the primary date change was 7 -2, with all Republicans agreeing on the primary date change along with one Democrat.
The committee members are as follows, with who picked the members noted:
Florida Governor Rick Scott announced his three choices for Florida’s Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee.
Former Republican Governor Bob Martinez served as Florida’s 40th governor from 1987 to 1991. Before that he served as the mayor of Tampa, the city where he was born.
Former Democrat Senator Al Lawson represented Floridians from 11 panhandle counties from 2001 to 2011 in the state senate, and before that he served nearly two decades in the Florida House of Representatives.
Jenn Ungru, a Republican, is Governor Scott’s deputy chief of staff with oversight responsibilities over the Department of State. She has served in the Scott administration since the inauguration and has more than a decade of campaign and election experience in Florida and nationwide.
Senate President Mike Haridopolos (R-Merritt Island) announced the appointment of Senators Rene Garcia, Gary Siplin and John Thrasher to the Presidential Preference Primary Committee.
Senator Rene Garcia (R-Hialeah) currently represents Florida Senate District 40, which consists of part of Miami-Dade County. Garcia first was elected to the Senate in 2010. Prior to serving in the Florida Senate, Garcia was a member of the Florida House of Representatives from 2000-2008.
Senator Gary Siplin (D-Orlando) currently represents Florida Senate District 19, which consists of parts of Orange and Osceola Counties. Siplin was first elected to the Senate in 2002 and was subsequently reelected. Prior to serving in the Florida Senate, Siplin was a member of the Florida House of Representatives from 2000-2002.
Senator John Thrasher (R-St. Augustine) currently represents Florida Senate District 8, which consists of parts of Duval, Flagler, Nassau, St. Johns and Volusia Counties. Thrasher was first elected to the Senate in 2009 and was subsequently reelected. Prior to serving in the Florida Senate, Thrasher was a member of the Florida House of Representatives from 1992-2000; he also served as Speaker of the Florida House from 1998-2000.
Florida House Speaker Dean Cannon appointed the following House Members to the Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee:
Representative Carlos Lopez-Cantera
Representative Seth McKeel
Representative Cynthia Stafford
Florida State Senator John Thrasher, was on the committee that made the final decision to set the primary date explained, "This is about getting Floridians involved at the earliest possible time."
U.S. Rep. David Rivera of Miami explained, “It is indisputable that what matters most in the early primary season is MOMENTUM, not delegates," in response to those who worry about the GOP rule that says Florida may lose half it’s delegates if they went ahead with setting an early primary date. Mr. Rivera also added, "That is why states like Iowa and New Hampshire, which have minuscule delegates, matter. As in 2008, Florida will provide overwhelming momentum not because of our delegate count, but because Florida’s critical role in the November election.”
Florida House Speaker Dean Cannon explained his support for the decision to set the early primary date as, "I feel the 31st is the right time," adding, "We are the largest swing state in the presidential race and have more votes than the first four primary states combined. We deserve to be a make-or-break state for the nomination." With the majority of national political insiders calling Florida the most important swing state in the upcoming presidential election, Mr. Cannon’s statements there do carry a good amount of weight as far as to why Floridians decided to take a stand against the establishment GOP rule forbidding early primaries.
Florida RNC co-chair, Sharon Day stated her concerns as, " I don’t know if it changes the dynamics of the presidential race, but it makes it tough on the candidates," adding, "I get the argument for Florida, but we created these rules for a reason."
I also got in touch with 2012 Florida District 03 Congressional candidate, Mike Yost to inquire about his views on the Florida Primary date change. Mr. Yost stated that while he had some reservations about the early primary date, that he was in total agreement in the fact that it is Florida’s decision to make,and not the GOP establishment’s right to impose upon Florida. Mr. Yost also conveyed his concern about whether or not Florida will, in fact lose half it’s delegates as the GOP has threatened to do on numerous occasions recently, and if so , just what kind of a message would that send to the rest of the country? The answer to that question will be revealed within the next week, as we approach the deadline for states announcing their Primary dates.
Florida is receiving major criticism across the political spectrum for their choice to hold their Primary on Jan 31st, as we see by the following statements,many of it from early primary states who will now have to adjust their calendars because of Florida’s decision:
From South Carolina Party Chairman Chad Connelly we see this: “Rogue states have once again dictated the presidential nominating calendar,” adding, “States who have worked so hard to maintain the nominating calendar should not be penalized and the offenders, including Florida, should lose their entire allocations of delegates at the National Convention.” Rogue states, Mr. Connelly? What is this, South American politics we are referring do here? Drop the childish rhetoric and let’s all unite and get to work to defeat Barack Obama in 2012 please.
From Iowa GOP Chairman Matt Strawm we see this childish temper tantrum: “The arrogance shown by Florida’s elected leadership is disappointing, but not surprising. Equally troubling is to see this petulant behavior rewarded with our national convention (in Tampa),” How about the arrogance the establishment GOP has shown in trying to dictate just what day Florida will hold their presidential primary on here? maybe Mr. Strawm needs to face a real conservative challenger in 2012, unlike when he ran unopposed in the 2010 elections? Mr Strawm praises the Iowa GOP establishment on his very own blog, while totally ignoring the true conservative grassroots Tea Party movement that rebuked the progressive Democrats and Rino-Republicans in the historic elections of 2010, allowing America a real shot of turning this ship around in 2012. Ignore the Tea party at your own risk, Mr. Strawm, as you sound a lot like GOP establishment elitism in your above statement. Do you hear this, Tea Party of Iowa?
The small state of New Hampshire actually has a state law that "requires" the state of New Hampshire to hold it’s primary 7 days before any other state ! Good grief, who in the hell came up with that law? Just because the blue-blooded elitists of what, over a century ago, chose to create a such a ridiculous state law in the first place is supposed to somehow dictate to the state of Florida when they can hold their primary? New Hampshire Republican Chairman Wayne MacDonald explained that his state will move forward if Florida accelerates the season. State law in the Granite State requires that its primary be held at least seven days before any other primary. "But it really defeats the purpose," MacDonald said. "We were trying to avoid front-loading, but here we go again." One can certainly understand Mr. MacDonald’s dismay about having to change his state’s primary date now, so here is a simple thought: "Why not instill some common sense and abolish the ludicrous law that says you have to be first in line in the first place? By the way, Iowa usually has their primary ahead of New Hampshire, but as one back-peddling politician stated, "It’s not a primary, it is a caucus." The fate of the country is at stake and these nuts are playing word games. Lovely.
Of course the leftist-sphere had to put in their two cents:
The leftist rag The L.A.Times puts some ridiculous spin on Florida changing their primary debate in an article that features a giant picture of Hillary Clinton talking to a bunch of people holding Obama and Clinton signs back in 2008 here. That’s right in an article about GOP primaries, the Liberal establishment running the L.A. Times uses a picture of Hillary Clinton. We must have missed Hillary’s announcement that she will be running for President on the Republican ticket in 2012 there.Of course no conservative-bashing L.A times article would be complete without a few lies and propaganda inserted into it to appease their readers out there in Liberal la-la land:
But Florida, which will play host to the 2012 Republican National Convention, in Tampa, wants to have a more central role in picking the nominee. To achieve that, it would run afoul of the RNC, which will dock it about half of its 116 convention delegates. (emphasis mine)
So in that statement they falsely state that the RNC will dock Florida half of its delegates, period, yet later on in that very same article, they show how that statement isn’t necessarily true:
Florida also pulled a similar move in 2008, moving its primary to Jan. 29, and helping to lock up the nomination for Sen. John McCain. Though all the Florida delegates made it to the convention floor in Minneapolis-St. Paul — with about half being characterized as "honored guests" — the RNC seems in no mood to make a deal this time.
How about actually reporting the facts and just the facts, instead of trying to inject your leftist mandate on what the GOP will or will not do regarding Florida’s primary date change decision out there in the 20-billion-dollars-in-the-red-budgetarily-bankrupt state of California ? We do not need advice or mandates about the Republican Party of America coming from the ignorant hope n changers of the left coast. Don’t you have some more illegal alien sanctuary cities to be creating out there in la-la land or something else to keep yourselves busy, like spending time creating laws to ban happy meal toys, while business leave the state in droves due to your decades long march towards creating a Liberal utopia?
The swing state of Florida with it’s added 2 electoral votes, giving it the same total as New York at 29, is a very critical vote for the Republican candidate to win. Here is a little-known fact: The last Republican candidate to win the White House while losing the Florida vote was Calvin Cooledge in 1924. Florida’s demographics are such a mixed bag that it always makes it a Nervous Nelly situation across the state and country when vote totals start coming in. In 2010 conservative Rick Scott looked like he would actually lose the election to Liberal Alex Sink in the early going, then it was neck and neck through about 80% of the vote with Scott pulling ahead for good pretty much not until the end. Northern Florida and the panhandle are in the mold of the "Old South" with it’s military bases making for a natural conservative base. Central Florida, also referred to as the I-4 corridor, is a mix of retired Midwestern retirees, young suburban families and Democratic-leaning Hispanics, ( largely non-Cubans) I live in Central Florida, and in the 2010 elections saw Central Florida shift slightly more towards conservatism, which I expect to see happen again in 2012. As people learn the truth about the hope and change catch-phrase and see how inflation, gas prices and the over-all cost of living increases are hurting Florida’s huge Senior citizen population, while living in a stagnant economy, Liberals posing as Democrats will feel the wrath of the informed voter in 2012 in Florida. So will progressive-voting Republicans,especially here in Central Florida. South Florida, which has a huge population of Cuban-Americans who mostly shy away from the Socialistic planks of Liberal ideology and vote conservative, as many of them know just what the Cuban Socialism did to their relatives and country under Fidel Castro and Company. South Florida also contains many white retirees from the Northeast who remain active in politics. Democratic strongholds in places like Jacksonville are among the most impoverished areas in all of Florida, and we can expect to see them turning red in 2012 also. With it’s totally diverse population, huge amount of retirees, and the emergence of the Tea party across Florida, the Hurri-Cain beat out Romney and Perry in the Florida straw poll by a whopping margin. Before that reality happened, most insiders thought Florida would be a Romney nomination win over Rick Perry. Now it remains a complete toss-up once again, yet one can not deny the conservative message Floridians sent to the country with Cain’s win, and now the moving up of the Primary date much to the dismay of the GOP establishment. This will make the GOP candidates scramble for the Florida Primary vote even more intense.
Here is a tip for all of the whining and crying establishment GOP operatives and assorted pundits that deem themselves so self-important as to denounce the state of Florida for taking a stand against the GOP’s elitist pattern of dictating to Floridians, and other states across the country as to how and when they will hold their primaries: Get over it, the Florida Republican Presidential primary of 2012 will be held on Jan 31st, period.
Will she or won’t she? That’s the burning question in the minds of anyone in America who keeps up with politics.
According to a Fox News poll, the majority of Americans say that she should stay out of the race. When asked the question, “Do you think Sarah Palin should run for president in 2012 or not?”, the results are overwhelmingly against her entering the race.
- 74 percent said no
- 20 percent said yes
- 6 percent said they’re not sure.
There is only a 9 percent gap in the between Republicans and Democrats who say she should stay out of the race, while nearly three quarters of Independents and Tea Party people said she should stay out of the race.
- 71 percent of Republicans
- 80 percent of Democrats
- 66 percent of Independents
- 66 percent of Tea Party people
Sarah Palin continues to leave the country wondering what her decision will be. The speculation is wide and varied, with pundits such as Karl Rove saying she will run, while other pundits and bloggers saying she will not. There’s also some who just do not know if she should run or not.
Jennifer Jacobs, chief political writer at the Des Moines Register, polled the politically involved in Iowa, and one reason listed as to why she shouldn’t run is her indecision about what she is going to do. Saying Sarah Palin is the “Brett Favre of politics”, Ms. Jacobs reports that the guessing game is getting old for potential voters.
Sarah Palin is speaking at a Tea Party rally in Des Moines today, and the rumor mill has been buzzing that that “today is the day” she will announce her candidacy. Her aides give the impression that there will be no announcement at today’s event, and Sarah herself continues to be non-committal either way.
“I think there’s room for more, though, because spirited debate and more competition will allow an even better discourse and more rigorous discourse that the public deserves.”
If she does not make an announcement one way or another in Iowa today, there’s always New Hampshire later in the weekend, where she will make an appearance. If she does not make an official announcement yay or nay in New Hampshire, there’s always the news media hounds, political pundits, her Fox News colleagues, and any other number of people to keep the rumors going.
There’s only one person who can put an end to this guessing game, and that’s the lady herself. She has said that her supporters deserve to know very soon which decision she is going to make. She has left the impression in more than one interview that September would be a fair time to let everyone in on the secret.
So the question still remains: Sarah, are you going to be one of the candidates? This guessing game is just feeds into the media and political drama.
Obama just can’t seem to escape his own administration!
Break out the bubbly, because Michele Bachmann beat the pack in the latest Ames Straw Poll in Iowa! You may be as surprised as I am that for once Ron Paul didn’t win a straw poll amongst conservatives. You might also be surprised to hear that it really doesn’t matter. That’s right! A straw poll is about as meaningless as an Obama Press Conference.
The problem with straw polls is the very nature of a straw poll; that it’s basically the opinion of a group of like minded people at any given time. You can’t ask people at a cake convention which deserts they prefer more because the answer is most likely going to be cake, and you can easily apply this same principle to a straw poll taken at any political gathering or conference. In Ames case, the most popular conservative will win hands down, and Bachmann has taken said cake.
You’ll recall that the CPAC 2011 straw poll had Ron Paul out ahead of the pack with 30% of the vote and Romney at 23%. You’ll also recall that at that time Michelle Bachmann only had a measly 4%, and while that’s all well and good, the outcome of these straw polls will have next to no effect in the coming elections. They never do.
Ron Paul’s popularity for one stemmed from the fact that he was a stark contrast to our current sitting “Whiner in Chief.” He’s heavily principled in Conservatism and a die hard constitutionalist, and to many in the conservative movement this is a fresh breath of much needed, red blooded, American air. The main problem Ron is seeing now is that he’s getting “out-conservatived” by the congresswoman who is riding on the “mama grizzly” wave that Palin had created. She’s able to stand on a record that she freely touts to any camera that focuses on her and it’s served her very well in conservative circles. She’s also the poster child for a strong woman; motherly yet not afraid to get down to business.
So what does this mean for her in the coming elections where she is slated to run? Probably nothing, if we take the past as an example.
2007 CPAC straw polls had Romney in a dominating 1st place. In fact, Romney won the CPAC straw poll 3 years in a row. He was the man to beat in the primaries…and John McCain did. Even the most famous American Conservative, Reagan was trounced by George H.W. Bush in the 79’ Ames straw polls and we all know how that ended up. As you can see, the straw polls aren’t the best predictors because they don’t tell the whole story.
For instance, while Bachmann is making some serious headway in the conservative movement she has recently had a new obstacle placed in her path to the top in the form of Texas Governor Rick Perry, who was nothing but a write in at Ames this year. As big a player as Bachmann has become, Perry is the more widely supported across the political board and will most likely be the candidate who wins the primary. Not only is Perry liked amongst a vast array of Conservatives, he’s popular amongst independents and establishment types. No conservative straw poll could tell you that.
Everyone’s favorite Congresswoman can stand on her stellar voting record and squeaky clean personal history, but the one thing she can’t say is “I won a Conservative straw poll once” then ride that like its the last bat out of hell. Her predecessors certainly didn’t, and it’s not wise for her supporters to do it either. Winning a straw poll really only means that harder work now has to be done to put the ideas that candidate into motion, and doing that means getting them into a position where those ideas can take effect, and that’s where Bachmann and her supporters are really going to have their work cut out for them.
Bachmann has a long way to go if she wants the presidency which means she’ll have to go through Perry to get it, and while Bachmann’s record is behind her, Perry has a lot of experience, a very well run state, and both the support of the tea party and the establishment behind his. Perry is a political Goliath and no straw poll can give you a good read on the size of any one candidate because it just doesn’t factor in every aspect with the exception of one; what conservatives favor today, and conservatives favor Bachmann…for now.