2012 Election

[American Patriot]

It was a loan and it was payed back.

Afterall you destroyed Europe.

Europe did not invade you, you invaded Europe.

Japan only attacked you directly.

No, sonny, we did NOT "invade" Europe.

That's a piss poor perception but about par for the course from someone who lives in Europe.

Go back and read history. We were ASKED to help.

[American Patriot]

I'm just having a discussion. LOL

Whatever you like Peterle.

[American Patriot]

Well, this is the wrong thread for a discussion of who invaded whom...

but I'll elaborate anyway.

America has not in the 20th Century "invaded" anyone. We have been asked to help throw out invaders, like the Iraqis.

Did we "invade" Afghanistan. You might argue we did. But EVEN SO we did NOT invade Europe. We were ASKED by ALLIES to assist in removing Hitler.

In World War I we were attacked by the Germans, first, before we went after them.

America has never once attacked another country without a just cause, a good reason.

Regardless of what some Leftists in America claim (and some on the Right) and MOST Europeans.

They call us "Arrogant".

What part of assisting Kuwait was "arrogant"?

What part of going after terrorist camps in Afghanistan was "arrogant"?

What part of removing Germans in France and putting down a fascist regime there and Italy was "arrogant"?

What part of any of those was an invasion?

[Phil Fiord]

It is one point of Pauls that I really like. Stop providing foreign aid. Billions to countries that do not like us and we still give them money? Why?

I see it like this. If I give a man 100 dollars and he takes it, I do not expect anything except it to be used productively. As I gave of my own free will, I can also stop giving if that man decides to use that money for an xBox game or two rather than food, gas or other essentials to living.

[American Patriot]

"In World War I we were attacked by the Germans, first, before we went after them."

I've discussed the issue of America's entry into WWI with you before, Rick, and this was the intervention that at the very least made all the others 'necessary'...Interventions continually being made to fix the bad ressults of previous interventions, ad nauseam.

But 'American Arrogance'? As many foreigners and one in particular seem to think?

That's bullshit.

Intervention means to STOP something from happening. "American interventionism" is ONLY done when it is REQUIRED. Folks tend to think we should leave things alone. They forget we have our own interests too.

Tough on them if they don't like it (yeah, that's ME being arrogant, because, I can be).

But when we went into WWI the Germans attacked us. In World War II the Japanese attacked us (and were allied with the Germans). So this wasn't a "US vs Japan" thing, it was the US vs everyone on the Axis side.

[American Patriot]

Latest polls show:

Romney in the lead in NH.

Ron Paul second (NH)

Huntsman third.

I don't see where Santorum and Gingrich came in right now. Still looking over the stuff.

[American Patriot]

Ah here we go:

Results for New Hampshire Republican Primary (U.S. Presidential Primary)

Jan 10, 2012 (95% of precincts reporting)

Mitt Romney	95,669	39.4%
Ron Paul	55,455	22.8%
Jon Huntsman	40,903	16.8%
Newt Gingrich	22,921	9.4%
Rick Santorum	22,708	9.3%
Rick Perry	1,709	0.7%
Michele Bachmann	343	0.1%
Other	3,240	1.3%

[American Patriot]

Looks like America is going to go for Romney to me.

[American Patriot]

The following is an EXTREMELY CLEAR case of Leftist Bias. Follow this for a moment, then read my comment:

New Hampshire Primary Results: Ron Paul Comes In Second





First Posted: 1/10/12 08:27 PM ET Updated: 1/10/12 10:11 PM ET

React

Important
Funny
Typical
Scary
Outrageous
Amazing
Innovative
Finally

Follow

2012 Election , Elections 2012 , Ron Paul , Video , New Hampshire Polls , New Hampshire Primary , New Hampshire Primary Election , Ron Paul 2012 , New Hampshire Primary 2012 , New Hampshire Primary Election 2012 , New Hampshire Primary Election Results , New Hampshire Primary Election Results 2012 , New Hampshire Primary Results , New Hampshire Primary Results 2012 , Politics News


share this story



557
55
9

Get Politics Alerts
Sign Up
Submit this story





With a projected second place finish in New Hampshire, Rep. Ron Paul's (R-Texas) campaign for the GOP nomination continues to outperform his 2008 bid, complicating efforts by Mitt Romney's rivals to consolidate opposition to the former Massachusetts governor.
Paul's message of individual liberty played well in the Live Free or Die State, as Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, stumbled badly in the few days leading up to the vote. Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, who'd been hoping a second-place finish or last-minute upset would catapult him to top-tier status, is likely to finish third, a result that would outpace the two men Romney see as his most formidable opponents, former Sen. Rick Santorum and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.
(You can follow the results live as they come in here.)
Paul, in a speech to supporters Tuesday night, said he called Romney and told him he was "nibbling on his heels."
Paul is one of the only remaining candidates who can compete with Romney in the race for cash, largely due to his national base of ardent grassroots supporters. That poses a problem for any candidate looking to quickly lock up the nomination.
But it could also spell trouble in the general election. If Paul decides to run as a third-party candidate, he could siphon votes away from both parties. Such a run would provide a third choice for disaffected voters who want to protest President Barack Obama and his handling of the economy but who don't like Romney.
Paul told HuffPost's Howard Fineman earlier this week that he hadn't decided whether to launch a third party bid. "I'll decide that later," he said.
In New Hampshire, Paul played nice with Romney, while his rivals attacked him as a soulless corporate raider who takes pleasure in handing out pink slips.
"Two important issues that should unite Republicans are a belief in free markets and an understanding that the media often use 'gotcha' tactics to discredit us," his campaign said in a statement. "Rather than run against Governor Romney on the issues of the day Santorum, Huntsman, and Gingrich have chosen to play along with the media elites and exploit a quote taken horribly out of context."
"They are also using the language of the liberal left to attack private equity and condemn capitalism in a desperate and, frankly, unsavory attempt to tear down another Republican with tactics akin to those of MoveOn.org," the statement continued. "Santorum, Huntsman, and Gingrich are employing leftist tactics because they can't run on their questionable records and can't distinguish themselves from Romney."
Paul's strong finishes in Iowa and New Hampshire will be difficult to replicate in South Carolina, where an evangelical Christian base dominates the primary electorate. Yet he may be able to fare better in Florida and Nevada, and continue to pick up delegates, if his supporters keep injecting money into his campaign.
"There's no way that they're going to stop the momentum that we've started," Paul said.

Guess what? Ron Paul came in "second" but Romney got ALL the counties but one. Ron Paul got that ONE county in the North of the state.

[Ryan Ruck]

Sources: Huntsman To Drop Out Of 2012 Race Monday, Endorse Romney

January 15, 2012

Jon Huntsman, the former Utah governor who was seen by Democrats months ago as the potential biggest threat to President Obama in a general election, is dropping out of the race tomorrow and will endorse Mitt Romney, a campaign official confirms to POLITICO.

A source said that Huntsman's rationale for backing Romney, who he has criticized for weeks on the campaign trail as lacking a "core," is that he didn't want to block the person best prepared in the field to beat Obama, and then to lead the country and grapple with the economy.

"Jon Huntsman is proud of the campaign he ran and the message of restoring trust in Washington," said a campaign official familiar with his thinking. "He didn't want to stand in the way of the candidate most likely to beat Barack Obama and turn the economy around. That's Mitt Romney."

A source close to the campaign said some of Huntsman's advisers attempted to talk him out of the decision, urging the former ambassador to at least wait until after the South Carolina primary this Saturday. It was just today that he got the endorsement of The State, South Carolina's largest newspaper.

"It was entirely a family decision," said the source.

But from a practical standpoint, Huntsman's candidacy was all but finished after New Hampshire.

The campaign had no money for TV and radio ads or even direct mail pieces this coming week, according to a campaign source.

"South Carolina had no real budget," said the source.

It's a tough ending for Huntsman, who basically went broke months back, uprooted his campaign to New Hampshire - only to come in a disappointing third place. Still, he vowed to press forward.

But as much as he sought to spin his distant third-place finish in New Hampshire, calling it "a ticket to ride," Huntsman was disappointed that he had been unable to take second place in a state where he vested his entire campaign.

Even as he held some 170 events in the Granite State, the Utahan never seemed to catch on. This was in part because he was uncertain how to define himself. Even on the Friday before the New Hampshire primary, he didn't answer directly when asked if he was the consistent conservative in the race or a pragmatic moderate.

A top campaign official said they realized they had to call it quits when it became evident they had gotten no bump out of New Hampshire.

"We were expecting to be between eight to thirteen percent in the polls here," said the official.

But Huntsman's failure can also be traced to his campaign style. In debates and on the stump, he came across as the sober diplomat he is, lacking the charisma and fire Republican primary voters are hungry for this year.

Huntsman positioned himself early as a pan-partisan leader who did not want to sling mud to get his ideas across.

He ultimately ended up contrasting more specifically with his rivals, and became more critical of Obama, who had appointed him as U.S. Ambassador to China - a post he stepped down from earlier this year. Huntsman had a record as former Utah governor that could appeal to conservatives, but it was not one that he emphasized early on.

Instead, his appeal tended to run to the center as he de-emphasized partisanship - a move that could help him in a general, but which proved a tough sell in a primary dominated by the hard-right of the GOP.

His campaign has been low on funds, and faced grim prospects in Saturday's South Carolina primary. Huntsman himself has expressed reluctance to loan his campaign more than the $2 million he initially seeded it with.

His father had been the chief funder of a super PAC backing his son, but the wealthy Huntsman Corp. executive has, according to sources, grown leery of throwing money into the effort.

Sources said there is an 11 a.m. endorsement expected tomorrow, followed a few hours later by a scheduled 2 p.m. meeting for all of Huntsman's staff.

Newt Gingrich's campaign put out a statement about the development., from spokesman R.C. Hammond: "With Governor Huntsman dropping out, we are one step closer to a bold Reagan conservative winning the GOP nomination."

[Ryan Ruck]

Jim DeMint: ‘I Will Not Endorse a Candidate’

January 16, 2012

Sen. Jim DeMint appears to have closed the door on endorsing a candidate in the Republican presidential primary.

With South Carolina's primary approaching on Saturday, DeMint today sent an email to his Palmetto State supporters announcing that he would not back a candidate in the race. DeMint had previously announced he would not endorse, but he had left the door open to changing his mind. The finality of DeMint’s language in today’s email closed the door.

“I do not have a favorite in this race and I will not endorse a candidate,” DeMint said.

In 2008, DeMint endorsed former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who this month won Iowa and New Hampshire and has been leading in public opinion polls of South Carolina heading into Saturday’s primary. Although DeMint maintains a warm relationship with Romney, he has said previously that if he endorsed, he wanted to back a candidate who both had the backing of grass-roots conservatives and could be competitive in the general election against President Barack Obama.

Since 2008, DeMint’s popularity has skyrocketed in conservative circles — both in South Carolina and nationally, raising the stock of any endorsement he might offer in the 2012 contest. DeMint, who has supported and helped raise money for Republican Senate candidates backed by the tea party, initially said he would withhold his endorsement in the presidential race to help increase the competition for South Carolina’s delegates.

As speculation increased in recent days that he would ultimately endorse Romney despite repeatedly saying that he was going to focus on electing conservatives to the Senate, DeMint appears to have decided to address the issue bluntly.

“The presidential primary in South Carolina has intensified and my name is being thrown around a lot,” DeMint said in the email to supporters. “I have complimented several of our candidates when they spoke out on conservative issues, but the media has suggested that I favor one over the others. I'm writing today to make sure you know exactly where I stand.”

DeMint is not the only high-profile South Carolina Member who has not endorsed a presidential candidate. Sen. Lindsey Graham and freshman Rep. Tim Scott, a tea party favorite, also have yet to back a candidate. Both Members sounded noncommittal in Sunday morning television interviews. South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley and state Treasurer Curtis Loftis, however, have endorsed Romney. Both Haley and Loftis were elected in 2010 with substantial tea party support.

Meanwhile, today Romney picked up another Congressional endorsement, this time from House Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman John Mica (R-Fla.). The former Massachusetts governor has received more Member endorsements than any of his competitors.

Says a bit about the current crop of candidates.

[Phil Fiord]

This sucks. According to rough numbers from poll data, about 40% of the US identifies as conservative, while only about 10-12% identify as liberal, as in far far left.

A true conservative should simply run as a conservative and moderates can shape the rest when they decide. Odds favor the moderate block would more easily side with a conservative than a far lefty. No one candidate is doing this.

It follows to say that being ones self is the best policy. Reagan did not seem to age so fast as President. He was already an older man, but look at the pictures. He did not age a ton in a year. How many go grey in a year or so after gaining office? Says to me the fast aging people are not true to themselves or who elected them.

[Ryan Ruck]

Case in point...


Democrat: 49 - Jimmy Carter
Republican: 489 - Ronald Reagan


Democrat: 13 - Walter Mondale
Republican: 525 - Ronald Reagan

GET THIS THROUGH YOUR HEADS YOU ESTABLISHMENT FUCKS!

[American Patriot]

So.... Iowa. New results are out.

Santorum WON by 34 votes over Romney.

Romney was second.

Nobody cares about the rest of them I guess.

Newt seems to have come in third and Ron Paul fourth, but I'm not sure. They glossed over that on the radio this morning.

[American Patriot]

From Huffingdrugspost

Iowa Caucus 2012: Count Shows Rick Santorum Beat Mitt Romney In Iowa By 34 Votes


First Posted: 1/19/12 06:03 AM ET Updated: 1/19/12 06:03 AM ET



2012 Election , Mitt Romney , Rick Santorum , Elections 2012 , Iowa Caucuses , Iowa Caucus 2012 , Iowa Caucus Recount , Mitt Romney 2012 , Rick Santorum 2012 , Politics News


share this story



19
196
7

Get Politics Alerts
Sign Up
Submit this story





2012 Iowa Caucuses:
Rick Santorum - Final total: 29,839 Change: -168
Mitt Romney - Final total: 29,805 Change: -210
It’s a tie for the ages.
There are too many holes in the certified totals from the Iowa caucuses to know for certain who won, but Rick Santorum wound up with a 34-vote advantage.
Read the whole story: 2012 Iowa Caucuses

[American Patriot]

Santorum finished 34 votes ahead of Romney in new Iowa tally; votes from 8 precincts missing


View Photo Gallery — Rick Santorum: The former Pennsylvania senator is seeking the Republican presidential nomination.




By Debbi Wilgoren and Philip Rucker, Updated: Thursday, January 19, 6:44 AM

Republican front-runner Mitt Romney’s narrow lead in the Iowa caucuses disappeared when officials certified the vote count, a Republican involved in the process said Thursday, but former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum cannot be declared the winner because of irregularities in some precincts.
Instead of leading by eight votes, Romney ended up trailing former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum by 34 votes--29,839 to 29,805, the Republican said. The reversal was first reported by the Des Moines Register, which said results from eight Iowa precincts are missing “and will never be recovered and certified,.”

Graphic


Post-game analysis of Iowa caucuses

Gallery

  After what was widely considered an unfocused and bloated campaign in 2008, the Republican former Massachusetts governor is returning to the presidential sweepstakes with a more tightly knit team.


More on this Story

• Read more at PostPolitics
• Gingrich sees a South Carolina surge
• Romney faces mounting pressure to release tax returns now
• Mitt Romney and the fall of Republican moderates

View all Items in this Story


The certified vote totals from Jan. 3 caucuses will be formally released by the Iowa Republican Party Thursday morning at 8:15 Central time (9:15 in Washington). They will be available for inspection by representatives of the candidates at 9 a.m., Iowa GOP officials said in a statement, and by reporters two hours after that.
More than 122,000 votes were cast during caucuses in 1,774 precincts, meaning that the margin of victory — regardless of who won — was only a fraction of a percent.
Romney, whose campaign was buoyed when he was declared the winner of the Iowa caucuses and then the New Hampshire primary a week later, issued a statement Thursday morning declaring the contest “a virtual tie.”
“I would like to thank the Iowa Republican Party for their careful attention to the caucus process,” Romney’s statement said, “and we once again recognize Rick Santorum for his strong performance in the state.”
Analysts said it was not clear that a change in the official vote count would provide a boost to Santorum, who is battling with former House speaker Newt Gingrich to capture enough of the conservative vote in Saturday’s South Carolina primary to disrupt Romney’s momentum.
Romney was labeled the winner in headlines and news reports around the world after the caucuses, which helped him build upon his already sizeable lead in money, endorsements and campaign organization. His subsequent victory in New Hampshire made him the first non-incumbent GOP candidate since 1976 to win both the Iowa caucuses and the Granite State’s first-in-the-nation primary.
Although his lead in South Carolina has shrunk somewhat in recent days, according to the latest polls, it is Gingrich, rather than Santorum, who appears to be closing in.
Santorum’s campaign made no statement early Thursday. But the candidate has been hinting to crowds in South Carolina for days that the Iowa vote tally might change, and predicting that a shift could “change the complexion of this race.”
At a barbecue joint in Spartanburg on Wednesday, he criticized the Iowa GOP for declaring Romney the winner of the caucuses in the early morning hours after the vote, given how close the race remained.
“These are very close races, and little minor technical differences can make a difference between who wins and loses,” Santorum said. “For the state of Iowa, for the Republican party of Iowa, to suggest that this race was decided and that isn’t going to change, is wrong.”
But Romney, asked Tuesday about the possibility that Santorum would end up ahead, said: “I’m not sure that changes much.”
The Register, citing unnamed officials in the Iowa GOP, reported that vote tallies from eight precincts have disappeared and cannot be counted. The certification process showed inaccuracies in 131 other precincts, the Register said, including one precinct where the corrected tally shifted 50 votes from Santorum to Romney.
The changes were reported in the final days and hours before Wednesday’s 5 p.m. deadline for certifying the vote.
Romney was ahead by 51 votes the weekend after the caucuses, the Register quoted Iowa GOP executive director Chad Olsen as saying.
“On Tuesday night, Romney was up 24 votes. Then at noon Wednesday, Santorum was up by only three votes. The six precincts that happened to come in next boosted Santorum to a 34-vote lead,” the newspaper said.
“At 5 p.m. Wednesday — the deadline for volunteers to get their official “Form E” paperwork with caucus results to Republican Party of Iowa headquarters in Des Moines — the back-and-forth ended with 1,766 precincts certified out of 1,774.”
Asked who actually won the primary, Olsen told the Register: “It’s a split decision.”
Staff writer Rosalind S. Helderman contributed to this report.

[American Patriot]

"I told you so"

Perry is OUT.

I told you after Iowa he was out.

[American Patriot]

Oh and by the way, he will endorse Gingrich.....

[Phil Fiord]

Paul was 3rd in Iowa. Still is. Only change was a flip between Mittens and Santorum.

[vector7]

Oprah Confident Obama Will Win Re-Election



First Posted: 01/22/2012 8:24 am Updated: 01/22/2012 4:22 pm

JAIPUR, India (AP) — Oprah Winfrey says she is confident that President Barack Obama will win another four-year term in this year's U.S. election.

The talk show host was addressing a literary festival Sunday in the northwestern Indian town of Jaipur.

Winfrey praised Obama's handling of the presidency. She said his next four years would be even more successful, with people able to get back to work.

Winfrey backed Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign in her first-ever political endorsement.

She was among the biggest crowd pullers at the annual Jaipur Literary Festival, which brings together top writers, poets and critics and around 50,000 literary fans from around the world.

Winfrey has been in India for a week filming programs for her new TV network.