I don't comment on it much anymore because we all know that's it's happening every day. I thought I would do a quick update though on some recent events.
The Republican Party in Nevada and Louisiana changed the rules for participation every few days throwing everything into complete confusion.
In Louisiana, hundreds of Ron Paul supporters were forced to fill out provisional ballots that were counted and McCain was announced to be the winner. Ron Paul came in second but they haven't released numbers so we don't know by how much or if the discounted Ron Paul votes would have changed things.
In the debate last night, here's a breakdown of speaking time for candidates:
Romney: 21:11, during 13 times McCain: 16:00, during 13 times Giuliani: 13:50, during 11 times Huckabee: 12:11, during nine times Paul: 6:31, during six times
Less than half the time than Rudy, who Ron Paul has beat in every primary and caucus except New Hampshire (which is being recounted).
But don't expect the recount to change anything. Campaign official picking up the ballot boxes are doing everything they can to lose citizens trying to keep an eye on things. The cop escort and the van with the ballots are speeding through school zones, cutting through parking lots, and doubling back in an effort to get out of view.
All that along with the usual Old Media brown out.
The fact that he's done as well as he has speaks volumes about the response to his message when people do actually finally hear it.
Cue the Law and Order "dunk-dunk" sound to end this episode. Fred Thompson has dropped out of the presidential race. Not that he ever really seemed to be in the race.
That's good news for Ron Paul. One less distraction for the Old Media. They have a hard time concentrating on what's important as it is without having a TV star in the running.
The Ron Paul media brownout continues of course. Lou Dobbs has a poll up asking which candidate can best deal with the economy. Ron Paul isn't one of the possible answers. What's funny is that Ron Paul supporters are voting for Edwards to give the poll a new look. Edwards is, of course, winning the poll by a huge margin.
A new term has come out of this election: Ron Paul Republican. It's a term that hearkens back to what Republicans used to stand for before the NeoCons hijacked the party. People are starting to run for office as Ron Paul Republicans too. The Ron Paul Revolution is not about putting one man into office anymore. It's gone beyond that.
Speaking of NeoCons. Rudy still has his people working for free. Huckabee asked his people to work for free. Some are and quite a few are leaving the campaign. McCain is trying to get a loan for $3 million to keep his campaign alive. They probably all wish that Super Duper Tuesday was here already.
Mitt's good to go of course and Ron Paul raised another $2 million on Monday so he's moving right along.
The Republican Party doesn't seem to understand. There is only one Republican that can beat Hillary and they are trying their hardest to suppress him. Check out this fair and balanced report by Fox News. The first time they report on it, Ron Paul is in third place. The second time, he's in second place. You wouldn't know it unless you look at the numbers at the bottom. You would think McCain was in second the whole time and Huckabee was in third.
It's not the fact that Ron Paul is more pro-peace than Hillary is kind of, sort of, anti-war, maybe and that he knows more about national economics than she can ever hope for. It's much more simple than that. Ron Paul is not going to quit and even if he didn't run as a third party, the Revolution will write his name on the ballot. No matter which Republican candidate the bought and paid for system puts in place, that candidate is going to lose 5-10% of the vote to Ron Paul.
In essence, the Republican party which has been hijacked by the NeoCon party is so scared of Ron Paul ruining their evil plans that they would rather have Hillary as president. That's something that should scare us all.
On a side note, the Revolution is doing another money bomb today and only asking for $10. They want to see how many people they can get to contribute as opposed to how much money they can raise. Even if you're a Democrat, you can help derail the Republican party with $10. https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate/
I'm sorry that I haven't had a chance to blog. Believe me when I tell you that I have a lot to say, especially when it comes to the economy. Last spring I said that we were headed for a recession and now the Old Media is finally starting to admit it. I would like to tell everyone who lied to you (Bush, Bernanke, Paulson, Greenspan, and all the rest that were part of the propaganda), "I told you so."
Now, if I could just get more people to listen. My financial blog gets a fraction of the readers that this blog gets. I get the impression that people don't want to hear about it. 2007 had the largest inflation rate in 17 years and 2008 is going to be worse. People are going to hear about it but they are going to get a lot of lies along with it.
Like Bush begging for oil. Whatever.
Anyway, with any luck, I'll be back on my blogging schedule tomorrow after another doctor visit and we'll dive into the fray and see what we can disect from the Old Media propaganda machine.
Here's another funny video. The video isn't funny. It's just funny that Ron Paul is getting more coverage around the world than in the US.
Blogs, newspapers, supporters, are showing up all over the world. Foreign countries are rooting for Ron Paul, for the obvious reason.
There is no denying the Ron Paul effect. It's powerful and people looking for advertising dollars know this. Even Fox Propaganda News knows this now. That had to be tough on them. Tougher still is the conundrum they find themselves in. They are still a business and the number of viewers they have is an important number when selling advertising slots. The question for Fox is how to get Ron Paul on their network without letting him point out how stupid the 5 NeoCon candidates are. They'd have better luck trying to prove that Britney Spears is a fit mother.
You may remember that Fox didn't allow Ron Paul to participate in the last debate. I know I remember that. Some interesting things came out of that. I mentioned many of them before but what I didn't know at the time was that CNN was going to rerun a debate against Fox's non-Paul debate. The rocket scientists that first aired the CNN debate put it up against NFL play offs. Apparently, in the second airing, the debate with Ron Paul had more viewers than the brand new debates sans Ron Paul.
Fox must have seen the light and dollar signs and invited Ron Paul to the next debate. They had to craft the debate in a way that would allow him to participate but showcase that he's not a viable candidate.
The results from the New Hampshire primary have gone around the world and come back. The verdict, based on comments on websites from people claiming to be non-US citizens?
How can America use its military to force democracy on other countries when it's own elections are being rigged?
Good question.
We are "encouraging" democracy in the rest of the world and we even send officials to other countries to monitor their elections to make sure it's all on the up and up. We have even invalidated some elections because they appeared to be fixed.
Where are the officials that are supposed to be watching over our own elections? Maybe we could invite Iraqi officials to oversee our elections to make sure they are done fairly.
Our TV media is still trying to ram the "how can the polls be so wrong?" line down our throats. Is anyone buying it? I'm not. It's not just about protesting too much but I'm also unconvinced because they aren't even considering that the polls were correct and maybe the vote results are wrong. They could even downplay the whole thing and wonder if maybe some sort of "mistake" had been made. One thing that I have learned about the media from this election is that whenever there is only one side of the story, there are definitely two sides of the story and it's in my best interest to go looking for that second side so I know the truth.
Where as, I think that a recount should be called for based solely on principle, I understand why Obama and Paul won't ask. In Obama's case, it might make him out to be just as much of a crybaby as his opponent. In Ron Paul's case, it might look petty trying to fight for 4th place and a waste of money that's better used to press on for the next election. He has been very frugal with all the money we have sent him. 4th place won't even get him a stuffed animal so why spend the money?
It's not a done deal though. At least not for Ron Paul.
A district in New Hampshire has come forward to say that they put a zero on the official form for Ron Paul's vote count when he actually had votes. They say that it was due to "human error". Before I get to my point of figuring out who won, let me just point something out.
Ron Paul received 10% of the vote in Iowa. It's highly likely that he would do as well or better in New Hampshire. It's beyond all levels of believability that he would get zero votes. That stretches the boundaries of imagination past Hawking-esque proportions.
Knowing this, I'm going to have to throw the bullshit flag (similar motion as the yellow flag from American football) on the "human error" explanation.
If I'm the person writing down the official numbers that I'm sending in to help decide who the next President of the United States is going to be and I got to a name that pulled in 10% in the previous Caucus and I was told to write down a zero, I would be apt to respond with:
"Zero? Are you sure? Not a single vote. Maybe we better double check this before we send this in."
Seriously. Not because I'm a Ron Paul supporter but because any candidate that's running with the pack is probably going to get a couple votes. Giuliani was supposed to do poorly but if you told me that he got zero, I'd be scratching my head. Zero? Really? I'd like to see the votes please.
You'll hear a lot of reason why Ron Paul is really catching on with people despite the Old Media trying their darnedest to keep people from hearing the message.
Ron Paul said that the idea of Freedom, Peace, and Liberty is powerful and that's what's driving this powerful social movement.
He's right that it's a powerful message but he's wrong about it causing his popularity.
Some people point to the fact that 70% of Americans want to bring the troops home and Ron Paul is the strongest candidate on ending the Iraq occupation and future invasions.
They are right that Americans want to end the war and that Ron Paul is the best candidate to actually do that but they are wrong about this being the cause of his popularity.
Others say that the US economy is tanking and Ron Paul either understand how economies work better than other candidates or if they do understand, Ron Paul is willing to take the actions that will fix the economy.
Spot on again with the observation in general but absolutely wrong about why he's so popular.
I haven't covered the Fox News Forum debacle much because it's something that has actually been getting coverage from the Old Media. Ron Paul has become such a factor in this election that Fox has abandoned any illusion of subtlety. Ron Paul is real. The exclusion from the forum proves that beyond a shadow of a doubt. With no better strategy at hand, they chose to just not allow Ron Paul to participate.
This is, in my opinion, the best thing that could have happened for Ron Paul and Fox News.
For Fox, it stripped away all pretense for the world to see. Most everyone within earshot of a TV knew that Fox's mottos of "Fair and Balanced," and "You Decide," were pure crap. Still, Fox News was able to pretend to be a newscaster. Those days are gone now. They overplayed their hand this time. They should have let Ron Paul participate and tried to keep him from getting much airtime. I think the Forum format might have made that difficult (I don't know because I didn't watch it) so they panicked and didn't let Ron Paul participate.
The New Hampshire Republican party withdrew it's support from the event because Fox News was no longer supporting Republicans. Everyone knows that Fox is against the Democrats, no secret. Now, it appears they also are against Republicans. The only party that Fox supports is the NeoCon party.
By not allowing Paul and Hunter to take part, Fox News announced as loudly as possible that they are not a news source but a propaganda mouthpiece for the NeoCons.
Much to the chagrin of the Ron Paul supporters, their man didn't take #1. He didn't even take #3 or #4. He was 5th. Not a distant fifth. He was close enough that he almost tied for 3rd with Thompson and McCain. Bad news but not terrible.
Hunter, Gravel, and Kucinich pretty much got the big donut. That's terrible news. For Ron Paul to be in a dead heat with two "front runners" is not anything close to the end of a campaign.
The other bad news is that Huckabee won. Not because Huckabee is such a slimy character that he actually makes look Mitt like he has scruples but in spite of that fact. He's a media construct, composed of fake fame, and in spite of people knowing his true nature, the Old Media was still able to give him the #1 spot in Iowa. This is bad news. Despite the power of the Internet and the obvious manipulation of political information by TV "news", the Old Media still pulled it off. It's very telling of the power they still hold and bad news for Americans, not just Ron Paul supporters.
Today is the day when we find out the answer to the age old question: Will Internet support produce actual votes?
Anyone who has gotten online knows the answer already. The real question is: How many votes will Ron Paul get compared to the other candidates?
The most optimistic of Ron Paul supporters think he'll be #1 because the Ron Paul people have outnumbered everyone else at everything else. It's hard to fight that logic except that some of the other candidates will be renting buses to haul voters to caucus. You know they are scrambling today to find some way to put a showing against Ron Paul.
I suppose that's the funniest part of this whole thing. According to the Old Media, Mitt and Huckabee are fighting each other for the number one spot. In reality, they have people out begging voters to come out so they can try to challenge Ron Paul's numbers. It must be hard each day to watch the Old Media lie about how strong your support is while you desperately try to find people to come vote.
The Old Media has started trying to cover itself by saying that Ron Paul could surprise people today. Only people who don't have access to the Internet are going to be surprised. Anyone who has even briefly looked into Ron Paul knows that he has an immense support base that blows all other candidates out of the water.
Not that the Obsomedia has given up the fight yet.
Barrack Obama may have surrounded him with some of Clinton's best advisors and Mike Chuckabee might have one of the most powerful forces in the known universe on his side by Hillary doesn't care because she is more powerful than all of them put together all by herself.
I'm not talking about recent comments by Bill Clinton that Hillary is apparently a super-genius and president and founder of Mensa and that Obama needs to be a strong leader that can stand on his own without the help of intelligent people around him.
No, I'm talking about the fact that Hillary, just by the power of her words when she takes office as the president, will lower oil prices. Her inaugural address will be so powerful that the powers of supply and demand will bend to her will. If she is elected president, out of fear, oil producing countries will lower oil prices to $60-$70 a barrel.
I am thinking about changing my vote but someone that powerful doesn't need my vote.
On a day when the best news that could be found for politics was that a candidate flies in a helicopter, a candidate goes to church, and sometimes birds get inside buildings, how did the media let something like this slip their grasp? (Just watch to where they show the lines of people coming down the hill)
It wasn't just in Los Angeles either. These things were going on all over the country. Ron Paul took part in the same kind reenactment himself. This was a huge story and a place like LA should have had helicopters flying over head giving us a sense of how huge this movement is.
Of course, that would ruin the "dozen spammers" and "will these people leave their computers?" stories they have been running from the beginning.
This post isn't about the Old Media black out of Ron Paul because it's way too late now. Old Media lost and the Revolution is real and Ron Paul is going to be the Republican nominee unless the powers that be alter the vote.
The continued media black out will change all future elections though.
First a quick bit of housekeeping for my P90X readers. I am going to start over with P90X after the New Year. Between travel and work (security in a casino over New Year's is nuts), I'm putting my P90X training and reporting on hold. I will start with Week #1 again when my schedule settles into a pattern.
Mike Huckabee has had a "shocking" surge in the polls in Iowa lately. I haven't figured out who was shocked by the surge but they said it on TV so it must be true.
Understand that when I discuss politics and the Old Media, it's with the assumption that they are aiming for a showdown between Rudy and Hillary. I have no scientific backing of this other than that's what most people believe will happen. Where did they get this belief? Well, yeah, from the TV.
If you ask people why they believe it's going to come down to these two people, they don't really have an answer. The one answer you get on the Republican side is that Rudy is "the only one that can beat Hillary." This answer implies that Hillary is going to be the Democratic nominee but again, you have to ask, why do they believe this? What is it about Rudy that makes him able to beat Hillary?
I've already discussed Huckabee's rise to fame and its reason from my viewpoint and said that the Old Media would be working very hard before the Iowa Caucus to destroy the preacher's good name (did he have a good name?).
Here's a nice little piece that has been done on Huckabee in the Christmas spirit:
For thinking people, this story has some problems.
Ron Paul leads the Republicans in terms of supporter activity and campaign donations and yet the obsomedia refuses to acknowledge him. They aren't offering excuses anymore and are just not covering him the way they would any other social phenomenon of this size.
The people who run the TV stations and newspapers are probably pounding their heads against their desk each night. Not the owners of the companies but the people responsible for trying to get viewers. The "Ron Paul Effect" has been well established online. If you want to increase viewers, talk about Ron Paul. Everything in their advertiser-gathering blood is telling them to discuss Ron Paul but they have orders to black out the Congressman as much as possible. You know that blood pressure pill prescriptions have shot up this December.
On December 16th, the Ron Paul campaign broke the all time one day fundraising record when the Revolution donated over $6 million in a 24 hour period. The following day, the Old Media was rather lackluster in their reporting of such a momentous and unheard of event.
I reported my personal experience of the day after the Tea Party HERE and it was very well received by readers. Many of you left comments and I didn't have time to respond on the 17th. I'd like to take some time now to respond to the comments of that day because I appreciate your input so much.
Before I get to the Mailbag, as they say on Old Media as they reach for letters that have been pre-sorted so that all Ron Paul questions have already been placed in the garbage, I'd like to share a video with you. Some time ago, I mentioned that Ron Paul supporters would start showing up where other candidates were doing "meet the people" pieces so that they could wave signs in the background. If the obsomedia won't come to Ron Paul, Ron Paul supporters will come to the media. Here's the funniest example that I have seen so far. Rudy is late in arriving and they are trying to report on it with dozens of Ron Paul people waving signs and yelling in the back. They do find one Rudy supporter to interview. Is it me or does his answer sound like it was recently memorized from a script?
He came into the election process as the front runner, the guy that was going to go head to head with Hillary Clinton and lose. Do you think he's going to just step down or do you think that when he loses the nomination, he'll attempt a third party bid for the White House?
If he does that, will he take votes away from Ron Paul and ruin Paul's chances against Hillary? Will he be a spoiler?
If Rudy wants the Republicans to win the White House, he'd be better off throwing his support behind Ron Paul. He has vowed that he won't do it but he has absolutely no chance of winning if he runs on his own. Third party candidates aren't allowed to win under the current system. What's his other choice? Endorse a Democrat?
I know I'm being a little presumptuous here because there's no guarantee that Hillary is going to win the nomination. Oprahama might be able to get enough people energized and out to vote that Hillary could lose. That would be unfortunate because I think that Ron Paul would have a harder time winning against Obama than he would against Hillary.
Harder but not impossible. Look at both Hillary's and Obama's themes and see how they compare when they go up against Ron Paul.
It doesn't affect my ego that I was wrong. I'm not surprised that I was wrong. I am deeply saddened that I was wrong but everything could work out for the best anyway. Let me explain since I've been gone for a couple of days.
On December 16th, Ron Paul supporters carried out their planned Tea Party fund raiser. It was a huge success. Huge as in, never been done before kind of huge. John Kerry was the previous record holder for fund raising but now it's Ron Paul. He raised a little over $6 million and is now being called the Six Million Dollar Man. I recap all of this because you might not know it.
See, I woke Monday morning and went down to the hotel lobby to grab a newspaper. I flipped to the political section of the USA Today, I believe it was, to check the headline.
"Hillary Clinton starting new campaign to try to convince people that she's actually a warm and caring person instead of a cold and calculating beeyotch." Those weren't the exact words and I can't remember the exact words now but that's what they were saying. I scanned the article and found out that McCain was being endorsed by a newspaper.
Down a bit farther was a small article, a paragraph that Ron Paul had raised over $5 million. Fine, I thought, they had to go to press before the 24 hours were up. I finished a bagel with Trey and went back to the room and turned on the TV.
I watched the Democratic debate today. Since deciding to vote for Ron Paul, I haven't paid too much attention to the Democrats except for what has been rammed down our throats by the obsomedia (Hillary and Oprah). I don't consider myself to be a member of any party although sometimes the rules make it so that you have to at least pretend to be in one of the parties. I registered as a Republican when I was Tinytown because the mayoral election was between 3 Republicans and no one else. Who ever one the nomination won the election. I registered as a Republican this time so that I could vote for Ron Paul in the Nevada caucus. It's the only way to vote in Nevada. I like New Hampshire's law where you don't have to jump through the hoop to be part of the Primary. We talk about the United States of America but we divide it as much as we can and even force the issue during election time. Anyway . . .
The moderator had learned some lessons from the Republican fiasco and the whole debate went much smoother. The candidates were given more time and there were fewer of them because Kucinich and Gravel weren't allowed to participate (ironic for me*). They all got along well and put on their best behavior for the voters of Iowa.
They all answered the questions they were given and gave pretty good answers, I thought. It was a completely different atmosphere from watching the Republican debate. If I wasn't voting for Ron Paul, I'd be voting for one of these guys.
Not that I would but if I had to make my choice from just watching this one debate, I'd be going for Edwards or Richardson.
CNN (Clinton Nomination Nonpareil) is obviously still going for Hillary.
After the debate yesterday which I watched on line, I actually turned on the TV to what the obsomedia had to say about the event. I watched CNN's Situation Room because I like Jack Cafferty. He says what he thinks and seems to have quite a bit of common sense. I make that statement based on the 60 seconds that he gets every 15 minutes. It's not much to go on but it's all I've got until I read his book.
Anyway, the big question of the debate is why is Huckabee racing up the polls in Iowa? Secondary is the question of why he's not going up in other polls. The poor pundits seem stumped and I guess no one has given them my phone number yet.
How does one cute comment about Jesus not getting into politics push Huckabee right to the top in two weeks? How did that one debate translate into better results than Rudy's name recognition and Mitt's multi-million dollar ad campaign.
It doesn't.
There. Quit pretending that this is all so shocking and such a mystery.
I just watched the Republican Debate in Iowa and it was interesting how many of the candidates are now giving lip service to the Constitution. In what they said, they haven't changed their stances to reflect actually obeying the Constitution but it's just interesting to see that they can no longer just dismiss Ron Paul. They understand that they have to say what he says if they want to stop losing ground.
Ron Paul was given more time in this debate and that was nice. A couple of the candidates don't care what the time clock says and will continue to talk well past the time they have been told to stop.
Many of them also don't answer the questions. This is normal but I have to wonder why the people running the debates allow that to be normal.
I would ask a question and point out that they didn't answer it and I would do it bluntly and move to the next candidate.
I liked the idea of lights so that candidates know when time is running out but I would take it a step further. A yellow light that shows that 15 seconds are left then a red light. Once the red light had been on for 15 seconds, the candidates mic would be turned off.
These ideas seem common sense to me. Sure, these are guys that are used to doing what the want and being in control but a couple things happen here. If it's your debate, claim it as your debate. Maintain control over the situation that you created by bringing them to your house. The other thing that's interesting is that a couple of these guys paid absolutely no heed to the rules that were set up. What does that say about them? Especially the ones that all of the sudden are paying lip service to the Constitution. If they can't follow simple rules, can you expect them to follow a "goddamn piece of paper"?
It was interesting to see the new turn. It was frustrating to watch them take 90 seconds to not answer a question they were given 60 seconds to answer. It reminds me why I don't enjoy politics. A couple of them talked about returning trust to the government but most of these guys are the same ole, same ole. Say what you think the right answer is, do whatever the hell you want to do, come back with spin to explain why you lied, and then do it all again.
Sadly, Ron Paul didn't give a clear answer when he was asked about what he would do about a Congress that would most likely hinder him every chance they had. I wanted to hear his answer. He was getting there saying that people would help but it doesn't get at the core. Congress doesn't represent the people. Congress represents corporations. How do you take a country that was created by the people for the people and give it back to the people? If he is elected, how will he get Congress to renege on the high paying deals they have going for them.
We voted in a new Congress to pull us out of the illegal war. They haven't done it. It doesn't look like they are going to do it. The people have spoken. 70% of us want an end to the war. We voted what we wanted. Poll after poll shows that, seriously, bring the troops home. You represent us. We want them home. Grow a set and bring them home. It hasn't happened. Instead, they are on the verge of handing over $70 billion more dollars with no time line. My favorite pundit line recently is that it's unlikely that Santa is going be giving backbones to Congress this year for Christmas.
Did they all lie to get into office? Maybe but I'll bet that a bunch of them went in with great intentions but things happen behind closed doors to change their minds.
If Ron Paul is elected president and he wants to take much of the control away from the government and give it back to the people, how will he do that? I wanted to hear that answer.
He spent to much time telling people that the Revolution wasn't his idea. We know that. The people that don't know it probably don't care. The official slogan is "Hope for America", I think, but that wasn't the question. The question is how do you change a corrupt system and restore the republic?
Despite my disappointment in that answer, at least it was only the one. In my mind, Mitt Romney epitomizes the stereotypical politician. He looks polished, he talks smooth, he doesn't answer the questions, and he smiles the whole time. A couple of the other candidates pointed it out too which was funny.
"Can you repeat the question? I forgot what it was while Mitt was talking but he sure talks nice, doesn't he?" That's not the direct quote but it was something like that.
Thankfully, that's the last debate for a while. Just like the CNN debate, my main complaint isn't with the candidates. They are doing what they do. Politicking. My complaint is that the people running the campaign let these guys run all over them.
I'll make the same offer that I made to CNN. If anyone is going to run a debate and wants someone who will stand up to the candidates and make them answer the question or mock them for evading the question, I have a lot of training in interviews and interrogation (without the use of waterboarding) and would be happy to donate my services.
I will do what the American people expect you to do as a journalist. Get answers.
I had to share this with you. I just watched a news clip from my buddies at that fair and balanced news source. In that story, they called Ron Paul a sleeper candidate. What planet do you have to be living on to in the news world to call Ron Paul a sleeper candidate? There are groups around the world that are organizing to back Ron Paul because of his non-intervention and sound money policies.
The fact that you refuse to cover the biggest grassroots movement of the 2008 presidential election does not make him a sleeper. It makes you a sleeper. Cut down on the narcotics and increase your journalistic efforts.
Compete.com rates traffic to candidates websites and thinks that number of hours spent at different candidates websites is a good indicator of the exposure they are getting. Care to see the chart?
Let's look at the poll results that we have up to this point in the SWB Hay Poll (Hey! What the hell? Everyone else has a poll.).
Remember, we have three categories that we are judging candidates: how we see them, how we hear them, and what we feel about them.
On the Democratic side the results to date are:
Best looking - 1. Edwards. 2. Obama. 3. Kucinich.
Best orator - 1. Obama. 2. Clinton. 3. Kucinich.
Conveys integrity the best - 1. Kucinich. 2. Gravel. 3. Clinton.
For the Republicans, we have:
Best looking - 1. Paul. 2. Romney. 3. Huckabee. (Who let the Ron Paul people vote?)
Best orator - 1. Paul. 2. Huckabee. 3. Guiliani.
Conveys integrity the best - 1. Paul (43 votes). 2. Huckabee (1 vote). 3. No one else got any votes. I suspect that Huckabee has been to my blog. How cool is that?
A San Francisco GOP group canceled its straw poll because there were too many Ron Paul people there. That's fine, because it's the same result either way and canceling actually gains more publicity.
The thing is, if Straw polls don't matter, why schedule them? If they don't matter and it's obvious who's going to win, why not hold them anyway?
The whole thing seems silly. They should stop doing polls and maybe cancel the election for fear that Ron Paul supporters might show up and vote.
A Ron Paul supporter recently was polled by IMC on who he thought would win. Ron Paul wasn't one of the choices but there was an "other" category. There was also a "don't call me anymore" choice. The supporter pushed "other" and received the message that he would be taken off the calling list.
Will the Ron Paul campaign get to the point where this kind of trickery is no longer used or will the Primaries get here soon enough that it will all pay off for Rudy McRomney?
I read an interesting thing on Zogby about the "scientific" polls. Only 6-16% of the people called take the poll. Most people just hang up on the people taking the polls.
Supposedly 51% of Americans have heard of Ron Paul now. That's a good sign but is it enough with only a few weeks left before voting starts. On the other hand, I've heard speculation that this year will be a record year for Primary and Caucus turnout and you know why. I'll be going to a Caucus for the first time in my life and I think it's the same for a lot of people.
Mitt gave his "I'm a Mormon" speech today and said that he wouldn't allow the leaders of the Mormon church to sway his decisions. That's a lie obviously because anyone that wants to be a good member of their church follows the "guidance" of their religious leaders. Another religious politician that lies is not what this post is about. It's the truth that I'm more interested in and Huckabee hit the bullseye when he was asked about Mitt being a Mormon:
"It has nothing to do with what faith a person has — it's whether or not that person's life is consistent with how he lives it," Huckabee said Thursday on NBC's "Today." "If I had actions that were completely opposite of my Christian faith, then I would think people would have reason to doubt if this part of my life, which is supposed to be so important, doesn't influence me."
He says so much in so few words. First, he says what I have already said. If you're going to be a Christian, you have to follow Christian ways no matter what job you're doing. Even if you're the President of the United States of America, you will be expected to follow Christian doctrine if you want to go on claiming to be a good Christian.
Second, Christian belief is founded on loving other people and living in peace. Something that neither Mitt or Huckabee practice and it makes them untrustworthy. If a person believes in something so vital, so important, so dear, as a belief in a supreme being and a life after death for all those people that follow the teaching of Jesus Christ, and they go against those teachings, what does it say about them?
Either they don't actually believe in Jesus Christ and his teachings or they do believe but go against the teachings intentionally and openly.
Either way, it speaks volumes about these two candidates, and any other candidate that preaches about Christ and then promotes war and torture. It almost makes it look like the only reason they are bringing up Christ is to gain the votes of Christians. I don't know if that's in the bible but invoking Christ's name while going against his teachings with the sole purpose of winning an election sounds like a sin to me.
Mitt Romney apparently bought a straw poll in Florida. From what I've read, this wasn't against the rules so it's not a big deal. I almost feel bad for the guy. I don't know him personally so all I have is what I read and see and I can't bring myself to feel bad for a guy that wants 2 Git-mos.
It's just got to suck for him. He entered this thing thinking his biggest obstacle was overcoming a guy who is 9/11 to hide his mafia-like brand of government. Mitt's a tall, clean cut, articulate Christian who spent something like $17 million of his own money to get name recognition early in the race. Things look like they might be going well and then, fetch* it all, Ron Paul's message goes viral.
This guy starts winning straw poll after straw poll without spending any money. He's putting all his money in the bank to make a strong statement during the 4th quarter. Then it gets worse. The Ron Paul Revolution gives the campaign more money in 2 months than any of the "top tier" candidates got in the 3 months of the 3rd quarter (yes, they managed to pass Rudy's mark yesterday).
When the opportunity came where it was okay to buy a straw poll, you just can't blame the guy. Some Ron Paul supporters supposedly bought extra tickets for extra votes too and here's where the sting comes back. Supposedly Mitt bought the tickets for his supporters, Ron Paul didn't. Did his parents tie a pork chop around his neck so the dog would play with him or was he more likable when he was a kid?
* For those of you not familiar with the dialect of the peculiar people, "Fetch" is the Mormon equivalent to the f-bomb.
We ended up getting a little bit of a late start to come home so I missed the first 30 minutes of the debate.
"I wouldn't say that I really miss it," - Office Space
Tia sat down and watched some of it with me but eventually decided to go do homework.
"Ron Paul never gets to talk," she said as she was leaving the room. She doesn't follow politics very closely but since I've been talking about Ron Paul so much, she wanted to see what the guy had to say. She never found out.
It seemed like the questions and responses went to candidates in about this order:
I don't comment on it much anymore because we all know that's it's happening every day. I thought I would do a quick update though on some recent events.
