Live New Hampshire Primary Election Result Updates

286 of 301 Precincts Reporting – 95%
Name Party Votes Vote %
Romney, Mitt GOP 94,252 39%
Paul, Ron GOP 54,511 23%
Huntsman, Jon GOP 40,388 17%
Gingrich, Newt GOP 22,518 9%
Santorum, Rick GOP 22,292 9%
Perry, Rick GOP 1,668 1%
Roemer, Buddy GOP 898 0%
Total Write-ins GOP 788 0%
Bachmann, Michele GOP 341 0%
Karger, Fred GOP 331 0%
Rubash, Kevin GOP 246 0%
Johnson, Gary GOP 175 0%
Cain, Herman GOP 148 0%
Lawman, Jeff GOP 122 0%
Hill, Christopher GOP 103 0%
Linn, Benjamin GOP 82 0%
Meehan, Michael GOP 46 0%
Story, Joe GOP 39 0%
Drummond, Keith GOP 35 0%
Betzler, Bear GOP 29 0%
Robinson, Joe GOP 26 0%
Greenleaf, Stewart GOP 22 0%
Callahan, Mark GOP 18 0%
Swift, Linden GOP 17 0%
Martin, Andy GOP 16 0%
Wuensche, Vern GOP 15 0%
Brewer, Timothy GOP 14 0%
Davis, John GOP 13 0%
Crow, Randy GOP 12 0%
Cort, Hugh GOP 2 0%
Vestermark, James GOP 2 0%

Dixville Notch Opens the New Hampshire Primary With a Win for Romney and Huntsman

Bookmark and Share   With all the pomp and circumstance and meaning of Groundhog Day in Pennsylvania, New Hampshire has seen their first in the nation primary begin with the first voting in the state out of Dixville Notch.

Out of the 9 voters in the small town, 4 are Independent, 3 are Republican, and 2 are Democrats.  As is expected, most of the the Independent voters chose to vote in the Republican Primary and so out of the 6 votes cast in that contest, Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman tied with 2 votes each.  Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul each received 1 vote.

On the Democratic side, President Obama won in a landslide, receiving all 2 of the registered Democrat voters and 1 Independent voter Dixville Notch.

Historically, Dixville Notch is about as good an indicator of voter sentiments in New Hampshire as Ron Paul is an example of responsible national security…………not at all.  But it is a good example of civic responsibility and participation in the democratic process and that is what’s it all about.  I would still have prefered that Independents were not allowed to influence the selection of who represents my Party but I am nonetheless glad to see that an end to the News Hampshire primary is in sight.  And short of a very unlikely surprise result in the Granite State, I am looking forward to the days leading up to the South Carolina Primary, a state primary contes twhich promises to provide a true proving ground for Mitt Romney and a real opportunity for any of his rivals who are still in the race after New Hampshire.

Bookmark and Share

McRomney: The Problem With John McCain’s Flip-Flop for Mitt Romney

Bookmark and Share   Back in December, White House 2012 took a look at John McCain’s expected endorsement of Mitt Romney.  At that time, McCain had stated that he would not endorse a candidate until after the Iowa Caucus.  White House 2012 anticipated that Romney might need to rely on the popularity of John McCain  which is really only limited to New Hampshire and Arizona Republicans.

Romney’s surprising virtual tie with underdog Rick Santorum may have been enough to upset the apple cart for Romney that it did become necessary for McCain to endorse Romney in the days leading up to the New Hampshire primary and in the end it will probably will have at most, a minimal benefit for Romney come primary night.

However, some of the drawbacks to a McCain endorsement that we noted back in December, were immediately highlighted by the mainstream media in the wake of the anticipated endorsement.  The main criticism was the hypocrisy involved in what is an ironic flip-flop for Romney by McCain.

At the time, White House 2012 even produced a video documenting the hypocrisy with clips that offer some of the reasons why Romney should not want an endorsement from McCain and why McCain shouldn’t want to endorse Romney.

Ultimately, the McCain endorsement will probably not help Romney much.  Romney should be winning New Hampshire primary regardless of what McCain did.  But there is an underlying risk that Romney takes by receiving John McCain’s seal of approval.  As the perceived moderate, establishment Republican, the approval of another perceived moderate, establishment Republican does little more than reinforce what is an image problem for Romney in this anti-establishment atmosphere.

To put it another way, given the existing mood in the Republican Party, whose endorsement would you rather have……..John McCain’s or Sarah Palin’s.  In my humble opinion, I think the Mama Grizzly would be far more beneficial than the G.O.P.’s establishment, liberal “Maverick”.

Bookmark and Share

John McCain to Endorse Mitt Romney in New Hampshire

Bookmark and Share   In an attempt to try to maintain a sense of momentum after a razor thin win in Iowa, the Romney campaign has decided to allow Senator John McCain to go public with his endorsement of Romney for President.

Word of a McCain endorsement of Romney first surfaced two weeks ago, but the announcement was shelved.  Until now.

A Republican official now states that on Wednesday, the 2008 Republican standard bearer with go public with his endorsement of Romney for the G.O.P.’s 2012 nomination.

The timing is most likely based on the need for Romney to start looking more like a clear frontrunner than his near loss in Iowa depicted him as and to help ensure that he can hold on to his wide lead over the rest of the field in the New Hampshire primary.

McCain remains relatively popular among New Hampshire Republicans and in 2008, McCain just so happened to beat Romney in New Hampshire.

For Romney, the need to create a sense of inevitability about his becoming the nominee is increasingly important.  Such a  perceived inevitability will help Romney to wrap up the nomination early by limiting the momentum that rivals like Santorum might capture.  However; McCain’s endorsement may be more damaging to Romney than helpful.  While McCain may provide Romney with a boost in the Granite State, how well his endorsement plays elsewhere is very questionable.

One of the knocks on Romney is his establishment Republican image.  That image is only reinforced by the signal that McCain’s endorsement sends, which is that the Republican establishment is lining up behind Romney.

In this anti-establishment atmosphere and age of TEA movement sentiments, the establishment label is hardly something that will help a candidate win favor with the electorate.

Bookmark and Share

Herman Cain Resurfaces with the Promise of an Unconventional Endorsement

Bookmark and Share   Moments ago, in a Fox News interview, Herman Cain resurfaced and shed some light on his future role in the 2012 presidential election.

Cain told viewers that he does not intend to endorse any candidate any time soon.  He states, “If I were to make an endorsement now, it might split the vote”.  He claims that in addition to not wanting to do that, he also does not want to do anything that prevents voters from remaining engaged in the process and educating themselves about candidates.

But the Herminator does promise to eventually issue what he called “an unconventional endorsement”.  He added that after running an unconventioanl campaign, an unconventional endorsement is only appropriate.

During the interview Cain admitted that in the end he will support whoever is the Republican nominee and as for his own political future he states that because of his accelerated age, he believes his biological clock will preclude any future run for president and he is not positioning himself for any future cabinet position.  However Cain did promise to remain active through his new political organization which is headquartered on the internet at The Cain Solutions website.

Bookmark and Share

Just What on Earth is a Conservative?

A New Conservatism is needed to stop America going down the road of Welfarism

Iowa is upon us. 2012 is upon us. How will it all end? It may just all end in tears. Tears because Obama wins, or tears because the GOP did    not offer a viable alternative. Whatever happens, one thing is for sure: this is a time to stand up for conservative principles.

But, just what on earth is a conservative, and can one win the White House this year?

To answer this means agreement on just what a conservative is, and your answer to the second part of my question depends on the answer to the first part.

Simply put, Conservatism is a set of instincts and principles guiding decisions, which are applied according to historical context. Today’s conservative may discuss different situations and policy options then an 18th Century conservative, but then they will adhere to some broad principles as if there had been no intervening centuries. The conservative whom is central to American modern conservatism is Edmund Burke, and he spelled out some core conservative elements of thought:

  1. People are basically religious, and religion is the foundation of civil society. A divine sanction infuses the legitimate, existing, social order.
  2. Society is the natural, organic product of slow historical growth, with institutions drawing on the wisdom of previous generations.
  3. People are creatures of instinct and emotion as well as reason. Prudence, prejudice, experience, and habit are better guides than reason, logic, abstractions, and metaphysics. Truth exists not in universal propositions but in concrete experiences.
  4. The community is superior to the individual. Rights derive from duties. Evil is rooted in human nature, not in any particular social institutions.
  5. Apart from an ultimate moral sense, people are unequal. Social organization is a complex of classes, orders, and groups. Hence, differentiation, hierarchy and leadership are the inevitable characteristics of any civil society.
  6. A presumption exists “in favor of any settled scheme of government against any untried project.  “Man’s hopes are high, but his vision is short.”  Thus, efforts to remedy existing evils usually result in even greater ones.

We find echoes of these elements in the influential 1953 essay “The Conservative Mind”, where Russell Kirk offered what he called “six canons of conservative thought”. Like Burke, the divine plays a foundational role:

  1. Belief that a divine intent rules society as well as conscience
  2. Affection for the proliferating variety and mystery of traditional life
  3. Conviction that civilized society requires orders and classes
  4. Persuasion that property and freedom are inseparably connected and that economic leveling is not economic progress
  5. Faith in prescription and distrust of “sophisters and calculators”
  6. Recognition that change and reform are not identical

In 2012, how many of these foundational canons of thought are taught in our educational system? Again the answer is simple: none. What does happen is that these foundational principles are undermined and dismantled at every level of education and public life. To be a conservative is to swim against the cultural tide, against the consensus which is taught in schools and parlayed by the chattering media.

Winning a political election means appealing to the consensus, and today’s consensus is not tolerant of principles, or even thought for that matter. In today’s climate, a conservative cannot win the election. You can only look at the GOP field and vote for the consensus candidate, in other words the nearest thing to an electable conservative. This is not a ringing endorsement of Mitt Romney, but he is the only candidate who can compete with Obama.

But then in the grand scheme of things the presidential election is a mere sideshow, because the real battles lie ahead in establishing a new conservative agenda for an America systemically in doubt and unsure. The enlightenment trajectory of Europe down the road to Welfarism, with its self-destructive repudiation of civilized principles, is the trajectory America is now following.

The answer is not to be found in this election, a new conservatism that tackles the causes of decline in enlightenment civilization is needed. A new Burke or Kirk is needed, because conservatives cannot simply look at Obama as the cause of America’s identity crisis, he is a symptom of the decay of the principles these thinkers set out so clearly.

Iowa Caucus Locator: Find the Location of Your Local Caucus Precinct

If you are an Iowa Republicans and are not sure of where your caucus is located, please click on the link below:

Gingrich Predicts His Own Loss in Iowa and Bachmann Hopes for a Miracle

Bookmark and Share   After more than six weeks as the candidate with the target on his back and nearly 10 million dollars in negative ads against him, New Gingrich saw his Iowa poll numbers fall from a near 30% to his current standing in the mid teens.

The loss of just about half of his support has led Newt to admit now that he is not likely to win the Iowa Caucus but at the same time, he believes that a likely third or even fourth place showing will still it make him possible for him to remain competitive beyond the Hawkeye State’s nomination contest.

That assessment is actually true, but short of a first or second place showing, Newt’s future viability will rely on two things.  First, he must hope that if Mitt Romney wins, he does not win by very much.  Then Newt must hope for a third place showing.  While a fouth place finish will not derail his candidacy, it will make fundraising and the establishment of momentum quite an uphill battle as he moves ahead.

If Newt can fisinsh third or second and keep Romney from winning by a very large margin, he will remain competetive and may be come the benefiicary of an anti-Romney phenomenom.

If opposition to Romney is as strong among conservatives as many believe, victories in Iowa and New Hampshire could finally force the anti-Romney vote to charge behind one final alternative to Romney.  Newt is in the best position to be that alternative candidate but anything less than a fourth place finish in Iowa will make that impossible.

Meanwhile Michele Bachmann says “We’re believing in a miracle because we know, I know, the one who gives miracles,” .

At Oral Roberts University, Bachmann’s alma mater she told ABC ;

“We’re going to see an astounding result on Tuesday night — miraculous,”

Current polling has apparently forced both Bachmann and Gingrich to be unconditionally honest about the results tomorrow, for under the circumstances, Bachmann does in fact need a miracle to pull off a finish above 6th place.  For Gingrich, given the nearly 41 percent of Iowa caucus goers who remain undecided on the eve of the contest, a better than expected showing is not out of the question and as a Gingrich supporter a biased optimism has me still believing that he could surprise everyone with a third or second place finish.  However, when factoring in current voter trends, Newt’s poorly run campaign and lack of an organization on the ground, along with the undeniable momentum behind Rick Santorum, logic would dictate that Newt is right.  He will not win the caucus tomorrow night.

As for the other candidates, Ron Paul is seeing the helium in his balloon be overwhelmed as the weight of the oxygen in the atmosphere surrounding the reality of his reckless national security views and general unelectability brings his number back to the floor.  In an early afternoon speech to supporters, Paul reminded his fans that the Caucus will involve small numbers of people but the message they send will be a big one and he urged his supporters to stick together and be sure to show up at their proper caucus locations.

Mitt Romney spent most of the day trying to remain focussed on the one person which unites him and his rivals together in their desire to defeat in  November…..Barack Obama.  That focus was designed to play on the perception that he is the one Republican who has the best chance of actually being the one who can defeat Obama.  The hope there is that as Romney solidifies his frontrunner status in Iowa, there is a good chance that the large undecided bloc of voters will break in his favor and provide him not only with a win, but a bigger than expected win that could make it  possible to wrap up the nomination sooner rather than later.

Rick Perry, the wildcard going in to tomorrow night, spent his time on the campaign trail trying to make sure that his supporters don’t jump ship and while trying to also give those caught up in the surge for Rick Santorum  reason to think twice about actually casting their ballots for the wrong Rick.  A new Perry ad attacks Santorum for his willingness to defend pork barrel spending.

Perry goes in to tomorrow night as the spoiler.  Between his heavy ad buy and a good deal of retail political campaigning in Iowa, he remains the one candidate left who could perform better than expected and could benefit from a surge that has gone undetected by the polls.  The strength of such an undetected surge will not be enough to allow Perry to finish in one the top two or three positions, but he could pull the type of numbers that may prevent people like Sanoturm and Gingrich from outpolling Ron Paul.

Bookmark and Share

As I Asked Before, Does It Make Sense to Endorse the People You Want to Run Against?

Bookmark and Share    Last week I was criticized for criticizing now former Republican presidential candidate Gary Johnson for endorsing Ron Paul for the Republican presidential nomination while at the same time seeking the Libertarian presidential nomination.  I made a bit of a stink about the stupidity of endorsing the candidacy of someone who you intend to oppose.

As it turned out, when Johnson made it official that he was changing his Party registration from Republican to Libertarian, dropping his bid for the G.O.P. presidential nomination, and seeking the Libertarian Party’s nomination, he did not come right out and endorse Ron Paul.  That made sense.

However, this week, one day before the Iowa Caucuses, Gary Johnson lived up to expectations and came out with the following statement.

“While Ron Paul and I are both libertarians, we don’t necessarily agree on every single issue.

However, on the overriding issues of restoring our economy by cutting out-of-control spending and the need to get back to Constitutional principles in our government, Ron Paul and I are in lock-step.”

….I am hopeful that in urging my supporters in Iowa to vote for Ron Paul in the coming caucuses, a victory for the principles we share can be won.”

Thank you Gary Johnson.

Thanks for redeeming me and my previous post on this topic.  You have helped make my questions more relevant than ever and it is my greatest hope that you will in eventually  decide whether you want to be President or whether you want Ron Paul to be President. Once you make that decision, maybe you will finally be able to do a little good for either yourself or Ron Paul.  Until then you are  just being a fool and playing us for fools.

Bookmark and Share

Why I Am Endorsing Newt Gingrich for President

Bookmark and Share    This country is in trouble and bold leadership is needed. As someone that has had the privilege to vet these candidates as closely as just about anybody else has, I’ve come to the conclusion there are several good, Christian people running that most years I would vote for.

However, this isn’t most years.

Sadly, there are only two candidates offering a real means by which to actually undo that which the Left has done to this country for the past 50 years, and not just conservative platitudes. One of those candidates is Ron Paul, but his foreign policy is naive at best and reckless at worst. The other is Newt Gingrich, who has campaigned on what I believe is the most important issue facing us as a people—the loss of the rule of law.

The Left has used unelected judges and judicial oligarchy to reinvent the American way of life, from secularism to the loss of the sanctity of life, to the redefining of marriage, the confiscation of private property, and the granting of imaginary rights. There is an entire chapter of my new book devoted to the need for conservatives and Christians to confront judicial oligarchy once and for all. I have spent the past two years of my radio program educating my audience on this issue, and was a vocal proponent of Iowa’s historic judicial retention election last year, and Newt’s assistance with that effort was vital.

After offering every candidate in the race the chance to show they understand the gravity of this issue, Gingrich is the only one who has demonstrated he does, and can also use the bully pulpit of the presidency to educate Americans on the need to return to the rule of law.

I understand Newt has taken positions and done things in his personal life I do not agree with, but to his credit he has come on my radio program and been very transparent about those things, and has shown humility and a willingness to be transparent in the process.

He has signed the Personhood Pledge I advocated for. He has offered one of the most articulate defenses of marriage and the family I have ever read from a candidate. He has agreed to never sign a budget into law that includes a plug nickel for an abortion provider. He has agreed to seek personhood legislation and a stronger defense of marriage act that would limit the judicial oligarchs’ ability to legislate from the bench.

With these steps he has shown the leadership this country desperately needs. Electing another Obamney from the ruling class changes nothing. Electing another nice conservative with no proven ability to govern or a killer instinct to take on the system changes nothing, even if it makes us all feel warm and fuzzy inside.

This is a time for leadership, not warm fuzzies. The future is at stake, and we may never get another environment with the country so prepared to challenge the system as we have right now.

I suppose I could stay silent and let the process run its course, as many other so-called leaders are doing, so as to not worry about alienating some of my fellow believers by making this decision. But then I’d have to look my children in the eye years from now and explain to them why I stood by and said nothing when I had the chance, as more hackneyed Obamneys finish off what’s left of the greatest country God has ever shed His grace upon.

I’m willing to take full responsibility for this decision, just as I hope those that have chosen to support other candidates who themselves have fatal flaws are willing to do the same. It is my hope the other Republican candidates will follow Gingrich’s bold leadership in providing the country a true alternative to President Obama.

It is my prayer that next year that for once we actually have something to vote for, and not just something to vote against. I am making this endorsement in the hopes that will be the case. Sometimes the most broken people are the ones God does the most tremendous work through. I know that has been true in my life.

Bookmark and Share

Trunkline 2012: Friday’s Campaign Trail News Wrap-Up from White House 2012 – 12/30/11

Bookmark and Share  The news from the campaign trail todasy is plentiful as Newt weeps, Ron Paul rejects everyone, Perry and Santorum sharpen their aim at one another, Bachmann gets an almost endorsement, Gingrich gets a very important Iowa endorsement, and everyone offers their own views on the Caucus and everyone else.

This is a time for leadership, not warm fuzzies. The future is at stake, and we may never get another environment with the country so prepared to challenge the system as we have right now. – Steve Deace in his endorsement of Newt Gingrich
  • Twitter of the Day:
Greta Christina
GretaChristinaGreta Christina

Not sure which is funnier: headline reading “Santorum Surges From Behind,” or the fact that Rick Santorum retweeted it.
Favorite      Retweet      Reply

If It Were Up To Republicans, Ron Paul Would Still Be a Second Tier Candidate

Bookmark and Share   Ron Paul’s recent surge to the front of the pack certainly makes this an exciting time for those who subscribe to his rhetoric and feel that his lack of actual accomplishments makes him an ideal President.  It’s also an exciting time for those who are simply fed up and looking for a way to register a significant protest vote against the system ans politics in general.  But for true conservative Republicans, Paul’s rise in recent Iowa polling is little more than a means of assuring the reelection of President Barack Obama and if left up to them, Ron Paul would still be lumped together with names like Jon Huntsman, Buddy Roemer, and Michele Bachmann in the bottom third of the Republican presidential field.

However, in states like Iowa, and even New Hampshire, the Republican presidential nominee is not chosen just by Republicans.

According to state Party rules governing the Iowa Caucus and several other state nominating contests, only registered Republicans in the state of Iowa can participate in the Republican caucus but individuals registered as Independents or affiliated with other parties, may switch their Party affiliation at the caucus site and cast their vote for the Republican candidate of their choice.  In other words, a non-affiliated voter or a liberal Democrat can walk in out of the snow, change their Party registration,  and vote for Ron Paul.

For some, the opportunity for people of any political affiliation to vote in a partisan primary or caucus is a good thing, and seems logical, but as a proud partisan conservative Republican, I can tell you that it is not.

For the record, while I am an American first and foremost, I must admit that I am a proud and devout, partisan conservative Republican.  My committment to the Party is based on ideology, and I am often not the most politically popular person in the Party because I am often at at odds with many of  its leaders who I believe spend most of their time playing politics and forsaking our conservative based ideology for political expediency.

That stated, I defend my ideological partisanship on the grounds that it is my deep conviction that ultimately, the conservative-Republican ideology is the best thing for America.  So my political partisanship goes hand in hand with my love of country and I do not separate the two.  That’s why I have never supported so-called open primary or caucus contests that allow people of opposing ideologies to choose the nominee that represents  my beliefs and Party.

The way I see it, as a conservative, why should I have the ability to pick the liberal nominee?  If  I had the chance to do that in 2008, I would have done my best to make sure that Dennis Kucinich won the Democratic presidential nomination for President.  Kucinich would have been a sure loser for liberals.

I am of the opinion that if Republicans and Democrats, or for that matter Libertarians, are to nominate the candidate that best represents their beliefs and can be the strongest one to represent their Party, then those who subscribe to the ideologies represented by those parties should be responsible for deciding who represents that Party.  In some ways, these open contests make about as much sense as us opening up the general presidential election to the citizens of other nations.  Which by the way, is not so unfathomable when you consider the lengths to which Democrats are trying to go  in with legislative initiatives designed at specifically making  it possible for illegal immigrants to vote.

Now some of you may be saying that I am blowing this all out of proportion.  Some may even suggest that crediting Ron Paul’s predicted success in Iowa to the opportunity for independents and Democrats to vote in their Caucus is overstated.  To them I must ask…………are you that stupid!!?

One need not look very hard to find that my assertion about the effect of independents and Democrats is true.

A recent American Research Group poll of  Iowa voters makes the case that if left up to Republicans, Ron Paul would not be a real contender.

According to ARG, among Republicans who intend to vote in the Iowa Caucus, Mitt Romney leads with 23% and he is followed by Newt Gingrich who comes in at 19%.

As for Ron Paul, strictly among Republicans, he pulls 12% of the vote which leaves him tied with Rick Santorum.

Among Republicans:

  • Mitt Romney 23%
  • Newt Gingrich 19%
  • Rick Santorum 12%
  • Ron Paul 12%
  • Michele Bachmann 9%
  • Rick Perry 8%
  • Jon Huntsman 6%
  • Buddy Roemer 1%
  • Other 1%
  • Undecided 9%

In the same poll, a deeper look at Iowa Republicans that breaks them down along TEA Party lines finds that Ron Paul does a little better among those voters most focussed on a limited and more constitutional government but not by much.   Ron Paul receives a 16% share of the vote from them,  but that is 9% behind Gingrich and 10% behind Mitt Romney.

Among Tea Party Supporters

  • Mitt Romney 26%
  • Newt Gingrich 25%
  • Ron Paul 16%
  • Michele Bachmann 10%
  • Rick Perry 9%
  • Rick Santorum 7%
  • Jon Huntsman 0%
  • Buddy Roemer 0%
  • Other 0%
  • Undecided 7%

In fact, the only segment of Iowa residents who Ron Paul gets a majority of the vote from in the “Republican” Iowa Caucus are Independents.  Among them, Paul polls 30% of the vote, 8% more than Romney, and 18% more than Newt Gingrich.

Among Independents

  • Ron Paul 30%
  • Mitt Romney 22%
  • Newt Gingrich 12%
  • Rick Perry 11%
  • Michele Bachmann 6%
  • Rick Santorum 6%
  • Jon Huntsman 6%
  • Buddy Roemer 0%
  • Other 1%
  • Undecided 9%

If that is not enough to convince you of the undue influence that non-Republican entities are having on the Republican Caucus in Iowa, maybe you will believe it coming from Ron Paul’s own people?

Back in March of 2011, the hero worshippers behind the propaganda based website entitled The Daily Paul, posted a call to arms entitled “2012 Open Primary States: The key to Ron Paul’s Republican Nomination”.  It basically calls upon Pauliacs to sabotage the Republican nomination process and steal the nomination from the Party by asking Democrats and Independents to flood the primaries and caucuses of the 17 specific states that have open primaries which allow Democrats and Independents to vote without even having to register as a Republican.

The article reads;

“We must organize and put the strongest efforts in these states to encourage Democrats and Independents to vote for Ron Paul and capture all the Delegates of these Open Republican Primary States”

By the count of the author behind the plot, winning those states would give Ron Paul 874 of the 1,212 delegates needed to win the Republican nomination.

Fortunately for rational conservatives though, not only is that a substantial number short of the delegates needed, most of the states do not have election laws that allow for opposing parties to easily and blatantly circumvent the democratic process in the general election by sabotaging a Party’s nomination process and leaving them with a nominee who is the weakest possible candidate they could have representing them.

Additional good fortune is the fact that Iowa is one of the few state’s that Ron Paul is actually doing that well in.  Nationally, Ron Paul’s average standing in the polls is half that of Romney and less than half that of Newt Gingrich.  While national polls do not mean much to a process that is based on the collective results of individual state contests, that national average does accurately reflect most state polls.

In the final analysis, while excitement erupts about Ron Paul rising to the top, the truth is that such excitement is based on a lack of any real depth of truth, and thankfully, it is the G.O.P. which will still determine their own nominee.  Even so, I still think it is about time that state parties and their representatives rethink their willingness to allow the political opposition to influence who our own Party’s nominees are.

Bookmark and Share

Trunlkine 2012: Thursday’s Summary of News and Views from the Campaign Trail– 12/29/11

Bookmark and Share  Today’s campaign trail briefing offers a look at Ron Paul’s games and blames,  anew santorum ad, Jon Huntsman’s wisecrack, how Iowa will effect New Hamsphire and more news and views.

 “If you’re thinking about Ron Paul because of his domestic issues, think again and look at virtually any of the other candidates and consider how they would be as Commander-in-Chief. That’s the president’s first duty, defending the country.” – Ambassador John  Bolton

  • Twitter of the Day:

   BorowitzReport   Andy Borowitz
Kelly Clarkson has endorsed Ron Paul, which means that her music is no longer the worst thing about her.
Reply         Retweet        Favorite

Wednesday’s Words and Wit from the Presidential Campaign Trail: 12/28/11

Bookmark and Share Santorum surges, Romney leads, Bachmann goes after Perry and Paul, pastors urge candidates to drop out of the race and conservatives think about foreign policy as a sleeper issue in the 2012 election, what the Ron Paul vote has to do with Ron paul, and how we find the most conservative and electable nominee.  That an more tops today’s news from  the campaign trail in Trunkline 2012 election news roundup.

“He is however, most certainly Anti-Israel, and Anti-Israeli in general. He wishes the Israeli state did not exist at all. He expressed this to me numerous times in our private conversations. His view is that Israel is more trouble than it is worth, specifically to the America taxpayer. He sides with the Palestinians, and supports their calls for the abolishment of the Jewish state, and the return of Israel, all of it, to the Arabs” – Eric Dondero, the right-hand man to Congressman Ron Paul for 16 years

  • Twitter of the Day:

  McGarrysGhost   Leo Thomas McGarry
Ron Paul’s lifetime legislative record in Congress: 620 bills sponsored, 4 bills voted on, 1 signed into law. That’s a 99.84% failure rate.

Trunkline 2012: Tuesday Tidbits From The Republican Presidential Race – 12/27/11

Bookmark and Share  Today’s Trunkline 2012 reveals that Ron Paul is beginning to understand what it’s like to be attacked rather than on the attack as both Christians and Jews start throwing stones at him,.  Meanwhile, Newt’s past continues to haunt him, Perry flops or flips, it’s hard to tell, and Michele Bachmann finds some praise and predictions.

“You look at Ron Paul’s record of systemic avoidance of reality, his ads are about as accurate as his newsletter,” – Newt Gingrich

  • Twitter of the Day:

  qhardy  Quentin Hardy
Rick Perry’s Iowa ad spending comes to $25 per caucus goer. “I should have just sent them each a $25 bill,” he says.
Reply      Retweet      Favorite

Gingrich Super PAC Launches Super Big Ad Buy in Iowa

Bookmark and Share    The individuals behind the pro-Gingrich Super PAC known as Winning Our Future have launched their first ad in Iowa with a reported significant media buy of $250,000.  The ad will run from now through Monday, January 2nd, the day before the Iowa Caucuses.

The ad offers a compelling arguments for those who are still undecided and open to Newt Gingrich’s candidacy.

It tries to play on the strong anti-establishment sentiments that are motivating much of the electorate, including those within the TEA movement.

The ad contends that given the aggressive opposition to Newt’s candidacy that establishment Republicans demonstrated, he is clearly no friend of the establishment.

The point is quite a valid one and one which Newt Gingrich could have and should have run with as soon as the inundation of negative attacks on him began.  Had Newt’s campaign been able to create and focus on a single message that would have defined himself as the anti-establishment candidate, he could have maintained much of the lead that he once held.  But the lack of political discipline and organization of Newt’s campaign failed to capitalize on that and lacked the ability to effectively coordinate such a theme.

Fortunately, the Super PAC, that is not affiliated with Newt’s campaign, has taken it upon themselves to try and do what Newt didn’t and while I think their new ad helps, I believe that it is too little, too late to move Newt’s numbers significantly.  At this stage  of the game in Iowa and New Hampshire, the real focus needs to be on undecided voters and the Get Out the Vote operation.  Unfortunately, Newt lacks the organizational ability to identify those undecided voters and insure that those who are solidly behind him, show up at their precinct’s caucus and make their support official.

Compounding Newt’s problem is his loss of momentum.

If those who are supporting Gingrich come to believe that Newt has slipped so far that it is impossible for him to win, some of those supporters may not bother with the trouble of trudging out to a Caucus on a cold night and listening to an hour of speeches only to see their candidate suffer what they believe is an inevitable defeat.

So while ad likes this can’t hurt, Gingrich needs to somehow excite his supporters and win over a good portion of the very sizeable undecided vote.  Then he needs to make sure they show up at their proper caucus location.  However, at the moment, Newt is conceding the momentum to Ron paul and Mitt Romney and the ground game to Romney, Paul, Bachmann, and Santorum.

Bookmark and Share

Hero Worship of Ron Paul Gives Birth to the Third Party Candidacy of a Proven Libertarian Leader

Bookmark and Share   On Wednesday,December 28th, six day before the first voting takes place in the first presidential caucus, the Republican presidential field will take a new turn.  It is on that day that former Governor Gary Johnson will be making a major announcement about what he describes as his plans for insuring that his message of liberty and freedom is heard in the 2012 presidential election [see the press release below this post]. It is expected that he will use the opportunity to declare that he will seek the Libertarian presidential nomination and hope to continue to spread his message while carrying the banner for that third party.

Up to now, the message he wants to deliver has been muted by low poll numbers and a lack of media exposure and financial resources.

Unfortunately for Governor Johnson those three attributes feed in to each other and have been responsible for a vicious cycle that placed his candidacy in a state of virtual obscurity.  And it is pity that he fell victim to that cycle.

As a two term Governor of New Mexico, Johnson proved himself to be quite an effective leader.

He is about as anti-government as you can get and as a self described Libertarian-Republican, when he was in charge of New Mexico’s state government, he vetoed 750 bills and stood by his belief that less government is better government.

But where he did see a place for government action, he acted quickly and unapologetically.

In addition to vetoing more bills than all the other 49 Governors of the time combined, Johnson shrunk the size of government by 1,200 employees, left the state with an all time high bond rating, cut government spending by 30%……. just through welfare reforms, eliminated the state’s deficit, reduced taxes $123 million annually, shifted state Medicaid to managed care, brought the New Mexico state government and the Navajo nation leadership together to finally resolve century-old disputes over water, gaming, and other issues, privatized half the prisons in the state, shot down campaign finance legislation., repealed an act that prevented non-unionized labor the ability to be employed in construction of new schools and other public works, and oversaw the construction of 500 miles of new, four-lane highways that were designed, financed, built, and guaranteed by the private sector.

Gary Johnson did not just talk about limited government, he ran one. And he did so by adopting Republican principles and incorporating them into the application of Libertarian beliefs.

Were it not for his Ron Paulish foreign policy and national security designs, even I would have given Johnson serious consideration for the Republican presidential nomination.  However; aside from those very dangerous shared views of the two men, Johnson is in truth, the superior candidate.  Neither man is an exciting speaker and neither have outstanding personalities but on the issues and their individual records, Johnson is head and shoulders above Paul.  While Ron Paul has preached the virtues of limited and small government, Gary Johnson actually practiced and applied those virtues to government.  While Paul talked the talked for over four decades, Johnson actually walked the walk as a successful Governor for eight years.

Those facts should have made Gary Johnson the most successful Libertarian candidate in the Republican presidential field.  But with the third time presidential candidacy of Ron Paul, it became impossible for Gary Johnson to compete for the Libertarian market available within the G.O.P.

Unlike Ron Paul, Johnson lacks the cult of personality that Ron Paul has achieved through his decades of rhetoric and distortions.  That cult of personality has blinded his cult-like followers from even giving another candidate a fair and decent hearing.

Blinded by the glow of the messianic light that Pauliacs cast on Ron Paul, the small but significant 10% to 18% of those who are staunch supporters of Paul’s message, refuse to believe that anyone else can have a similar message and for them, whether they realize it or not, the issues are actually overshadowed by Ron Paul.

If for no other reason than the fact that Gary Johnson has proven himself and Ron Paul has yet to prove himself, true believers in Libertarian policies who are sincere about the issues, would have and should have been far more appreciative of Gary Johnson than they were.  Instead, Gary Johnson and his record of accomplishment was overshadowed by Ron Paul’s use of propaganda and mass media outlets, that created a heroic public image through unchallenged praise and flattery.

The reality is that if Ron Paul fanatics were more consumed by the issues than hero worship, Gary Johnson might still be trying to influence the Republican Party and general election through the primary process.  Instead, he will now spend most of his time running against the only opposition to President Obama that has a realistic shot of defeating him.

The greatest irony here though is that the cult of personality following that surrounds Ron Paul is astonishingly antithetical to the Libertarian ideology and its sincere roots in liberty.  Cults of personality are most often associated with dictatorships whose success relies primarily on unquestioned loyalty to the dictator and a Pallovian reaction to their charismatic authority.

While Ron Paul is far from charismatic, his message has a charisma of its own and it has led to the unhealthy hero worship which has left Libertarians with one man as their sole, unchallenged leader.  In may ways it is more similar to the following of Kim Jong-Il  than it is to the support of an American politician.  Even Ronald Reagan faced criticism from fellow Republicans, but does a Libertarian dare criticize Ron Paul?  As I stated…….hero worship.

Many Pauliacs will of course disagree with me but the true test of my analysis will quickly come once Ron Paul loses the Republican Presidential nomination.

When the inevitability of Paul’s loss of the nomination becomes undeniable, we will wait to see if Ron Paul runs his own independent candidacy for President.  If he is a true Libertarian, there is no reason why he shouldn’t pursue the Libertarian Party nomination as he did in 1988. In fact one must question why he has not already to do so.  Nothing precludes him from accepting multiple Party nominations.  So there is no apparent reason why he isn’t already seeking the Libertarian nomination. But if he doesn’t seek it, will Pauliacs finally give Gary Johnson a decent hearing and flock to him?  Or will hero worship of Ron Paul suddenly reduce enthusiasm for the message and cause of liberty and freedom?

Bookmark and Share
%d bloggers like this: