Showing posts tagged iowa.
x

Under the Mountain Bunker

Leave me a message   Location: Colorado. More info here.



» Website

twitter.com/charyl:

    Who won the debate in Iowa last night? Four possible choices:
Anyone who didn’t watch it
President Obama
Rick Perry
Fox “News”
I watched the debate, to my own detriment, and didn’t hear ONE  feasible idea or solution given by any of the candidates on stage. They  threw around the word ‘jobs’ a few times but no one elaborated on how to  create them. I don’t think the words “middle-class” were ever used.
Bachmann flat out lied about S&P’s reasons for the downgrade, and  she did so calmly and thousand-yard-staring right into the camera. So  that should tell you all you need to know about her.
Bachmann and Romney say they would NOT have raised the debt ceiling  last week. Can you imagine the world of hurt we’d be in this week? I  have to say I did admire Santorum’s speaking out against this kind of  extremist lunacy with his “showmanship not leadership” scolding. To me, that sums up Bachmann, Palin, the Teaparty and the  entire GOP Congress right now. Or as Andrew Sullivan says, “The current GOP doctrine is not conservatism, it’s anti-government radicalism”. That was on full display last night. Also, Santorum said the C-word (compromise) so, obviously, he’s out.
Of course Ron Paul had a couple sensible ideas. He was arguing to end  the wars — which the crowd loved. No one else seems to want to end the  wars. And auditing the Fed isn’t a bad idea either. But he won’t win the  GOP nomination.
Newt Gingrich was just flat-out pissed off last night. It was like watching Michael Douglas in Falling Down,  if Douglas was about 150 pounds heavier. He got into it with Chris  Wallace and the crowd went wild! Gotcha questions and the lamestream  media, dontcha know. How dare Wallace ask Newt about Newt?
Bachmann and Pawlenty had a couple of Minnesota-nice kerfluffles. Is  she as useless as Pawlenty described? Or is Pawlenty really a version of  Obama? All I know is, who else but Bachmann would crow about  introducing the “Light Bulb Freedom of Choice Act”? Right there, that’s  the extent of her years in Congress.
However, when asked who would walk away from a 10:1 deal (spending cuts vs. tax increases), every one of them raised their hands.  Every one of them, even “showmanship not leadership” Santorum and  “let’s legalize all the drugs” Paul. And that’s just stupid. Seems they  all agree that corporations should be more ‘competitive’ by way of further tax cuts.
So that’s all they’ve got: more tax cuts. Corporations are people, my friend!

    Who won the debate in Iowa last night? Four possible choices:

    1. Anyone who didn’t watch it
    2. President Obama
    3. Rick Perry
    4. Fox “News”

    I watched the debate, to my own detriment, and didn’t hear ONE feasible idea or solution given by any of the candidates on stage. They threw around the word ‘jobs’ a few times but no one elaborated on how to create them. I don’t think the words “middle-class” were ever used.

    Bachmann flat out lied about S&P’s reasons for the downgrade, and she did so calmly and thousand-yard-staring right into the camera. So that should tell you all you need to know about her.

    Bachmann and Romney say they would NOT have raised the debt ceiling last week. Can you imagine the world of hurt we’d be in this week? I have to say I did admire Santorum’s speaking out against this kind of extremist lunacy with his “showmanship not leadership” scolding. To me, that sums up Bachmann, Palin, the Teaparty and the entire GOP Congress right now. Or as Andrew Sullivan says, “The current GOP doctrine is not conservatism, it’s anti-government radicalism”. That was on full display last night. Also, Santorum said the C-word (compromise) so, obviously, he’s out.

    Of course Ron Paul had a couple sensible ideas. He was arguing to end the wars — which the crowd loved. No one else seems to want to end the wars. And auditing the Fed isn’t a bad idea either. But he won’t win the GOP nomination.

    Newt Gingrich was just flat-out pissed off last night. It was like watching Michael Douglas in Falling Down, if Douglas was about 150 pounds heavier. He got into it with Chris Wallace and the crowd went wild! Gotcha questions and the lamestream media, dontcha know. How dare Wallace ask Newt about Newt?

    Bachmann and Pawlenty had a couple of Minnesota-nice kerfluffles. Is she as useless as Pawlenty described? Or is Pawlenty really a version of Obama? All I know is, who else but Bachmann would crow about introducing the “Light Bulb Freedom of Choice Act”? Right there, that’s the extent of her years in Congress.

    However, when asked who would walk away from a 10:1 deal (spending cuts vs. tax increases), every one of them raised their hands. Every one of them, even “showmanship not leadership” Santorum and “let’s legalize all the drugs” Paul. And that’s just stupid. Seems they all agree that corporations should be more ‘competitive’ by way of further tax cuts.

    So that’s all they’ve got: more tax cuts. Corporations are people, my friend!

    — 2 years ago with 27 notes
    #news  #opinion  #politics  #class war  #income redistribution  #war on the middle class  #corporations are people  #GOP  #gop debate  #iowa  #light bulbs  #Michele Bachmann  #more spending cuts for the rest of us  #more tax cuts for corporations  #more tax cuts for the wealthy  #Newt Gingrich  #Republicans  #rich santorum  #Ron Paul  #showmanship not leadership  #tax cuts  #tea party  #teapublicans  #tim pawlenty 
    Sarah Palin agrees with Mitt also, too: Corporations are people. “People pay the taxes.” →

    Governor? Why are they always calling her that, as if she served her term. They ought to call her HALF-GOVERNOR or QUITTER. Anyways, Palin’s made some moolah since she quit being Alaska’s governor, so she agrees with Romney.

    From Think Progress:

    KEYES: Governor, are corporations people?

    PALIN: The people pay the taxes. It’s not an entity — the corporation itself — that pays the taxes. It’s the people who pay the taxes. So Mitt Romney was right.

    […] Note to Palin: corporations as legal entities do in fact pay taxes.

    If corporations are people, can they also be the “real Amurkins” she thinks she can identify?

    — 2 years ago with 3 notes
    #news  #politics  #class war  #also  #corporations are people  #GOP  #iowa  #Mitt Romney  #Republicans  #sarah palin  #spending cuts for the rest of us  #tax cuts for the wealthy  #tea party  #teapublicans  #too  #video 
    (image: tinfoilandtea)
…
Ames Straw Poll results by the numbers: Bachmann wins straw poll, Palin wins Corn Kernel Queen
Here are the results via Rollcall. Out of a total of 16,892 votes:
Michele Bachmann: 4,823 votes / 28.6 percent
Ron Paul: 4,671 votes — only 152 votes less than Bachmann
Tim Pawlenty: 2,293 votes.
Rick Santorum: 1,657 votes,
Herman Cain: 1,456 votes.
Rick Perry: 718 write-in votes
Mitt Romney: 567 votes
Newt Gingrich: 385 votes
Jon Huntsman: 69 votes
Rep. Thaddeus McCotter: 35 votes

Three of the past five straw poll winners have gone on to win the caucuses later that cycle.

And, of course, Sarah Palin had to win a poll at the Iowa State Fair also, too:

Separately, attendees voted in a corn  kernel poll, which measures the support of each Republican by the number  of kernels in their respective Mason jar. By late morning, the kernel  level in Sarah Palin’s jar rose just above the best-known GOP candidates  — even though the former Alaska governor has not declared her  intentions yet for 2012.

So there’s that: Sarah Palin is the Corn Kernel Queen of the fair. And that sounds about right.
(via: Rollcall)

    (image: tinfoilandtea)


    Ames Straw Poll results by the numbers: Bachmann wins straw poll, Palin wins Corn Kernel Queen

    Here are the results via Rollcall. Out of a total of 16,892 votes:

    1. Michele Bachmann: 4,823 votes / 28.6 percent
    2. Ron Paul: 4,671 votes — only 152 votes less than Bachmann
    3. Tim Pawlenty: 2,293 votes.
    4. Rick Santorum: 1,657 votes,
    5. Herman Cain: 1,456 votes.
    6. Rick Perry: 718 write-in votes
    7. Mitt Romney: 567 votes
    8. Newt Gingrich: 385 votes
    9. Jon Huntsman: 69 votes
    10. Rep. Thaddeus McCotter: 35 votes

    Three of the past five straw poll winners have gone on to win the caucuses later that cycle.

    And, of course, Sarah Palin had to win a poll at the Iowa State Fair also, too:

    Separately, attendees voted in a corn kernel poll, which measures the support of each Republican by the number of kernels in their respective Mason jar. By late morning, the kernel level in Sarah Palin’s jar rose just above the best-known GOP candidates — even though the former Alaska governor has not declared her intentions yet for 2012.

    So there’s that: Sarah Palin is the Corn Kernel Queen of the fair. And that sounds about right.

    (via: Rollcall)

    — 2 years ago with 3 notes
    #news  #politics  #ames straw poll  #GOP  #iowa  #iowa state fair  #Michele Bachmann  #Republicans  #Ron Paul  #sarah palin  #tea party  #teapublicans  #tim pawlenty 

    TAWD PALIN WAS CONFRONTED BY AN ALASKAN IN IOWA this week and accidentally? summed up why Sarah resigned:  to earn money to pay high financial debts and to avoid legal complaints. Those reasons are exactly why most everyone thought she resigned, but Tawd’s explanation is more amusing when you recall the lengthy blah, patriotic, blah, what’s best for Alaska, blah, word salad Palin served up to the media two years ago. (Via the Colorado Independent)

    TODD: “What would you recommend doing when you got six, seven hundred thousand dollars hanging over your head and you got all these people filing [complaints]…

    WOMAN: “You go for the money, obviously, that’s what she did. Everyone in Alaska thinks she sold out.”

    TODD: “No, when you have debt hanging over your head, you’re making — and you got complaint after complaint.. what would you do?”

    WOMAN: “Wait for the complaint to pan out.”

    TODD: “You got hundreds of thousands of dollars, all of this debt hanging over your head and that will be there, bankrupt your family.”

    WOMAN: “Oh, it’s not there anymore, is it?

    TODD: “That’s right.”

    WOMAN: “You got quite the deal. Sell out!”

    Video: Todd Palin says Sarah resigned for money, to avoid legal complaints

    — 2 years ago with 2 notes
    #news  #politics  #humor  #Alaska  #avoid lawsuits  #famegoblin  #half-term former governor  #iowa  #money  #resignation  #sarah palin  #the quitter  #todd palin  #why she quit | 
    "Palin herself has indicated that she did not plan to announce her political intentions on Saturday in Iowa, but supporters from around the country had already booked plane and bus tickets to the state to attend. The Palin sources cited “issues with the planning” of the rally, which is being sponsored by Tea Party of America, a recently created group that has never put on a large-scale event. Event organizers were caught in an embarrassing mix-up on Tuesday when they dis-invited, then re-invited, former Delaware Senate candidate Christine O’Donnell to speak at the event. The Palin sources said event organizers had been “dishonest” about the speaking program and how the rally was being promoted. They said Palin could still appear at the event."
    — 2 years ago with 9 notes
    #news  #politics  #iowa  #sarah palin  #the quitter  #tea party 
    …
First rule of a Teaparty rally: only ONE female grifter headlines
Christine O’Donnell, well known author and not-a-witch, was scheduled  to speak at the Tea Party Rally being held on Sep. 3. Yesterday, she  was uninvited. Then she was re-invited.
Today Palin cancelled and / or said her plans were on hold because of, what a spokesperson told the WSJ, “continual lying” from event organizers.
Now? O’Donnell’s been re-univited.

Why? NBC News tries to confirm what seems obvious from the tail end of this timeline: That Sarah Palin doesn’t want Christine O’Donnell around:
DES MOINES — Tea Party of America President Ken Crow told  NBC News, “I had to cancel Ms. O’Donnell” after a conversation with  Sarah Palin aides — and is now hopeful Palin will attend the Saturday  rally in Indianola.

The teaparty likes Palin at their rallies. She always brings the drama with her word-salad.
Source: Gawker

    First rule of a Teaparty rally: only ONE female grifter headlines

    Christine O’Donnell, well known author and not-a-witch, was scheduled to speak at the Tea Party Rally being held on Sep. 3. Yesterday, she was uninvited. Then she was re-invited.

    Today Palin cancelled and / or said her plans were on hold because of, what a spokesperson told the WSJ, “continual lying” from event organizers.

    Now? O’Donnell’s been re-univited.

    Why? NBC News tries to confirm what seems obvious from the tail end of this timeline: That Sarah Palin doesn’t want Christine O’Donnell around:

    DES MOINES — Tea Party of America President Ken Crow told NBC News, “I had to cancel Ms. O’Donnell” after a conversation with Sarah Palin aides — and is now hopeful Palin will attend the Saturday rally in Indianola.

    The teaparty likes Palin at their rallies. She always brings the drama with her word-salad.

    Source: Gawker

    — 2 years ago with 74 notes
    #news  #politics  #christine o'donnell  #invited  #iowa  #quittin'  #re-uninvited  #reinvited  #sarah palin  #tea party rally  #uninvited 

    Bachmann’s new ad: Don’t settle - no surprises

    In which Michele Bachmann is going down and she’s taking the whole clown car with her …

    via: reddit

    (Source: youtube.com)

    — 2 years ago
    #politics  #michele bachmann  #the whole clown car  #going down  #iowa 
    …
Michele Bachmann: Gays can marry!
Michele Bachmann told a group of supporters in Waverly, Iowa yesterday afternoon that gay and lesbian people should have “no special rights”  to marry people of the same sex, insisting that “the laws are you marry  a person of the opposite sex.” Iowa actually began allowing same-sex  couples to marry in 2009, but Bachmann, oblivious to the growing  acceptance of marriage equality, explained that prohibitions against  such marriages don’t discriminate against gay people since they can  always marry partners of the opposite sex:

JANE SCHMIDT: Then, why can’t same-sex couples get married?
BACHMANN: They can get married, but they abide by the same law as everyone else. They can marry a man if they’re a woman. Or they can marry a woman if they’re a man. […]
via: thinkprogress

No comment from Michele’s own ‘lawfully’ married husband, Marcus Bachmann…

    Michele Bachmann: Gays can marry!

    Michele Bachmann told a group of supporters in Waverly, Iowa yesterday afternoon that gay and lesbian people should have “no special rights” to marry people of the same sex, insisting that “the laws are you marry a person of the opposite sex.” Iowa actually began allowing same-sex couples to marry in 2009, but Bachmann, oblivious to the growing acceptance of marriage equality, explained that prohibitions against such marriages don’t discriminate against gay people since they can always marry partners of the opposite sex:

    JANE SCHMIDT: Then, why can’t same-sex couples get married?

    BACHMANN: They can get married, but they abide by the same law as everyone else. They can marry a man if they’re a woman. Or they can marry a woman if they’re a man. […]

    via: thinkprogress

    No comment from Michele’s own ‘lawfully’ married husband, Marcus Bachmann…

    — 2 years ago with 10 notes
    #LGBT  #Michele Bachmann  #gay  #humor  #iowa  #law of the land  #lawful marriage  #marcus bachmann  #opposite sex marriage  #politics  #news 

    Yesterday in an Iowa grocery store: Newt Gingrich’s ego met reality

    Clean up on aisle four!

    When a man in a camouflage coat grabs your hand in an Iowa grocery store and calls you ‘a fucking asshole’ to your face, it might be time to take stock of your position in the state.

    For Newt Gingrich, who was on the receiving end of the unorthodox greeting Tuesday, it was a sign that his campaign is returning to earth after having rocketed since Herman Cain’s collapse.

    Ouch!  That was definitely a two-dozen-donut-and-gallon-of-ice-cream remark for Newt if ever there was one. Luckily, he was already in a grocery store.

    And btw, Newt isn’t JUST a fucking asshole. He’s recently revealed that he’s a crazy fascist as well:

    “Just so we’re clear, this week, a leading presidential candidate articulated his belief that, if elected, he might (1) eliminate courts he doesn’t like; (2) ignore court rulings he doesn’t like; and (3) take judges into custody if he disapproves of their legal analyses.

    I hope it’s unnecessary to note that Gingrich’s vision is stark raving mad.

    I’ll just conclude with this observation: Newt Gingrich believes Barack Obama is a wild-eyed fanatic, guided by an extremist ideology, hell bent on overseeing a radical overhaul of the American system of government.

    The irony is rich.”Steve Benen

    (via: randomactsofchaos)

    (Source: youtube.com)

    — 2 years ago with 2 notes
    #news  #politics  #newt gingrich  #iowa  #fucking asshole  #ice cream  #donuts 
    REMEMBER: Ron Paul knew nothing about his Newsletters!
FACT: RON PAUL IS NOT A MAN OF PRINCIPLE. He’s a grifter and an opportunist:

I’ve been following Paul a long time. And I  can say that Ron Paul never does the hard, right thing. He always does  the easy, opportunistic thing. In the 80s and 90s, that meant publishing  paranoid, racist tracts to make money. In the 00s and 10s, that’s been  grandiose pontificating, pandering to a liberal crowd desperate for an  anti-Bush Republican and grabbing all the pork he can – all the while  posing as a statesman that the “system” can’t handle.
[…] Ron Paul is not a man of principle.  He has no interest in doing any of the hard work it takes to put his  ideas into practice. He just wants to live comfortably on his royalties  and government paychecks as he grandstands against the very Federal  government without whom he’d be much poorer.
— read more: Ron Paul’s ‘Principles’

GRIFTER? OPPORTUNIST? YES. HERE IS A LETTER WRITTEN BY PAUL (on his stationary, apparently signed by him) that has recently been revealed (PDF copy):




WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A direct-mail  solicitation for Ron Paul’s political and investment newsletters two  decades ago warned of a “coming race war in our big cities” and of a  “federal-homosexual cover-up” to play down the impact of AIDS.
The eight-page letter, which appears to  carry Paul’s signature at the end, also warns that the U.S. government’s  redesign of currency to include different colors – a move aimed at  thwarting counterfeiters – actually was part of a plot to allow the  government to track Americans using the “new money.”
The letter urges readers to subscribe to  Paul’s newsletters so that he could “tell you how you can save yourself  and your family” from an overbearing government.

Subscribe to my newsletters! Save yourselves from the coming race wars and federal homosexual cover-up on AIDS!! Oh my GAH!!!

[…] Paul’s letter went on to describe  various plots and schemes that he had “unmasked,” including a “plot for  world government, world money and world central banking.” He also  claimed to have exposed a plan by the Federal Emergency Management  Agency (FEMA) to “suspend the Constitution” in a falsely declared  national emergency.
Despite being “told not to talk,” Paul  wrote that his newsletters also “laid bare” the “Israeli lobby, which  plays Congress like a cheap harmonica,” and a “federal-homosexual  cover-up on AIDS.”
Paul claimed that his “training as a physician” helped him “see through” this alleged cover-up.
— read more: RawStory and Reuters

THE NEWSLETTERS: did he or didn’t he?

[…] But let’s suspend disbelief for a  second and pretend that he didn’t write them. Let’s say Lew Rockwell  wrote them, as many Paul defenders have claimed (Rockwell denies this,  and Paul has never specifically implicated anyone else, except in 1996  when he acknowledged that he did write them.) He certainly  profited from them (to the tune of over a million dollars) and allowed  them to be published using the first person POV, under his name, and  with his signature.

There are [only] three options:
1) Paul wrote the newsletters, which are undeniably racist.
2) Paul published the ghostwritten newsletters, tacitly supporting and profiting from their racist rhetoric.
3) Paul is so unbelievably incompetent that he founded a newsletter, kept a staff on his payroll and then  never read a single copy in the years between 1978 and 1996 while it  published racist drivel in his name. And you want someone this  incompetent to run the country why, exactly?

This is not some conspiracy to torpedo  Paul’s campaign (Republican primary voters will take care of that). This  is a real issue that he has yet to sufficiently address and has changed  his stance on multiple times. These racist, homophobic views, combined  with his positions on the Civil Rights Act, the 14th amendment and Lawrence v. Texas, etc., pose  a very real threat to racial and gender/sexual minorities in the US. To  throw up your hands and write them off as unimportant is an endorsement  of minority oppression.
— reagan-was-a-horrible-president

FINALLY HERE’S A ROUNDUP OF PAUL’S MOST INCENDIARY NEWSLETTERS from TNR…



…
We need to talk about … Ron Paul

    REMEMBER: Ron Paul knew nothing about his Newsletters!

    FACT: RON PAUL IS NOT A MAN OF PRINCIPLE. He’s a grifter and an opportunist:

    I’ve been following Paul a long time. And I can say that Ron Paul never does the hard, right thing. He always does the easy, opportunistic thing. In the 80s and 90s, that meant publishing paranoid, racist tracts to make money. In the 00s and 10s, that’s been grandiose pontificating, pandering to a liberal crowd desperate for an anti-Bush Republican and grabbing all the pork he can – all the while posing as a statesman that the “system” can’t handle.

    […] Ron Paul is not a man of principle. He has no interest in doing any of the hard work it takes to put his ideas into practice. He just wants to live comfortably on his royalties and government paychecks as he grandstands against the very Federal government without whom he’d be much poorer.

    — read more: Ron Paul’s ‘Principles’

    GRIFTER? OPPORTUNIST? YES. HERE IS A LETTER WRITTEN BY PAUL (on his stationary, apparently signed by him) that has recently been revealed (PDF copy):

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A direct-mail solicitation for Ron Paul’s political and investment newsletters two decades ago warned of a “coming race war in our big cities” and of a “federal-homosexual cover-up” to play down the impact of AIDS.

    The eight-page letter, which appears to carry Paul’s signature at the end, also warns that the U.S. government’s redesign of currency to include different colors – a move aimed at thwarting counterfeiters – actually was part of a plot to allow the government to track Americans using the “new money.”

    The letter urges readers to subscribe to Paul’s newsletters so that he could “tell you how you can save yourself and your family” from an overbearing government.

    Subscribe to my newsletters! Save yourselves from the coming race wars and federal homosexual cover-up on AIDS!! Oh my GAH!!!

    […] Paul’s letter went on to describe various plots and schemes that he had “unmasked,” including a “plot for world government, world money and world central banking.” He also claimed to have exposed a plan by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to “suspend the Constitution” in a falsely declared national emergency.

    Despite being “told not to talk,” Paul wrote that his newsletters also “laid bare” the “Israeli lobby, which plays Congress like a cheap harmonica,” and a “federal-homosexual cover-up on AIDS.”

    Paul claimed that his “training as a physician” helped him “see through” this alleged cover-up.

    — read more: RawStory and Reuters

    THE NEWSLETTERS: did he or didn’t he?

    […] But let’s suspend disbelief for a second and pretend that he didn’t write them. Let’s say Lew Rockwell wrote them, as many Paul defenders have claimed (Rockwell denies this, and Paul has never specifically implicated anyone else, except in 1996 when he acknowledged that he did write them.) He certainly profited from them (to the tune of over a million dollars) and allowed them to be published using the first person POV, under his name, and with his signature.

    There are [only] three options:

    1) Paul wrote the newsletters, which are undeniably racist.

    2) Paul published the ghostwritten newsletters, tacitly supporting and profiting from their racist rhetoric.

    3) Paul is so unbelievably incompetent that he founded a newsletter, kept a staff on his payroll and then never read a single copy in the years between 1978 and 1996 while it published racist drivel in his name. And you want someone this incompetent to run the country why, exactly?

    This is not some conspiracy to torpedo Paul’s campaign (Republican primary voters will take care of that). This is a real issue that he has yet to sufficiently address and has changed his stance on multiple times. These racist, homophobic views, combined with his positions on the Civil Rights Act, the 14th amendment and Lawrence v. Texas, etc., pose a very real threat to racial and gender/sexual minorities in the US. To throw up your hands and write them off as unimportant is an endorsement of minority oppression.

    reagan-was-a-horrible-president

    FINALLY HERE’S A ROUNDUP OF PAUL’S MOST INCENDIARY NEWSLETTERS from TNR…

    image

    We need to talk about … Ron Paul

    — 2 years ago with 9 notes
    #news  #politics  #2012  #bigot  #conspiracy theories  #federal-homosexual cover-up on AIDS  #GOP  #iowa  #old testament patriarchy  #presidential candidates  #race wars  #racist  #Republicans  #Ron Paul  #ron paul newsletter  #Teaparty  #world money 
    "If Iowans decide to nominate Ron Paul despite his radical views, or because of them, it will be an ugly day for America as well as the Republican party. Because the nomination of Ron Paul is a essentially a rejection of the Western Civilization conservatives supposedly hold so dear."
    — 2 years ago with 1 note
    #politics  #iowa  #gop  #republicans  #ron paul  #Stormfront  #white nationalists 
    …
Who’s ahead in Iowa?
According to the TPM Poll Average as of Saturday afternoon:  Romney 22.4%, Paul 17.2%, Santorum 16%, Gingrich 13.7%. Gingrich is  (now) only a couple points ahead of Perry and Bachmann. And Santorum is  SURGING.
If this chart looks to you, as it does to me, like a brain scan charting a seizure… well, I don’t think that’s an unfair analogy to make regarding the Iowa conservative voters.

    Who’s ahead in Iowa?

    According to the TPM Poll Average as of Saturday afternoon: Romney 22.4%, Paul 17.2%, Santorum 16%, Gingrich 13.7%. Gingrich is (now) only a couple points ahead of Perry and Bachmann. And Santorum is SURGING.

    If this chart looks to you, as it does to me, like a brain scan charting a seizure… well, I don’t think that’s an unfair analogy to make regarding the Iowa conservative voters.

    — 2 years ago with 2 notes
    #news  #politics  #GOP  #Republicans  #2012  #iowa  #presidential candidates  #iowa caucus  #conservative voters  #romney  #paul  #santorum  #gingrich  #perry  #bachmann  #brain seizure chart 
    image: theamericanprospect
The Iowa Caucus: did you know…
Did you know Iowa caucuses are open? Meaning:
[I]ndependents and Democrats can choose to go to cast their vote in the GOP race.
Also:
Only 46 percent said they were evangelical or fundamentalist Christians.
A majority, 54 percent, said they were definitely not.
7 percent of Republican primary voters view themselves a supporter  of the Tea Party. But NBC/Marist data from Iowa shows a 46 – 47 split  against support of the conservative movement.
nearly 30 percent of GOP caucus-goers say they’re in the “moderate” or even “liberal” category.
Read more
This chart / brain scan of a seizure is beginning to make a little more sense now:

This means Michele Bachmann may very well get her miracle after all! : )
Related:
Des Moines Register / caucuses

    image: theamericanprospect

    The Iowa Caucus: did you know…

    Did you know Iowa caucuses are open? Meaning:

    [I]ndependents and Democrats can choose to go to cast their vote in the GOP race.

    Also:

    • Only 46 percent said they were evangelical or fundamentalist Christians.
    • A majority, 54 percent, said they were definitely not.
    • 7 percent of Republican primary voters view themselves a supporter of the Tea Party. But NBC/Marist data from Iowa shows a 46 – 47 split against support of the conservative movement.
    • nearly 30 percent of GOP caucus-goers say they’re in the “moderate” or even “liberal” category.

    Read more

    This chart / brain scan of a seizure is beginning to make a little more sense now:

    This means Michele Bachmann may very well get her miracle after all! : )

    Related:

    — 2 years ago with 14 notes
    #news  #politics  #2012  #GOP  #iowa  #iowa caucus  #Mitt Romney  #presidential candidates  #Republicans  #rick santorum  #Ron Paul