Posted on 01/03/2012 8:08:24 AM PST by Free Vulcan
Live thread to cover today's GOP caucus. News, predictions, opinions, totals, and the like.
Will be heading out about 4 pm or so to get our site ready and do a final review with the precinct chairs. I expect it to be bigger than 2008 with very heavy turnout and we are preparing for that.
We are also ready for disruptions. They simply won't be tolerated. The state party sent us a memo saying if there's any trouble call the cops immediately. Anyone trying to cause problems is going to get a rude awakening.
My predictions of the outcome are a narrow field with about a 10 point spread for the top five with Bachmann far behind in single digits:
Santorum - 24 Romney - 22 Paul - 20 Perry - 17 Gingrich - 14 Bachmann - 4 The Rest - 1
Think things are still in flux and many won't decide till right to the wire, so I'm not terribly confident of any predictions.
NO PROBLEM WITH KANSAS (96 KU Grad, B/635th Armor, KS NG, Topeka, KS).....Rock Chalk Jay Hawk!
It's accurate, alright. I think it's you who needs to pull out a dictionary and define the word conservative, so that you can come to grips with where you actually stand, politically.
No offense, but reading between the lines of your posts, I'd say that you're a center-right moderate, not a conservative.
The reason that Free Republic is so successful, is because the tenets and behavior of this site, represent conservative thought better than nearly any other meeting place on the internet.
Name a site which bills itself as conservative, yet is home to a more moderate community, that exceeds the membership and activity of Free Republic. Don't bother, because you won't find it.
If you're looking for honest conservatism, you've found it here. If this site isn't your cup of tea, then you only think you're a conservative.
You won't hear me disagreeing.
But are those attacks a bad thing? Not necessarily — especially in the Republican primary season. We can tell a lot about people from who their enemies are. It doesn't tell us everything we need to know, but it tells us a lot.
When the vilest and most vicious of the Democratic attacks get leveled against Santorum, they may actually help his campaign for Republican votes by antagonizing conservatives.
On the other hand, if Santorum has some skeletons in his closet we don't yet know about, we'll find out very soon. That's not bad; if there is something we need to know that hasn't yet come out, at least we still have South Carolina to create a clear conservative candidate. My guess is that there's nothing there to find other than some fiery and maybe radical quotes illustrating his well-known pro-life and anti-gay positions.
For conservative voters, that's not a problem — or at least it shouldn't be.
What I'm concerned about is two types of attacks:
1) the type of people who got on some Santorum threads yesterday and started posting questions about Santorum’s views on the Second Amendment, totally without links or evidence, and
2) the type of people who got on Free Republic to bash Santorum’s decision to have a private funeral Mass in his home for his dead newborn son, quoting Colmes’ comments on FOX News.
I'm not sure the people doing Item #1 are even legitimate Freepers. I don't recognize the accounts as regular posters, and when challenged, no evidence showed up. They may be Romneybots or Paulbots spreading nonsense. When I see sleepers who signed up years ago but have little posting history until they dump serious accusations against one candidate, I get suspicious.
As for the people doing Item #2, even Colmes apologized for his offensive comments, but some Freepers wanted to make a major issue over that. The difference is the people doing Item #2 include at least some people who sincerely believe what they are saying, and I respect that. We, as pro-lifers, need to understand that some people in America are so far away from our values that they think what the Santorum family did was not just strange but grotesque. That's reality, and we have to deal with it.
For the general election, we need to be prepared for serious attacks on the pro-life position of **ANYONE** who wins the Republican nomination; after all, even Romney claims to be pro-life and he's going to get liberal Democratic attacks accusing him of switching sides purely for political convenience (and the Democrats are right on that about Romney, IMHO).
But for now, we need to be very careful about doing the Democratic Party's work for them. I've seen things on Free Republic written about Santorum in the last few days that, if I didn't recognize the screen names of the people writing, I would have thought were from Democratic Underground or Daily Kos or even worse places.
I do not question the sincerity of economic conservatives or military conservatives who really, really don't like social conservatives, but we need to learn to disagree in a civil manner, not tear each other apart. None of the three wings of the Republican Party can win elections in most parts of the United States without the others. Circular firing squads help nobody but the Democrats.
Exactly. And don’t forget Palin’s endorsement of McCain.
I so much wish that were true.
Homosexuals vote in higher percentages than evangelicals. Many are middle to upper-middle-class and are in the socioeconomic categories that are able to write significant checks and have significant time to campaign. Whether we think they're a persecuted minority or not is irrelevant; **THEY** think they're being persecuted, and they know that protection and expansion of their “rights” will depend on political activism.
Homosexuals may be a tiny minority nationwide, but they have an out-sized voice in the upper levels of media and culture. In their minds, the Republican Party has just gone nuts by giving one of its farthest right-wing candidates (Santorum) a near-victory in Iowa.
On homosexual issues, Santorum’s views are standard Republican positions. They're also the views of mainstream America. Look for a concerted campaign over the next few weeks to convince Republican voters in New Hampshire, and then later in Florida, that the social issues people have taken over the Republican Party and doom us to a 1964-style Goldwater defeat.
Unfortunately, I'm afraid we're going to be seeing some of that campaign on Free Republic.
Newt on Laura Ingraham says “yes” to Laura’s question on a Gingrich-Santorum alliance (not a ticket, but a joint push)against ROMNEY. Dunno what Santorum would say, but Newt speaks of their 20 year friendship and that they were rebels together......
My heart is in my throat that Republicans will HOLD, and WILL NOT have another milquetoast dolemccainromney representing us!
Pooling resources in a sense needs to be done, though that is not what Gingrich said, but it is the dang MONEY that is killing us. We may have a CHANCE at getting a real conservative team knocking out the Establishment, AND their candidate, AND the horse they rode in on.
You’re on a roll, Gal! :)
1,577 posted on Tuesday, January 03, 2012 11:31:59 PM by Sun: “I wonder who Duncan Hunter will support?”
Interesting question. Does anyone know the answer?
I’m intrigued by Santorum’s history on the Senate Armed Services Committee, which could be a significant factor with military conservative voters, especially if Perry decides to pull out.
Living outside Fort Leonard Wood, knowing someone’s background on military matters is important to me and my community — and put bluntly, we’ve been huge beneficiaries of defense earmarks for decades, like most military installations served by powerful congressmen, so that isn’t a negative against Santorum even if it is a negative for most conservative communities.
Duncan Hunter, with his years of service on the House Armed Services Committee, has a level of knowledge of Santorum’s role on military issues that goes far beyond most of us, including those of us who are politically active and knowledgeable.
Thank you for reminding us of that.
FReepers note: We have an election decided by eight votes. Literally every vote counted this time. And somewhere across Iowa, 58 people decided to vote for a candidate who isn't campaigning. I'm willing to bet that most of those 58 people are people who would have voted for someone other than Romney, and many of them would have voted for a social issues conservative like Santorum.
The Iowa vote is over. If you don't live in Iowa, remember this margin of victory for Romney in your own upcoming caucuses or primaries, and **DON'T THROW AWAY YOUR VOTE!!!!!**
Wow. Your work there is done, ya big handsome lizard, you!
1,718 posted on Tuesday, January 03, 2012 11:58:08 PM by reaganaut: “I love Pizza Ranch, especially their cheeseburger Pizza.”
I think the first time I ate at Pizza Ranch was 1987 when I was visiting Orange City for church-related reasons.
It takes a lot for anybody’s chain-made pizza to impress an Italian, but it tasted good. Not great, but for a “paisan” like me visiting Hollanderland, what can be expected? It's not like the Dutch would want to spend too much money for eating out... ;-)
(Iowans will know what I'm talking about. For the rest, just remember that Calvinist theology has sociological consequences. It's a standing joke that copper wire was invented by a Hollander and a Scotsman fighting over a penny — calling someone cheap is a compliment if your name is VanderSomething. And speaking as a Calvinist, I'm entitled to make those jokes — especially since my Korean Presbyterian wife, back when we lived in Holland, made the Dutchmen look like spendthrifts! Since the Scots Presbyterians and the Dutch Reformed are both going liberal, I guess we have to look for the Koreans to carry on Calvinist thrift...)
“Paulistards attempt to gang up on FR (ha ha ha ha ha!) and learn that they can’t put that one past the Viking Kitties - they’re smoky bones”
There’s nothing like a few ZOTS! to bring the Conservative Movement together!
Adios, Paultards! Go cry to Screwy Lewy Rockwell how mean and terrible the “neocon bankster Zionist war mongers” were to you, ya rats!
You are conflating the information. One can have a foreign born parent or even both parents and be a Natural Born Citizen... the catch is BOTH Parents must be a U.S. Citizen at the time of the child’s birth. And just take note... when Rubio is nominated for V.P - there will be lawsuits to stop it... And nothing in your Authoritarian - Directorial mindset will be able to prevent it ...
Yes... unless I'm remembering wrong, Sioux City is also the home of Bob Vander Plaats, the Christian conservative leader whose backing of Santorum was key in what happened today.
As for LeMars, one of the few western Iowa communities where Romney did well ... let's just say in the pre-cellphone era when I needed to meet with people in Northwest Iowa without having to worry about prying eyes and ears in the next booth at a restaurant, we would drive to a restaurant in LeMars where the chances of anybody recognizing us were minimal. The culture is different there from the surrounding counties.
They just hate everyone else. One hatred that is not rational (others may not be either) is the one towards Newt. He really is a conservative and a great leader.
Not entirely accurate, but you have a point.
Iowa's main role is to be a winnower. The Iowa straw poll killed Pawlenty. It has now pushed Bachmann into conceding today. Somebody is going to end up being the “social issues conservative candidate,” and Iowa has already made sure it won't be Bachmann or Pawlenty. It also looks like Iowa caused Gingrich to decide to go on the attack in New Hampshire and that is not a bad thing.
Another critical purpose of Iowa (and New Hampshire) is to force presidential candidates to campaign the way people used to do things ... door to door, restaurant to restaurant, VFW Hall to senior citizens center, hometown parade to county fair. Making a presidential candidate actually connect with people as if they were running for city council, mayor, county commission, or the state legislature is important because it allows people with little money but lots of grassroots support to have a real voice.
Other important factors for Iowa include that it forces presidential candidates to pay attention to agriculture issues. I've never been a farmer and nobody in my family has farmed for well over a century, but I've spent enough time in rural America to believe that's an important part of the American economy that gets ignored too often on the national level because farmers, unlike large corporations, tend to be small businessmen and don't have effective lobbying organizations at the national level.
I fully agree that places like South Carolina and Florida are better predictors of the eventual nominee, but they're better predictors only because the weaker candidates were culled out earlier by Iowa and New Hampshire.
Glad to be of service to battle liberals, cretins, RINOs, commies, socialists, oligarchs, statists, et cetera! But I repeat myself!
The CNN exit polls show that 2 percent of voters were Democrats and almost none of them voted for Ron Paul. As expected, Paul did win the lion’s share of Independent voters.
(1) Attempting to micromanage the world is a liberal utopian concept that comes straight out of the Woodrow Wilson playbook.
Far from securing the United States from terrorist attacks, constantly interfering in the internal affairs of foreign nations makes terrorist strikes more likely, makes costly expensive foreign wars more likely, and undermines our economy by enslaving the young to the national debt.
(2) Wars in Iraq, Libya, Serbia, and Vietnam were globalist wars of choice. None of these countries had any capacity to attack the United States.
(3) What’s the use of a military that is not used to defend our own borders? Who cares if North Korea attacks South Korea? Mexico is allowed to invade Arizona and Texas.
(4) The Founders were against standing armies which they believed could be turned on people to take away their liberties.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.