Skip to comments.
GOP Presidential Primary: Total Numbers after Iowa and New Hamshire
jeffhead.com ^
| 10 January 2012
| Jeff HEad
Posted on 01/11/2012 7:31:06 AM PST by Jeff Head
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-50 last
To: 11th_VA
Ron Paul is the future of the Republican party - he took the young vote hands down.””
The indoctrinated people from 18-30 are just delighted that Paul calls for an end to the war on drugs- even cocaine & heroin. They don’t want to march & carry a rifle & be in ANY military, as they just don’t understand there sometimes is a need for war. Pearl Harbor is barely 2 words to them.
They are a self-indulgent generation & will remain that way until a war with Islam wipes them out.
When trouble comes to this country—& it will—this group will be totally useless & will be some of the earliest to be wiped out, IMO.
To: ScottinVA
Sure is a long, hard fall from the heady times of the Reagan years.
No kidding. I just want to once be able to vote for a presidential candidate I am proud of, without having second thoughts. I was only 16 in 1984 so never got to vote for Reagan. I voted for Bush the elder both times, but was unsure about the whole compassionate conservative line. Voted for Dole, because he wasn't Clinton and voted for Bush the younger because he wasn't Gore or Kerry. When I voted for McCain it made me want to puke.
I know I won't be happy with the candidate this year. Santorum is too fast to embrace big government programs. Newt was on the couch with Nancy. Perry wants an open border. I'm not a fanboy for any of the candidates. But I could live with any of those three.
Romney is always wrong on every issue. There is not one single thing I like about the guy. I have tried to find anything and it just isn't there. I simply can't attach my name and my honor to a man I despise in every way possible. As much as Ron Paul scares me he at least believes the crap he is spewing. I can and will work oppose someone who I believe is wrong, but it is nothing like the gut wrenching fury I feel when viewing the traitor.
An (R) after the name just isn't enough. It is not that I can't vote for a candidate I don't agree with 100% of the time. I have done in many times before and I am likely to do it again many times in the future. It is that I can't vote for a candidate that I disagree with 100% of the time.
42
posted on
01/11/2012 9:07:19 AM PST
by
GonzoGOP
(There are millions of paranoid people in the world and they are all out to get me.)
To: who knows what evil?
Paul voters are not going to any other candidate since Paul voters want a small, honest constitutional government that pursues and non-interventionist foreign policy. Paul is the only candidate that is advocating the elimination of 5 federal department, abolishing the IRS, abolishing the progressive income tax and cutting 1 trillion dollar from the federal budget immediately. No other candidate comes close.
43
posted on
01/11/2012 9:12:47 AM PST
by
jpsb
To: ridesthemiles
I find it staggering that the media is telling us that Romney needs to be the candidate NOW- when just over .11 percentjust over 1/10th of a percent of the USA population has voted into these numbers!!!!! The media was saying that before a single vote was cast.
They are not mentioning how very early we are in a very long process.
44
posted on
01/11/2012 9:40:39 AM PST
by
World'sGoneInsane
(We Can Take OUR Country Back--Perry 2012)
To: jpsb
Well, until he screwed the pooch with his “Oops” move, Perry actually was trying to say that he wanted to cut three departments out entirely. And I suspect he’d be a strong fiscal conservative, plus he’s been doing what he can as Governor to try to control the borders (in spite of no help from the current administration.)
I still think he’s the candidate that combines credentials and philosophy the best, but he’s got to get some traction in SC or it isn’t going to matter.
45
posted on
01/11/2012 10:19:18 AM PST
by
Norseman
(Defund the Left-Completely!)
To: ridesthemiles
Perhaps Mitt didnt win IOWAperhaps Santorum did!!! I wish we could get a straight answer, as the media is working at making "two in a row for Romney" the 'truth'...
46
posted on
01/11/2012 10:24:54 AM PST
by
who knows what evil?
(G-d saved more animals than people on the ark...www.siameserescue.org.)
To: Jeff Head
Can someone please tell why/how ex-governor who
had to leave office during the scandal....
.... womanizer/philanderer
.. Mark Sanford has become a vaulted 'Fox news contributor'...????????????
Is this what Fox is becoming......
47
posted on
01/11/2012 10:52:19 AM PST
by
Guenevere
(....We press on.....)
To: Jeff Head
Thanks for putting this in context. All I am reading and hearing is that Romney will be the Republican candidate based on Iowa and NH. Such absurdity with so few delegates.
48
posted on
01/11/2012 11:35:13 AM PST
by
winkadink
(During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. George Orwell)
To: joe fonebone
It is time to panic, not because of these rudimentary numbers but because of the American people and their herd mentality.
49
posted on
01/11/2012 11:46:47 AM PST
by
Theodore R.
(I'll still vote for the Right Rick --Santorum-- if he is on the April 3 ballot.)
To: ridesthemiles
It’s possible. We’ll know when they certify it here in the next little while.
50
posted on
01/11/2012 11:56:25 AM PST
by
Jeff Head
(Liberty is not free. Never has been, never will be. (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-50 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson