« Thompson Jumps Ahead to South Carolina | Main | Paul Descends on Romney (Literally) »

New Hampshire Turnout 'Absolutely Huge'

Share

January 08, 2008 12:37 PM

ABC News' Karen Travers Reports: New Hampshire Deputy Secretary of State Dave Scanlan told ABC News that turnout among primary voters today is "absolutely huge" -- and there are concerns about running out of ballots in towns like Portsmouth, Keene, Hudson and Pelham.

"Turnout is absolutely huge and towns are starting to get concerned that they may not have enough ballots," Scanlan said. "We are working on those issues. Everything else seems to be going smoothly."

Scanlan said that the Secretary of State's office is sending additional ballots to Portsmouth and Keene (traditionally Democratic strongholds), Hudson (Republican leaning with significant numbers of independents) and Pelham (large number of independents).

According to Scanlan, the ballot strain seems to be on Democratic ballots, which suggests that the undeclared voters are breaking for the Democratic primary. New Hampshire Secretary of State William Gardner predicted that 90,000 undeclared voters would vote in the Democratic primary compared to 60,000 voting in the Republican primary.

Deputy Secretary Scanlan said based on a formula anticipating higher turnout, they printed additional ballots, but in most cases towns will go "right down to the wire with ballots they need." The extra ballots will be insurance ballots in most places so election officials have a comfort level.

Scanlan said reports from polling places show that turnout has been steady and high though the morning but typically high activity periods will be lunch and after work.

For more New Hampshire primary politics, click on ABC News' The Note.

January 8, 2008 in Vote 2008: Democrats, Vote 2008: Republicans | Permalink | User Comments (109)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/24921688

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference New Hampshire Turnout 'Absolutely Huge':

User Comments

A high turnout, independents voting Democratic, more voters than ballots in some places? You have just described the conditions most favorable to a Barack Obama victory. If independents are voting for him, there are not enough to vote for McCain, and that will likely benefit Mitt Romney. As of 1PM, I would guess a combination of a big (10% or more?) Obama victory and a smaller (2% to 5% at the most) Romney victory is coming down the pike. We'll know in a few hours...

Posted by: Dave from NY | Jan 8, 2008 1:06:59 PM

Anyone notice a trend (ONLY on the GOP side of the aisle) how all but dead candidates are miraculously rising to the top of the heaps, state by primary state? I assure you, it is NOT a coincidence. It’s called persuasive writing/reporting and is something that journalists are taught in freshman college English 101. It is occuring with none other than our journalistic “friends” in the Democrat controlled, liberal media machine, doing all it can to choose THEIR GOP “favorite” for us. This is exactly how Mike Huckabee was elevated to frontrunner status from ZERO in a matter of a few weeks. There were nothing but puff pieces/articles/stories and absolutely NO scrutiny of his record mediocre, often liberal voting record as AR Governor. As a result, and much to the joy of the liberals, IA voters were convinced that Mr. Huckabee should be their choice...but as future Pastor of the United States.

Liberals are salivating at the prospect of anyone buy Romney winning the nomination. Now, the DNC liberal propaganda machine is attempting to do it again, but this time using, and I mean USING their old pal, John McCain in NH. Why? Because they know that Huckabee can’t win there.

Mitt Romney is by far the most qualified man in EITHER party and is a class act all the way. And yet since he became a GOP candidate for president, I have seen nothing but negative, trivial articles/stories about his Mormon religion, his money, his slick appearance, etc. fully intended to sway an naive electorate that pays way too little attention to the most important 4 year event in our country.

Mitt Romney is a TRUE family man and very successful at turning failed or failing enterprises around and Lord knows the United States of America needs turning around. It should be run as a business first, with a strong military to protect it from harm. All other social, giveaway programs should be scrutinized (and certainly would be under a Romney presidency) as to efficiency and even necessity. The fact that he was even elected Governor in a state (MA) controlled by 85% Democrat legislature was a feat in itself. He did a very admirable job as Governor as well. Of course, his many justified vetoes were constantly overturned by those liberal Democrats which made for a lot of frustration. Mr. Romney is far and away the best candidate to take over the presidency. And, I can assure you that it will be MUCH to the chagrin of the Democrat National Committee liberal propaganda machine.

Posted by: Tom S. | Jan 8, 2008 1:13:55 PM

Please give me a break it's 7 electoral
votes. I am a middle Age women of color
and I will be voting for Clinton, those

one time voters in the other state have
nothing to do with a 20 year vet, who looks at the issue, new story please!!!!!

Andrea
Baltimore

Posted by: Andrea Lorick | Jan 8, 2008 1:21:06 PM

Mitt Romney may well be the most competent candidate, but he is also seen by many as the least trustworthy and courageous, a flipflopper par excellance, and a crass snooty humorless chameleon to boot.

Posted by: northlite | Jan 8, 2008 1:22:48 PM

The only thing Romney flip flopped on (and the press has taken it to the max) is on Abortion. Other than, that there is very little change in his message. The key is RECORD people RECORD RECORD RECORD. Obama has a marginal record (but all the liberal endorsements), and Clinton has a marginal record (but promises to be the most liberal), and the true liberal by RECORD is Huckabee. No one wants to compare line for line records. I think McCain should stick to his 2000 NH promise "that would be his last run". Huckabee claims the court made him do it (half billion net tax gain).

Posted by: Randy | Jan 8, 2008 1:30:04 PM

Romney is a first class individual in every respect. Huckabee is unethical and it is well documented.

Posted by: Chris George | Jan 8, 2008 1:31:55 PM

And you, northlite, have just made Tom S.'s point in the first paragraph of his post. You don't know Mitt Romney. You only know what the press tells you. And you've just regurgitated the press's talking points on Romney for the last few months.

Posted by: Greg T. | Jan 8, 2008 1:33:26 PM

i hope Obama does win by more than 10% b/c it will make Hillary's comeback on Feb 5, and subsequent surge to the nomination, even sweeter! Comeback Kid Part 2!!!

Posted by: boynla, LA, CA | Jan 8, 2008 1:34:09 PM

tom s.,you are way out there dude. that guy (romney)is so far right he might even be in the bleachers. of course, someone like him always has to run to give the real republican whack jobs someone to pull for. i guess its a good thing he has you (and rush) in his corner,eh tom?

as for obama, i actually feel sorry for the people who support/vote for him ,its obvious they are a tad short on working grey matter up there ,or perhaps they just arent using what they have but ,for whatever reason, they are largely devoid of competent reasoning and sound judgement in their decision making and generally rely on hyperbole, rhetoric and emotions ,(with a big dose of oprah ,jerry, or dr phil thrown in) to make up their minds for them.

detestable even as they are , its not disgust at their ignorance that bothers me as much as i pity them for being so simplistic ,naive ,unobjective and uninformed.

its been said "stupid is as stupid does...and " no sense being stupid if you cant show it" ...

GO OBAMA WE WANT CHANGE!! (snicker...)

Posted by: bah | Jan 8, 2008 1:34:20 PM

Nobama, a Romney supporter, writes:

"Liberals are salivating at the prospect of anyone buy Romney winning the nomination." [sic]

Don't you think it's a little Freudian to have the words "Romney" and "buy" right next to each other?

Huckabee 2008!

Posted by: Ben | Jan 8, 2008 1:34:51 PM

Obama and McCain have become the media candidates. McCain, after his astonishing third place finish in Iowa become the anointed one. Obama has actually been elevated by the press to cultural icon status.

In 2000 it was Bush that the Press told us was the most hugable and lovable candidate. In 2008, its Obama. I find that interesting, but don't see it as evidence of a compliant lap dog press. It is more like they are just trying to improve their profits by supporting the winner of the horse race.

Posted by: Frank | Jan 8, 2008 1:38:57 PM

one time voters are what is going to win the fall elections. Andrea, Hillary is a wonderful lady, but she has run the least exciting campaign she could. I think she missed her chance 4 years ago. She chickened out and now she is Dick Gephardt.

Posted by: Spot On | Jan 8, 2008 1:41:11 PM

Dave from NY

You got the Obama guess correct, but the McCain guess wrong. It isn't how many percentage of independents vote in the Republican primary. It is what is the percentage of the Republican primary are independent. In other words, if the independent voters turnout is significant compared to the Republican registrated voters, then McCain wins. I think McCain will win because of the increase independent turnout.

Posted by: Richard | Jan 8, 2008 1:41:18 PM

McCain, by a nose. Romney is a sinking ship.

Posted by: Spot On | Jan 8, 2008 1:50:56 PM

Anyone stopped to think that maybe independents are flocking to Obama because they see the chance to end the Clinton campaign? That most in this nation are tired of the Clintons, and see this as the chance to make them go away forever?

Posted by: JB | Jan 8, 2008 1:53:04 PM

The Republican's strongest candidates would be Romney & Giuliani, both of whom have been carved up by the press. John McCain will NEVER be President. The Straight Talk Express from 2000 is now the The Last Gasp Express. If he does not plummet like a rock after NH, he will lose to any Democrat in a Landslide.

Posted by: Christopher London | Jan 8, 2008 1:58:50 PM

"Liberals are salivating at the prospect of anyone buy Romney winning the nomination."

HA! I am a liberal, tried and true, and INVIITE the citizens of New Hampshire -- and every other state and territory -- to send Mitt Romney our way. I even EVITE you guys to nominate Mitt.

Are you kidding? Just what Americans are looking for: a soulless C.E.O. with as much "authenticity" as a Guns N Roses cover. More staged than the High School Musical. Why don't you just nomin8 Avril Lavigne?

The "liberal" media just covers horse races. They dont give a rat's paycheck about Huckabee's "positions." Or anyone's "positions." The media wants to tell exciting stories about insurgents and ninth inning upsets, rookies and pros, its sports writing on another level.

Don't be a sore loser... You guys won election after election on the backs of religious voters (who you kept in the closet by never passing any meaningful abortion or gay marriage proposals)... then they go behind your back and nomin8 Huckelberry. HA!

Posted by: DREW | Jan 8, 2008 2:01:12 PM

Sorry, that should have been directed at Tom S.

Posted by: DS | Jan 8, 2008 2:05:40 PM

Tom S., I am a democrat, I hope that romney wins. Not because I agree with a single thing he's ever done in his personal or professional life, but because there is no way he would win nation-wide. Huckabee is the only Republican I'm afraid of winning at the moment.

Posted by: Alex Encandar | Jan 8, 2008 2:08:17 PM

Governor Romney signed legislation to allow an unborn child to be killed for a $50 co-pay. How many children do you think are worth just $50?

Posted by: Tom | Jan 8, 2008 2:08:59 PM

I refuse to swallow the Obama pill...people are acting like they are in a cult...it is sickening! If he is the nominee on the democratic side I will either vote independent or not at all....I refuse to give in to this mass hysteria the media has created over Obama, the media coverage has been very limited for some candidates who actually have the potential to make real changes.

Posted by: Gina Alford | Jan 8, 2008 2:14:37 PM

"Governor Romney signed legislation to allow an unborn child to be killed for a $50 co-pay. How many children do you think are worth just $50?"

Well, I'm not an expert of the monitary value of Children (as you appear to be Tom), but I think that unborn children are worth next to nothing.

@Nobama, clever name. He went to a muslim school, so what, he's christian now (not that I care either way) so get over it. Also, yeah he didn't want to wear a pin of the american flag. Again, so what, it's just a symbol, obviously he respects our country a great deal, or else he wouldn't be running. Any yes his middle name is hussain, big deal, did you CHOOSE your name?

@Gina Alford, meh I don't care which democrat wins out of the top 3 really, they all seem about the same.

Posted by: Alex Encandar | Jan 8, 2008 2:19:36 PM

Why anyone at all would vote GOP (unless their relative is a GOP candidate) is beyond me anyway.

Posted by: SoxSweepAgain | Jan 8, 2008 2:20:27 PM

Huckabee has a liberal record? Only someone out of touch with reality (or who's never bothered to Google) could say that. He doesn't believe he's descended from primates; he's against choice; he thinks homosexuality is an illness; he believes God is helping his campaign the way it did Jesus in the miracle of the loaves and fishes; and he's utterly corrupt in the way that only smarmy smiley Republicans can be.

Posted by: Viking | Jan 8, 2008 2:20:38 PM

I think the only candidate on the democratic side that has the potential to actually change things is John Edwards.

Posted by: Gina Alford | Jan 8, 2008 2:22:31 PM

Tom S.:

That was an entire boatload of stupid. Yes, it's a left-wing conspiracy, brought on by the "liberal media" to choose the Republican candidate.

Now run along and watch Rush and O'RLY because adults are talking.

Posted by: Reed L. | Jan 8, 2008 2:23:08 PM

GOP voters, *please* nominate Romney. He has no chance of beating Obama or even Hillary. John McCain is your only chance of winning, but you seem too blinded by your hatred of illegals to give him a chance. I know it must feel great to nominate the most hardcore Republican you can find, but Independents are the key to winning the general election.

Posted by: Howard | Jan 8, 2008 2:31:01 PM

Tom S has a decidedly warped view of politics if he feels the media made Mike Huckabee. Evangelicals support him in huge numbers because of his stands on issues of importance to them. Oh, unless you feel evangelicals are simply robots led around by the media.

Romney? Disingenuous, sneaky, and scary.

Posted by: Expose Mitt | Jan 8, 2008 2:32:00 PM

It's going to be a long decade of progressive rule, get used to it. Obama/Edwards '08

Posted by: vlstrade | Jan 8, 2008 2:36:07 PM

Bah: Thanks for reminding me why Obama is the superior candidate. Your judgmental, petty, prejudiced, ignorant nonsense is not needed in our camp. Barack displays nothing but class, something you have not the faintest clue about. I actually feel a little sorry for you, projecting onto others the qualities that you yourself possess. Classic transference... but you wouldn't know what that means.

Posted by: chin075 | Jan 8, 2008 2:43:44 PM

What fun! First the Evangelical State gives us an Evang and a Lib and now the Liberal State will give us a Lib and a Lib?

What candidates are the above?

There is no clear read coming out of the process, as yet, because these states are extreme voter patterns. Remember Dean, McCain last go rounds?

Save the gas for the real hills ahead on Super Tuesday!

Posted by: GlennO | Jan 8, 2008 2:43:57 PM

If Romney squashes McCain over immigration, and then returns to a McCain like position on the issue in the general election (he was already mostly there in Saturday's debate when pressed about the 12 million), I'll sit out November and maybe/maybe consider Romney for re-election in 2012 (if he gets that far) if/if he demonstrates some kind of core value during a 1st term. That's how much Romney turns me OFF right now!

Posted by: Bill | Jan 8, 2008 2:44:11 PM

What I don’t understand about everyone crying foul over the media’s treatment of certain candidates is why are you still watching/reading their coverage? We all know news is a business. Businesses only concern is a profit. To be an informed voter means more than simply memorizing your party’s talking points. Quit your whining and dig facts for yourself. No candidate is perfect but imagine if the current VP actually had decided to run...Ok, too nightmarish to imagine.

Posted by: poppquorn | Jan 8, 2008 2:44:25 PM

This new, unspoken requirement that everyone running for office must wear the flag pin is a bit too nationalistic for me. So even though I love that symbol of our country, I also support Obama's decision not to wear it on his lapel. We must all be very wary of people—posters on this site or elsewhere—who denigrate others for not wearing it. The fascist overtones of such requirements are to be avoided in our grand republic. We're all too good for that.

Posted by: greenpaz | Jan 8, 2008 2:44:32 PM

"It is occuring with none other than our journalistic “friends” in the Democrat controlled, liberal media machine, doing all it can to choose THEIR GOP “favorite” for us."

Let's get real, the mainstream media is to the right of center. The "liberal media" is an urban myth perpetuated by conservatives.

Huckleberry scares the country club Republians. So far they have been able to use the evangelicals as convenient idiots who vote for their candidates that then give them the tax cuts and other policies that enrich them that are important to them. Now the evangelicals are tired of being used and are voting for one of their own who will put their agenda ahead of the agenda of the country club Republicans. Huckleberry even has the audacity to care about the welfare of the poor and underpriviledged, like Jesus taught.

Posted by: CaptainVideo | Jan 8, 2008 2:49:42 PM

Hold your noses everyone.

JUST IN: Begala and Carville coming in to save Clinton's crashing campaign (source Foxnews). Ya think she would understand why she's on her way out. This will seal her doomed campaign. They just don't get it!

She has met the enemy and she is she.

We - repubs/dems/indies - have had enough of the grifters.

NO WAY! Anyone but Clinton!

Posted by: GlennO | Jan 8, 2008 2:50:25 PM

Don't kid yourself, liberals are feeling great about going against "Three-Card" Romney, he's a flip-flopping Massachusetts chameleon who was for every position before he was against it.

Posted by: rey | Jan 8, 2008 2:56:28 PM

If Obama wins the Democratic nomination, you can count on his Republican adversary winning the White House. It's not the LIBERAL media that wants Obama to beat Clinton; it's the conservative media. Case in point, Bill Kristol, the now NYTimes but former rightwing rag (Weekly Standard?) reporter was simply in GLEE at the prospect of an Obama win, and really pushing for it too.

Obama is the media's favorite because he represents a light (no pun intended) lunch snack for the G.O.P in the end. He has no credentials.

Posted by: walden9 | Jan 8, 2008 2:58:03 PM

Here's the only realistic scenario for this election: A last minute constitutional amendment nullifying Amendment 25, paving the way for four more years of Bush! Whoooooo!

Posted by: Steve | Jan 8, 2008 2:58:35 PM

I'm amazed and thrilled that many Republicans continue to believe that Mitt Romney is their best chance when he performs the worst of any candidate in head to head polls. He will not alienate any major sector of the base like McCain or Huckabee, but he will get absolutely slaughtered among independents. Even those paying no attention can see him for what he is.

Trust me, McCain is your only shot to avoid a bloodbath vs. Obama. Look at the turnout levels and exactly who is getting independent support today.

I've said enough for now... see you folks in the fall....

Posted by: John M. | Jan 8, 2008 3:05:25 PM

Hmm...this are by far the most unreflective, sophomoric blog comments I've encountered in a day of surfing watching the NH primary story unfold.

But then... it is a TV news site.


Or less TV.

Posted by: johnzero | Jan 8, 2008 3:12:31 PM

Huck - yea right
bin laden - yea right
others - who cares

Hillary!! whooo hooo bring back the Clintons!!

Love you guys =)
Go Billary

Posted by: O.J. | Jan 8, 2008 3:15:02 PM

"Mitt Romney is by far the most qualified man in EITHER party and is a class act all the way. And yet since he became a GOP candidate for president, I have seen nothing but negative, trivial articles/stories about his Mormon religion, his money, his slick appearance, etc. fully intended to sway an naive electorate that pays way too little attention to the most important 4 year event in our country."

Could it be possible that Americans don't want a rich, slickster Republican as President, Dave? Did I mention that he's a liar, too and would say anything to get elected? No? Well, he is and he has. Give him half a chance and he'll become the author of the Emancipation Proclamation while charging up San Juan Hill on his way to the Halls of Montezuma to pick up the Congressional Medal.

By the way, when you speak of the "liberal media" are you talking about me? Because there's no one but me and Martin Luther King in the room--we just got back from a walk to Selma.

Posted by: sim | Jan 8, 2008 3:19:38 PM

I'll tell you why as a Republican I would rather have Obama win the nomination. If Hillary wins the nomination her presumptive running mate would be Obama--that is a ticket that is frankly, unbeatable. If Obama wins the nomination there is no way Hillary will play second fiddle to him (or anyone for that matter). Obama will be forced to pick from the likes of Richardson or Biden, et al.

The Republicans on the other hand could field a formidable ticket with Romney and Huckabee...a combination of Huckabee's conservative social views and Romney's fiscal/economic accomplishments would be tough to beat.

Posted by: Bobby McCutcheon | Jan 8, 2008 3:19:55 PM

I am an Edwards supporter from Colorado, but, if he does much worse than expected today in N.H., or Obama does much better (as is beginning to appear likely) I am going to have to reconsider my position. I know a great BAND WAGON when I see one, and even though I think Edwards would make a better President, Obama is beginning to look like DESTINY'S CANDIDATE!

Posted by: Krashkopf | Jan 8, 2008 3:23:47 PM

Romney is the candidate I want because the Democrats will absolutely eat him alive. I'm sorry but America will not elect a Mormon president. Furthermore, he is just twisting in the wind when it comes to abortion, gay rights, etc. There is no consistency whatsoever - he just panders to whomever he's talking to at the moment. He will get crushed but don't worry GOPers he's polling at 9% nationally.

Posted by: Clint | Jan 8, 2008 3:32:30 PM

yawn

Posted by: thissandwhichbites | Jan 8, 2008 3:46:48 PM

It seems that the only Republican ticket that could beat Obama is Romney/Powell.

Posted by: Mark | Jan 8, 2008 3:48:00 PM

All this talk, but no one points to the real problem for our upcoming election, and our democracy in general:

Diebold & electronic voting machines.

The GOP is working hard to keep this out of the news.

Posted by: SSkip | Jan 8, 2008 3:48:36 PM

An Obama/Edwards ticket for the Dem's would be a dark horse ticket to run (not a racial slur or pun, I apologize but the term does apply here), only because Obama's enthusiasm, fresh perspective and rhetoric combined with Edwards experience and seemingly honest progressive change ideals would make for a possibly successful presidency (as measured by what kind of changes would loom on the horizon after their terms began, and as measured by the plans they have voiced about putting into place to accomplish those changes). The state of this country is a receding economy fighting two wars it cannot continue supporting (fiscally speaking; I'll leave the ethics and morality to the philosophers), with major economic, social, and demographic change ahead. The candidate that will guide, rather than oppose these changes will be the more successful one, I think. Frank Herbert, as geeky as this reference is, stated it best in the overall idea of his "Dune": The society that cannot change, grow, and adapt, will die out. No one in this country can argue that socially and economically, we've probably peaked; but that doesn't mean we can't go on and continue thriving. We need a candidate who can do these things; the Obama/Edwards ticket provides this, whereas others do not.

Posted by: sean | Jan 8, 2008 3:51:36 PM

I love how the Liberal media (of which there is none anymore)is blamed for Romney not being the GOP top dog. The media had nothing to do with his loss in Iowa.. There are massess of evangelicals that will NEVER vote for Mormon even if God told them too. Lets make sure to put the blame (if you want to call it that on the GOP itself, its scared to death of Huckabee, Romney is just another trust fund country club republican with no idea how real Americans live. McCain has always been strong in NH and that is why he will win tonight. The reason so many independants are going to the dems is becuase the REPUBLICANS have destroyed the country over that last 8 years and everbody is sick of them. This cast of clowns they have running this year is making the most conservative puke in their soup.

Posted by: JW Fort Lauderdale FL | Jan 8, 2008 3:51:46 PM

Anyone here actually believe that we have any say so in who is elected?

Man, puh-leeze.

Posted by: Rerun | Jan 8, 2008 3:58:31 PM

You can say what you want but the truth is that there is only one candidate that truly understands the economy, forgien policy, and the limits of federal government and his name is Ron Paul.

Ron Paul knows more about the U.S. economy then Ben Bernanke the Fed Chairman. Don't believe me? Ask anyone that works on Wall Street that has heard Dr. Ron Paul speak. They will tell you that everything he is saying is true. A fiat currency (i.e. paper money) is vulnerable to inflation and out side influence, like the U.S. dollar; however, a gold and silver backed dollar is inflation proof.

On forgien policy Dr. Paul is absolutly right in pursuing a policy of non-intervention. Everything that is currently happening to us is blowback from nation building instituted by our forgien policy. We installed the Shah of Iran. We trained and supplied Al Queda with weapons to fight the Russians in Afganistan. We provided Sadam Hussien with biological and chemical weapons to fight the Iraq - Iran war. Some of these actions may have been made with the best of intentions, to bring peace and stablilty to the region, but they have all come back to haunt us. Remember the old saying that the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and the axiom that something given has no value. No matter how much we want a people to have some of the greatness that we call freedom, they have to want it enough that they are willing to fight for it. In Iraq, we went in to install a new democratic form of government for the Iraqi people. We can assume that the United States Armed Forces was much stronger then Sadam Hussien's military and police apparatus. However under Sadam Hussien the majority of people (the Shiites) didn't stand up to him and revolt, but these same people were quick to take up arms against us. Sadam Hussien was a horrible dictator who need to be removed from power, but the people who needed to remove him were the Iraqi people not the U.S.

Now about Al Queda, in order to fight the ugly communist war machine it was deceided that the enemy of our enemy is our friend. With that philosophy we proceeded to train and arm the Muslum militants of Afganistan and their young charismatic leader Osama Bin Laden. We sent them surface to air missles (MANPADS) and trained them how to lure Russian helicopters into an ambush. An interesting side note is that the CIA agents made a data base of the members of Osama Bin Ladens recruits but because Farsi dosen't have a word for data it was just called the base or al queda. Ron Paul wants to end the Iraq war, no other presidental candidate would end it faster then Dr. Paul. He wants to bring all of our troops home from forgien countries, closing those bases and cutting off forgien aid to all those forgien countries. Why should we arm Saudi Arabia, and by proxy Hamas, and then finance Israel. That is like playing two sides against each other with us picking up the bill.

Something else for you to consider is the candidates voting record. Ron Paul's voting record is the only one the stands up to the truth-o-meter. He is known as Dr. No for never voting for anything unconstitutional. He voted against the Iraq war, and the reasons given have proved to be exactly true. He has never voted for an unbalanced budget or a law that restricts the second admendment. I wonder in hindsight, if it were a widely known fact that most Americans carried concelled handguns on domestic flights would the 9-11 hijackers have even tried.

In closing, I invite all of you to look for Dr. Ron Paul on YouTube and hear his positions in his own words, and also look for the political truth-o-meter sponsored by the St. Petersburg Times. I trust the truth will ring clear.

Jason

Posted by: Jason | Jan 8, 2008 4:00:42 PM

Dave from NY,
Paranoid much?
"the chagrin of the Democrat National Committee liberal propaganda machine" and "Democrat controlled, liberal media machine" .... are you posting that while wearing a tinfoil hat?

Nothing like your esteemed FAUX news organization, huh?

Posted by: C from Alabama | Jan 8, 2008 4:01:47 PM

Obama/Edwards would be the death of this country. Those two idiots would destroy our economy and gut our military. The good thing is I am sure they will beef up the nanny state welfare system. We'll need it when unemployment hits double digits. The question really becomes, does the country disentigrate from within before or after we get nuked? Because after the smiling buffoon obama attacks Pakistan there will be nukes everywhere. Please obama supporters, wake up! Don't let Oprah tell you who to vote for!

Posted by: ryan | Jan 8, 2008 4:02:50 PM

As a student who went to both a public high school and a state university in Massachusetts, I must say that the cuts that Romney made to the Massachusetts educational system have been very detrimental. Schools that were already underfunded are stained even moreso now.

If he is the Republican candidate and happens to win, then there is no chance that we'll ever be able to "fill the education gap" that has been noticed in standardized testing in our nation in relation to other developed nations.

Posted by: Jess | Jan 8, 2008 4:04:17 PM

Expose Mitt: "Oh, unless you feel evangelicals are simply robots led around by the media."

Robots? Yes, far too many are. Being led around by the media? Nah! They've got megachurch pastors and evangelists to do it.

Posted by: Patrick | Jan 8, 2008 4:08:29 PM

thanks for declining my non existent need to join in with the herd ,chin075. i go my own way, with the facts and empirical evidence, myself.

you and your obama-itte friends feel free to keep on mooing away though, its kind of funny to listen to sometimes, although one does get a bit tired of the "its me...i am the man called Change!" after awhile...

the actual truth is that obama is a loser and everyone who is older than 35 knows it. as far as being "classy" ,his "camp" sure didnt show much class ,eg; booing a us state senator at a public forum where both were invitees ,but forget that for a moment.

the bottom line is that obama is using the ignorance of the american voter to get into office, relying on smoke and mirrors and feely goody speeches with no true meat and potatoes solutions . thats been the republican way of doing business for the last 2 decades and he smells more republican to me everytime i hear him talk.

hes playing the race/youth card (which is a big segment of the democratic demographic ,unfortunately most are youtube watching slackers who really know nothing/next to nothing about american politics other than what they see/read on the internet ) to catch all the gullible naive voters he can . the fact that he is doing as well as he is is a testament to the ignorance as well as the lack of political savvy of the american voter.

obama will never get into the white house either , an obama nomination will lock the republicans in for another 4 years most assuredly ,galvanizing their support base to include the south ,which will likely carry the republicans back into the white house. so chin075, my wanna-be political analyst friend, when the republicans are back in the oval office , remember YOU supported an unelectable nominee, allowing a big business loving republican to make your life miserable, for at least 4 more years, and thank yourself accordingly.

Posted by: bah | Jan 8, 2008 4:13:36 PM

Oh man, some of you people are scary. History is filled with charismatic men that eventually brought their countries to absolute ruin. My mother is German, her father spent 11 yrs in a concentration camp for supporting the Republic over Hitler in the 1933 election. A few years before he died I asked him why the German people elected Hitler, his answer, " Times were tough, and Hitler promised a new Germany, he seemed sincere but there was something about him I didn't like. He seemed to much like the ideal leader,but I accepted his victory ,and until I was arrested I thought perhaps I had made a mistake voting against him". Folks, I'm not saying any candidate is any way like a nazi. What my Grandpa was trying to say is that its never good to judge a man based on his looks, or his speeches.

Posted by: Mike | Jan 8, 2008 4:15:48 PM

Godwin's Law is in effect by proxy; the discussion is over. Haha.

Posted by: sean | Jan 8, 2008 4:19:42 PM

Poster Tom S. says, “It is occuring with none other than our journalistic “friends” in the Democrat controlled, liberal media machine, doing all it can to choose THEIR GOP “favorite” for us.”

HA HA HA HA –what planet do you live on Tom S??? Liberal media???? Are you saying that Rupert Murdoch (who pretty much owns all media) is liberal?? That GE (who is a weapons manufacturer) is LIBERAL???? That Roger Ailes, Fox News CEO, yep the same Roger Alies that was Rudy Giuliani’s first media consultant, and Rudy officiated Roger's wedding and are best buddies IS LIBERAL??? HA HA HA And the Republican Controlled FCC just voted for more media consolidation allowing Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes more media outlets.

Liberal media my booty!!!

Posted by: Gayle | Jan 8, 2008 4:29:18 PM

Post from Lucy A. "...George W. Bush, the finest man and a true man of Jesus, was leading this country to glory..."

You poor dear....where have you (and your brain) been for the last 8 years?? Bush the finest man??? a true man of Jesus??? Leading this country to glory???.... you are just as DELUSIONAL as Bushie himself!!

Posted by: Karl Rove | Jan 8, 2008 4:40:11 PM

It's amazing how much truthiness people convince themselves of.

Romney does the worst of the four major candidates against the democrats. McCain does the best, followed by Giuliani and Huckabee, with Mitt way back. Romney's probably the only Republican with no chance of winning the general election.

Also, McCain didn't need a high number of independents. He needed a few. Romney's only beating him by about one point among registered Republicans. McCain will win, and Obama will win big.

Posted by: Matthew | Jan 8, 2008 4:42:31 PM

Obama/Edwards would be the death of this country. Those two idiots would destroy our economy and gut our military.....

Well Alambama, if you hadn't noticed the two idiots in place have already done that and a lot worse. Do yourself a favor, turn off FOX NEWS and start reading everything you can on both sides. The truth is, the Republican Party does not deserve the White House or control of congress. NEVER in our history have we had such a disasterous administration. It's the Dems to lose this year.


Posted by: NW Firefly | Jan 8, 2008 4:44:34 PM

Somebody needs to get Lucy A. her meds.

I'm sorry ladyfrancesca, but if you think that Edwards gives a rat's bare-butt about the 'middle class', you haven't seen his house or heard about his $400 haircuts. The man is the definition of a slimey, ambulance chasing lawyer. He got rich off of the suffering of others. The best way to reel in insurance/medical costs is TORT REFORM. Do you think someone beholden to trial lawyers will go for that? Didn't think so. As for drug companies, my god, do you people think new drugs grow on trees? It costs BILLIONS of dollars and YEARS of R&D to bring a new drug to market. The only thing new regulations on drug companies (like quicker generics) will accomplish is FEWER AND FEWER LIFE-SAVING DRUGS! Use your brains people. Oh and last I checked the president can't do anything about the Constitution. You people really should learn how our government works. CONGRESS passes laws, not the President. Yeesh. Civics 101 would be helpful.

And yes, we DO need permanent bases in Iraq, the same as we have permanent bases in Germany and Japan. I don't know if you noticed it or not, but we live in a BIG world. There is a mad-man in charge of Iran and YES they are trying to get nukes.

Posted by: ryan | Jan 8, 2008 4:45:08 PM

Making fun of those of us who choose to follow the path of Jesus is the sign of a true Demoncrat Osamaberal. You pathetic winer!!!! If you are not having a successfull life in this great country of ours then you are a loser of the lowest common denoninator!!!!!! Go back to the godless hellhole you crawled out of and learn to think right before you start calling God's good people bad names! And don't impersenate Karl Rove by using his name illegally or YOU WILL BE UP ON CHARGES BY THE FBI IF I HAVE TO DO IT MYSELF!!!!!!

Posted by: Lucy A. | Jan 8, 2008 4:45:25 PM

Anyone notice how misspellings and moronic babble go hand in hand? lol!

Posted by: Clint | Jan 8, 2008 4:46:04 PM

Lucy A., if we were standing next to each other I'd have to slap some sense into you -you've really lost touch with reality! Are you on heavy medication or something?? It's either that or you're a paid for Loyal Bushie troll.

Posted by: James Baker | Jan 8, 2008 4:46:26 PM

Hillary will begin jockeying for VP position.

Posted by: Jim Baker | Jan 8, 2008 4:49:36 PM

It looks like Obama is going to run away with it for the Dems. And every candidate (for either party) in modern history that wins both Iowa and NH gets the nomination.
Hopefully Romney wins for the Repubs and kills McCain's momentum since I don't want him getting the nomination. McCain is the only Republican who has a chance in November.

Posted by: Rob | Jan 8, 2008 4:49:40 PM

YOU ARE ILLEGALY BREAKING THE LAW BY SAYING YOU ARE JAMES BAKER AND I AM PICKING UP THE PHONE CALL AND CALLING THE FBI ON YOU RIGHT NOW! THEN SEE IF CALLING GOOD PEOPLE BAD NAMES IS SO MUCH FUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GEORGE W BUSH RULES VOTE GEORGE W. BUSH FOR TWO MORE TERMS!!!!!!!!!!!!! CALL THE SURPREMEM COURT AND TELL THEM TO GET THE MORE TERMS FOR BUSH PROCESS IN THE WORKS BEFORE OSAMA BIN LADEN HIOMSELF IS RUNNING THIS ONCE GREAT COUNTRY OF OURS!!!!

Posted by: Lucy A. | Jan 8, 2008 4:50:09 PM

Lucy A thinks George Bush is a man of Jesus?! HA -now that is humorous! Lucy must think that Pat Robertson is a great Christian too.

Charles Taylor, Liberia's former president, had extensive business dealings with televangelist Pat Robertson. Taylor gave Robertson (who also had business dealings with dictator Mobutu Sese Seko of Zaire) the rights to mine for diamonds in Liberia's mineral-rich countryside. According to two Operation Blessing pilots who reported this incident to the state of Virginia for investigation, Robertson used his Operation Blessing planes to haul diamond-mining equipment to Robertson's mines in Liberia, despite the fact that Robertson was telling his 700 Club viewers that the planes were sending relief supplies to the victims of the genocide in Rwanda. The subsequent investigation by the state of Virginia concluded that Robertson diverted his ministry's donations to the Liberian diamond-mining operation, but Attorney General of Virginia Mark Earley blocked any potential prosecution against Robertson.

Yeah, great men of Jesus! They both belong in jail!

Posted by: Bill O'Reiley | Jan 8, 2008 4:51:54 PM

HERE IS THE SURPREME COURT'S PHONE NUMBER PEOPLE:202-479-3211. Start calling it over and over again so they can feel the strength of Jesus working through His People who just so happen is the REPUBLICANS and good men like GEORGE W. BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Lucy A. | Jan 8, 2008 4:52:20 PM

Obama has been given so much leeway. Well if the press won’t scrutinize his shady life, I will: Here’s what another commentator said: Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., a black MUSLIM from Nyangoma-Kogel, Kenya and Ann Dunham, a white ATHEIST from Wichita, Kansas. Obama's parents met at the University of Hawaii. When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced. His father returned to Kenya. His mother then married Lolo Soetoro, a RADICAL Muslim from Indonesia. When Obama was 6 years old, the family relocate to Indonesia. Obama attended a MUSLIM school in Jakarta. He also spent two years in a Catholic school. Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim. He is quick to point out that, "He was once a Muslim, but that he also attended Catholic Lolo Soetoro, the second husband of Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, introduced his stepson to Islam. Obama was enrolled in a Wahabi school in Jakarta. Wahabism is the RADICAL teaching that is followed by the Muslim > terrorists who are now waging Jihad against the western world. Since it is politically expedient, Barack Hussein Obama has joined the United > Church of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim background. ALSO, > keep in mind that when he was sworn into office he DID NOT use the Holy Bible, but instead the Koran. Here’s what ye another commentator said: Isn't it odd that Muslim leaders around the world are saying nothing about Barack Obama? If Obama was once a Muslim but now a Christian they would be calling for removal of his head; as no one can leave the muslim religion. Since the media has never asked Obama his real religion, if he is indeed still a Muslim, you have to conclude that with the silence of Muslim leaders about his candidancy that he is still a Muslim. Could this be why Obama is not on the Michigan Primary ballot? The largest group of Muslims in the United States are in Dearborn, Michigan. Obama side-stepped Michigan because a huge Muslim turnout for Obama would not look right. Is Obama still a Muslim? Why is the media afraid to ask? The media has been all over Mitt Romney about being a Morman but they will not ask Obama if he is still a Muslim. Media bias.

Posted by: PC | Jan 8, 2008 4:52:21 PM

Attention: Impersanator: yeah, go ahead and put Jesus and George W Bush in jail! Go right ahead and see the Raptur happen before you can hear the key unlock the jail door. Jesus already went to the worst kind of jail there is, like GETTING CRUCIFIED, REMEMBER??????? God is watching all of us and there is a special place in hell for you impoersonators that try to bring us that hav e a personal relatiopnship with Jesus which you are not obviously in the possession of, faker!!!! CHRISTIANS BEWARE! THIS IS A LIBERAL WEBSITE OWNED BY THE LIBERAL PRESS TRYING TO TRAP US CHRISTIANS INTO GETTNG C RITICIZED!!!!!!!!!! LONG LIVE GEORGE W BUSH, AND YOU JUST WATCH GEORGE W BUSH WILL BE RIGHT AT GOD'S SIDE WHEN THIS WORLD SOON COMES TO IT'S END!!!!!!!! PRAISE JESUS! PRAISE GEORGE W BUSH!!!!!! You will no longer have this good Christian on this website to make fun of any more. Good riddence to each and every single last one of you all DEMONCRATIC OSAMA LOVERS!!!!!!!!