Archive for October 30th, 2011
Troll Dissection 101: The Romney campaign’s paid trolls are out in force attacking Herman Cain on conservative websites
Here’s a troll dropping that was just left on another thread — by what I presume to be either a paid troll working for Willard “Mittens” Romneycare or else a troll engaged by the Left in an effort to push Romneycare towards the GOP nomination.
It was left by a commenter who has never posted on HillBuzz.org before. I ran the screenname, email address, and IP address used by the commenter through the HillBuzz.org comments search engine and this person has never left a comment here before.
In the three and a half years I’ve been running this site, I have never seen a legitimate and real commenter leave this much in a first-ever comment. I’ve also never seen legitimate commenters use verbiage and syntax like this.
In my professional opinion, this is a Cocktail Party GOP establishment operative trying to demoralize Herman Cain’s supporters in an effort to push Willard “Mittens” Romneycare towards the Republican nomination…which is what the Left wants too, oddly enough, since Romneycare is exactly who (and what) Obama wants to run against.
Can you dissect this troll’s remarks and note exactly what identifies it as a troll?
Can you theorize what the troll’s objectives are?
Can you see the agenda at work here?
Posted on 10/30/2011
By: Independent Lady
I really like Cain and he is a breath of fresh air to watch, but have some serious concerns. He tried to be a politician in GA by running for office, but wasn’t elected. This doesn’t mean he is not a politician because he did not win.
His business is motivational speaker, and most of his stops around the country have been to promote his new book, he even used campaign funds to purchase a lot of them (which could contribute to his book moving up higher) and that seems to be his main focus. Also, he has no military experience which I think we have to have this time. Obama has put our boys in jeopardy by announcing to the enemy where they will be when & exact dates we are pulling out over the Generals’ advice objections.
Cain also has switched positions on abortion (pro-choice in interview, then pro-life) and I don’t like the way he pulled the race card about the Perry rock and then said lowkey the next day he believed Perry about his Father painting it when they began using the camp. He also said he would trade a hundred dangerous terrorists for one American hostage, although the US has been firm in not starting that. I just don’t think he has the experience to run the number one office in the land. Neither did Obama.
I am very disappointed in Gov Perry’s debate performances to date, but will say that all 7 candidates piled on him his first two debates (Perry had just had back surgery & had been dealing with the fires in TX). What I do like about Perry is his experiences:
*Elected Governor 3 times
*Agriculture commissioner (wants to end all subsidies including energy)
*Legislative
*Longest Border State ($400B of TX dollars spent on securing border, forced by Federal Govt to
support illegals through public schools & medical needs)
*Captain in Air Force for 5 years (flew many missions)
*Been Commander in Chief over Texas Guards who are routinely sent to help out both in & out of TX
*Biggest Job creator in nation! Perry created over 40% of all new jobs in nation last two years
*Been advocating form of flat tax for a long time (in his book released last year) & his 20% plan needs tweaking, but best out there to date (check rickperry.org to see how many & what sources they used to put it together)
*Energy plan that is right on (we produce our gas, etc needs & QUIT getting into wars with countries that hate us to protect “our interests” ). Believes in securing our relationships with our own border states (MX & Canada).
*Medicare/Medicaid block grants to states, cut out the red tape, let states figure out best way to use finds
*Balanced budget by 2020 with no more deficits
*Money held “offshore” by companies brought back to US for a one time tax rate of 5.25% if it bring jobs and business back to USAll I am saying is that I think proven leadership in all the areas that are needed to get our country turned around is very important right now, and I would give Gov Perry a long look. He is the only one with a proven record to beat Obama. We had the best debator in office (former law review, lawyer), how’s that working for us????
Here’s my breakdown of what makes the remarks troll droppings, paragraph by paragraph:
1. The troll said: I really like Cain and he is a breath of fresh air to watch, but have some serious concerns. He tried to be a politician in GA by running for office, but wasn’t elected. This doesn’t mean he is not a politician because he did not win.
The troll starts off by saying she likes Herman Cain and then calls him a breath of fresh air. This is to establish with you, the reader, that the troll is on your side. Clearly HillBuzz.org has been identified as a Cain-supporting site and is turning up on the Romneycare camp’s radar as a result. Trolls always begin their remarks with something positive to entice you to listen…or to get by moderation, hoping a moderator allows the comment through after reading just the first sentence. That’s classic troll behavior.
The next clue is where the troll abruptly pivots from liking Herman Cain to saying she has “serious concerns” about him. Generally speaking, if you ever read a sentence in comments that starts off positively and then has a “but” in it near the end, the author is probably a troll.
I love how this Romneycare troll says that Cain “tried to be a politician in Georgia but wasn’t elected”. You mean, like all the times Willard “Mittens” Romneycare ran for office but wasn’t elected…or left office because he knew he would not win re-election?
2. The troll says: His business is motivational speaker, and most of his stops around the country have been to promote his new book, he even used campaign funds to purchase a lot of them (which could contribute to his book moving up higher) and that seems to be his main focus. Also, he has no military experience which I think we have to have this time. Obama has put our boys in jeopardy by announcing to the enemy where they will be when & exact dates we are pulling out over the Generals’ advice objections.
I don’t think you need me to go word by word in this paragraph to illustrate how clearly cut-and-paste his is from the Romneycare attack book on Herman Cain.
There is an interesting bit in here where the Romneycare troll tries to slip a line in here about military service being needed in the next President…which Mittens doesn’t have himself. I think this is the troll trying to make it seem like she’s really a Perry troll, since Perry was in the military.
I’d love to remind readers that Herman Cain worked for the Navy doing high tech, highly skilled work. So the man is much more familiar with the military and how it operates than Mittens is, that’s for damn sure.
3. The troll said: Cain also has switched positions on abortion (pro-choice in interview, then pro-life) and I don’t like the way he pulled the race card about the Perry rock and then said lowkey the next day he believed Perry about his Father painting it when they began using the camp. He also said he would trade a hundred dangerous terrorists for one American hostage, although the US has been firm in not starting that. I just don’t think he has the experience to run the number one office in the land. Neither did Obama.
The troll spends part of this paragraph trying to mitigate all of Willard “Mittens” Romneycare’s many flip-flops by saying that Herman Cain has switched positions on things too. That’s another goal of the Romneycare trolls: to make Mittens’ track record seem better by noting that other people have done flip-flops themselves, so that you’d think Romneycare isn’t that bad as a result. The rest of the paragraph is classic trolling…trying to demoralize and dissuad those on the Cain Train by perpetuating the meme that Cain has made gaffes and these gaffes are reasons you shouldn’t support him. Because Cain speaks to the media, does almost every interview he’s asked to do, and continuously makes himself available for public appearances, he generates a lot of sound bytes that Team Romneycare is using against him.
That’s why Mittens has been avoiding all interviews and sticking to as many 30 to 60 second engagements as possible, because he’s afraid of speaking his mind — and, like proved in Ohio on October 25rh, he often doesn’t know what side of an issue he’s on that particular day, so he doesn’t want to speak on anything without his staff reminding him of what he should say.
4. The troll said: I am very disappointed in Gov Perry’s debate performances to date, but will say that all 7 candidates piled on him his first two debates (Perry had just had back surgery & had been dealing with the fires in TX). What I do like about Perry is his experiences:
This is more proof the troll working for Willard “Mittens” Romneycare is trying to pretend to be a Perry supporting troll that is attacking Herman Cain. This is an effort by Team Romneycare to masquerade as Perry supporters when trolling so that people upset by these antics blame the Perry camp and not Romneycare. Look how little digs at Perry are slipped in while the troll ostensibly pretends to be supporting Perry.
5. The troll said: All I am saying is that I think proven leadership in all the areas that are needed to get our country turned around is very important right now, and I would give Gov Perry a long look. He is the only one with a proven record to beat Obama. We had the best debator in office (former law review, lawyer), how’s that working for us????
This is all totally meant to give the reader a bad impression of Rick Perry and his supporters, for them coming on a Cain-supporting site to badmouth Cain.
I am 100% certain this was written by someone on the Willard “Mittens” Romneycare payroll.
Answer honestly in comments below: are you still fooled by things like this when you read them online, or were you able to spot this remark as a troll dropping right away?
Countdown to the “HillBuzz & Mrs. Fox Radio Show”
I’m very excited about the launch of “HillBuzz & Mrs. Fox” on the Adventures in Radio Broadcasting network.
I’m teaming up with Megan Fox (of The Megan Fox Radio Show) to host what will ultimately become a one hour daily radio show that will be available as podcasts.
Key areas we’ll cover include combating voter fraud, exposing the Marxist indoctrination in public schools, highlighting the Left’s goon squads and what they do to keep Democrats in power, and reporting on current political events on a rolling basis.
It’s a project Megan and I have been working on behind the scenes for a long time now and we’re finally ready to do our soft debut in the coming week.
I’d love to hear from you in terms of stories you’d like to see us cover.
I grew up watching mystery-solving teams on shows like Hart to Hart, Scarecrow & Mrs. King, Magnum PI, Remington Steel, Simon & Simon, Crazy Like A Fox, Riptide, Misfits of Science, Manimal, Jem, Scooby Doo, and The A-Team and have always wanted to bring that spirit to politics.
Likewise, Megan has always been interested in investigating mysteries in our political world and asking the questions the agenda-driven media fails to ask.
Our goal is to take a sustained, hard look at what the Left, the Cocktail Party GOP establishment and the media that enables them both is really up to.
I hope you’ll give us honest feedback as the show launches and help us discover the political mysteries you’d like to see solved once and for all.
This is a very excited project for me on a personal level that I know will be worth the huge investment of time and personal resources I’m giving it…and it’s another step in HillBuzz’s evolution as the site moves from making frequent guest appearances on other shows to having a show of our own.
Stay tuned for our first show on the Adventures in Broadcasting Network sometime this coming week!
NOTE: You can like the HillBuzz & Mrs. Fox Show on Facebook too. Click here!
The Truth About Ron Paul’s Foreign Policy
This column was inspired by questions from Alert Reader JMC, who is looking for a GOPer to get behind since JMC’s first choice, Sarah Palin, is not running.
Honestly, and I would have never thought I would be saying this, but Ron Paul is the only one in the current field of GOPers that I agree with most. There are some issues that I have with him but the reality is that there will never be a 100% perfect candidate. So, I have to weigh out the good points and the bad points. Here are my questions:
- Where does RP stand on Islam and Muslims as a whole? Does he view them as a threat or does he think that they are good people who just want us to leave them alone?
- Is he or isn’t he a 9/11 Truther?
- Does he stand with Israel or does he want them to fend for themselves?
First of all, JMC, thanks for being a responsible participant in the American electoral process.
The best source of information about Ron Paul’s foreign policy is the man himself, in A Foreign Policy of Freedom: Peace, Commerce, and Honest Friendship
I’ve never read any quotes from Ron Paul that indicate he thinks the 9/11 attacks were staged by anyone but Khalid Sheik Mohammad and the 19 hijackers, but he has said that decades of U.S. foreign policy mistakes, and bureaucratic intelligence failures, led up to them. I suspect that people who find this opinion offensive might want to put a pejorative label of “Truther” on Ron Paul because of it. It’s a common Alinsky tactic.
Ron Paul’s live-and-let-live brand of libertarianism attracts a cornucopia of supporters, the most vocal of which are often the most controversial (but many, I suspect, are actually paid Mitt Romney operatives), which makes him a frequent target of criticism by the Cocktail Party GOP Establishment. Because Ron Paul believes everyone has a right to his or her opinion, he does not demand ideological purity among his supporters, and rarely comments on the antics of the more fringy among them. It is against everything Ron Paul stands for to tell other people what to do or how to think.
During the 2008 campaign, Ron Paul was asked about the handful of his followers who were 9/11 conspiracy theorists. “I can’t tell people what to do but I’ve abandoned those viewpoints and I don’t believe that,” he said during the a South Carolina presidential debate.
Ron Paul is profiled in the Christian publication World Magazine, in a great article titled “Father of the Tea Party.”
At the New Hampshire GOP presidential debate in June, Paul received cheers when the moderator asked him about bringing troops out of Afghanistan: “I’d bring them home as quickly as possible. And I would get them out of Iraq as well. And I wouldn’t start a war in Libya. I’d quit bombing Yemen. And I’d quit bombing Pakistan. I’d start taking care of people here at home because we could save hundreds of billions of dollars.” Military personnel contributed more to Paul in 2008 than to any other Republican candidate, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
Ron Paul’s Plan to Restore America calls for ending all foreign aid, which includes ending aid to Israel and all of Israel’s enemies, which currently get 7 times more money from the U.S. than Israel does.
GOP Frontrunner Ron Paul has gone on the record as saying that the jihad against the U.S. by Islamofascists has its roots in “blowback” from U.S.-orchestrated coups and assassinations in the Middle East dating back to the 1950s, when the CIA removed a democratically elected head of state in Iran and installed the Shah as a puppet–plus continual meddling in the internal affairs of Middle Eastern nations ever since, both official and covert. Many in the Cocktail Party GOP find this opinion offensive. I don’t know why–it’s exactly what the 9/11 Commission said in their report–that 9/11 was “blowback.”
This issue is covered in an excellent article in Esquire Magazine, Ron Paul: The Founding Father.
All this started because Ron Paul said something he wasn’t supposed to say. During the second Republican presidential debate in 2007, when they had him shunted off to the far side and gave him as little airtime as possible, the subject of Al Qaeda came up. “They attack us because we’ve been over there,” he said. “We’ve been bombing Iraq for ten years.”
The idea that terrorists attack the U. S. because “they hate freedom” was always more of a slogan than a serious position, but it had frozen into Republican orthodoxy. “That’s really an extraordinary statement,” said an outraged Rudy Giuliani. “I don’t think I’ve ever heard that before, and I’ve heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11.” Even the moderator got huffy. “Are you suggesting we invited the 9/11 attack, sir?” But Paul just continued in the same placid and rational way, oblivious to ordinary political calculations. “I believe very sincerely that the CIA is correct when they teach and talk about blowback. They don’t come here to attack us because we’re rich and free. They come and they attack us because we’re over there. I mean, what would we think if other foreign countries were doing that to us?”
Here’s a commentary on Fox News about blowback, from the 2008 presidential race: Straight Talk: Paul Has A Point:
The “blowback” theory isn’t some fringe idea common only to crazy Sept. 11 conspiracy theorists. It doesn’t suggest that we “deserved” the Sept. 11 attacks, nor does it suggest we shouldn’t have retaliated against the people who waged them.
What it does say is that actions have consequences. When the Arab and Muslim world continually sees U.S. troops marching through Arab and Muslim backyards, U.S. trade sanctions causing Arab and Muslim suffering and U.S. bombs landing on Arab and Muslim homes, it isn’t difficult to see how Arabs could begin to develop a deep contempt for the U.S.
Read Ron Paul’s statement on 9/11 here: 9/11: Ask the Right Questions and Face the Truth, in which he notes that
Sometimes it can be very uncomfortable to ask the right questions and face the truth. When a slick politician comes along and gives a much more soothing, self-congratulating version of events, it is very tempting to simply believe what we would like to hear. But listening to lies does not make us safer, even though it might make us feel better about ourselves. The truth is that ending these misguided wars and occupations will make us safer, more prosperous and more free.
Here’s a huge compilation of Ron Paul statements on terrorism, Iran, non-interventionism, blowback, 9/11 and other related issues, from a website called The Mossadegh Project. Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh was the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran who was ousted by the CIA’s “Project Ajax” in 1953.
As for Ron Paul’s stand on Islam…Ron Paul is an individualist, and believes individuals should be responsible for their actions. So I think he’d say that individual Islamic terrorists are a threat. Ron Paul suggested the use of Letters of Marque and Reprisal to combat the organizers of the 9/11 attacks. He suggested the same thing to go after individual Somali pirates who were responsible for shipping attacks off the coast of Somalia. He didn’t recommend bombing or invading the entire country of Somalia–he wanted to go after the individuals causing the problems.
I believe Ron Paul would say the same thing about Muslims in general as he would say about members of any group. In an interview with the Iowa State Daily, Dr. Paul said,
You know I just, I don’t think of people in little groups like that. I don’t think of people as ‘gay’ here and ‘black people’ there, or ‘women’ over here…Everybody is an individual person and everybody has the same rights as anyone else. The government has no business in your private life, you know, so if one person is allowed to do something so should everyone else.
As for Israel, the best way to characterize Ron Paul’s position is he wants The United States of America to fend for ourself, defend ourselves, and mind our own business except in instances of a confirmed national security threat.
One of the Left’s favorite canards is to accuse a conservative of being against something if that conservative is against Federal funding of it. In this case, Leftists and Cocktail Party GOP operatives try to paint Ron Paul as being “anti-Israel” because he’s pro-American Taxpayer. Whether or not you think it’s a good idea to send foreign aid to Israel, the fact of the matter is that The United States of America is bankrupt, so 40¢ of every dollar we send to Israel is borrowed from China.
Here’s an excerpt from “Israel and the Right,” from The American Conservative, May 23, 2011:
Congressman Ron Paul was also critical of Obama’s Israel policy, but from a different perspective: “While President Obama’s demand that Israel make hard concessions in her border conflicts may very well be in her long-term interest, only Israel can make that determination on her own, without pressure from the United States or coercion by the United Nations. Unlike this President, I do not believe it is our place to dictate how Israel runs her affairs.”
Paul added, “We should respect Israel’s sovereignty and not try to dictate her policy from Washington.”
This is not the first time Paul has taken this position.
When Israel attacked a nuclear reactor in Iraq in 1981 almost the entire US Congress voted to condemn the act, but Congressman Paul was one of the few Republicans who stood up and said Israel should not have to answer to America for how she defends herself.
An excellent opinion piece was published a couple of days ago in The Daily Caller: Ron Paul vs. foreign policy partisanship
So what does saying, “I like Ron Paul, except on foreign policy” really mean?
A crass but not untrue answer would be that Republicans don’t mind Republican wars, despite the reasons, results or costs, and Democrats don’t mind Democrat wars, despite the reasons, results or costs. And the American people in general don’t mind wars as long as the results are good and the costs are low.
Paul believes that any war under any president will come with a significant cost, which is why our reasons for going to war should be ultra-strong and the desired results, ultra-clear. What threat does a country actually pose? If we go in, what is victory? What is our exit strategy?
[Sarah] Palin summed up Paul’s defense philosophy well when she pointed out that being extremely “careful” about “interjecting our country in other nations’ business” is precisely Paul’s foreign policy. For someone to say, “I like Ron Paul, except on foreign policy” is really to say that Paul’s consistent reluctance to go to war can be quite annoying when it clashes with partisan attachment or popular opinion.
JMC, thanks for giving me the opportunity to share this information with you and other open-minded Hillbuzz readers who, like me, are determined to nominate an actual conservative instead of Mittens “Obama Lite” Romneycare.
Question: When did the Cocktail Party GOP establishment as we know it congeal its power?
I’d like to spend some time today looking back to discover when the Cocktail Party GOP establishment as we know it congealed its power.
We all know the Republican establishment didn’t support Ronald Reagan and tried its best to thwart his 1980 run for the White House.
So, I am assuming that Reagan cleared out the establishment types after his inauguration in 1981…and I further assume these people did not call the shots while Reagan was in office.
I’m guessing the Cocktail Party GOP establishment as we know it today was birthed by the first President Bush, sometime in late 1988 or in 1989.
This makes sense to me, because Cocktail Party GOP establishment stupidity can, in retrospect, be faulted for Bush’s loss in 1992…and then the disaster that was Bob Dole’s “it’s his turn” presidential campaign. The Cocktail Party almost lost the 2000 election against Al Gore…and Cocktail Party decisions were directly to blame for Republican losses in 2006 that turned power back to the Left.
The “it’s his turn” mentality favored by the Cocktail Party GOP establishment resulted in McCain 2008 — a campaign that just gave up on itself in September of that year, while simultaneously including Cocktail Party attacks on Governor Sarah Palin while she was McCain’s running mate.
The Cocktail Party GOP establishment has aggressively assailed Tea Party Americans as much as the Left has attacked us. The Tea Party and what it really represents is an existential threat to both the Left and the Cocktail Party GOP establishment.
I’d love your help today thinking about who exactly the Cocktail Party leaders are, and where they congealed their power. The Cocktail Party is aggressively pushing the nomination of Mittens Romneycare as the lastest “it’s his turn” candidate. I believe Romneycare is the only Republican who will lose to Barack Obama in the general election because the Left’s plan is to run Romneycare as the GOP nominee while encouraging a third party candidate like Jon Huntsman to split Republican votes enough so that Obama squeaks through to re-election.
That third party stunt will only work with Romneycare, since fewer Republican voters want Mittens as the nominee than supported McCain in 2008. If the Left funds a third party candidate like Huntsman, people who won’t vote for Romneycare will have somewhere to register a protest vote.
The Left would never get away with funding Huntsman if Herman Cain was the GOP nominee, however. It would look like flat-out racism to have Huntsman challenge both Obama and Cain — two black candidates running for president. This gambit only works with Romneycare (who, incidentally, as a candidate allows the Left to take Obamacare off the table in the next election, since Mittens won’t attack Obama on something based squarely on Mittens’ own actions as Massachusetts Governor).
When do you think the Cocktail Party GOP establishment congealed itself as we know it today?
Who was responsible for this?
Who are the real driving forces within this permanent political class?
HillBuzz Open Thread: Sunday October 30th, 2011
[ Note: The clip above is from the old TV show "What's My Line?", in a segment where a panel of celebrities has to identify someone they don't know by asking that person questions. This was filmed before the majority of Americans had ever heard of Kentucky Fried Chicken or its founder, Colonel Sanders. None of these panelists had any idea who he was, which is amusing today because his image is so recognizable in the fast food world. A modern example of this kind of thing would be if you time-traveled to the year 2004 or so and had a panel asking Mark Zuckerburg questions about Facebook or went further back and had a bunch of celebrities asking Steve Jobs questions about computers, long before anyone in the general public had heard of either of these two people or were thinking about their companies. ]
Today in History:
2005 – The rebuilt Dresden Frauenkirche (destroyed in the firebombing of Dresden during World War II) is reconsecrated after a thirteen-year rebuilding project. How long will it take for America to rebuild places like Detroit, which are in worse shape today than just about any city around the world that’s been through an actual war. Comparing Detroit to Hiroshima in terms of now vs. then photographs is especially vexing, since if someone had to guess which city had an atom bomb dropped on it at some time in the past, I bet they’d think it was Detroit.
1995 – Quebec sovereignists narrowly lose a referendum for a mandate to negotiate independence from Canada (vote is 50.6% to 49.4% I have always thought that if Quebec ever did go independent of Canada, that would last for about five years before Quebec (and eventually the eastern Canadian provinces) became part of the US. I still think this might happen in the future.
1991 – The Madrid Conference for Middle East peace talks opens. So long as there is Islam, there will never be peace in the Middle East because Islam itself is designed to thrive on chaos and bloodshed.
1985 – Space Shuttle Challenger lifts off for mission STS-61-A, its final successful mission. If you remember news coverage of the Challenger disaster, you might remember a woman giving color commentary of the astronauts as they boarded a van to take them to the launch pad. That woman gave little bios on each of them as they appeared out of the building and got into the van…years later, that woman is still broadcasting…as Andrea Shea King on Patriot Radio.
1974 – The Rumble in the Jungle boxing match between Muhammad Ali and George Foreman takes place in Kinshasa, Zaire. It’s horrible what Parkinsons did to Muhammad Ali…and sad that George Foreman is now better known for his line of grilling products and that fact that he named all of his children (even the female ones) “George” than he is remembered for his athletic abilities.
What’s on your minds today?
What are people talking about in your part of the country?
What do you think the big story will be this week?
Herman Cain needs our help.
The Cocktail Party has already picked our nominee so all of us who do not want Romney as our 2012 nominee should just pack up and go home. It’s over. Romney is it.
Here are the results of the National Journals Political Insiders Poll…
| Rank the top five candidates, 1 through 5, in terms of who you think is most likely to capture the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. | |
|
Republicans
(105 votes) |
|
| CANDIDATE | INSIDERS INDEX SCORE* |
| Mitt Romney | 98 |
| Rick Perry | 72 |
| Herman Cain | 47 |
| Newt Gingrich | 31 |
| Rick Santorum | 13 |
| Jon Huntsman | 11 |
| Michele Bachmann | 7 |
| Ron Paul | 5 |
|
*Methodology: In tallying the rankings, a first-place vote was worth 5 points, a second-place vote was worth 4 points, and so on. The Insiders Index reflects the percentage of points that each contender received out of the maximum possible. For example, Mitt Romney scored an Index rating of 98, meaning he received 98 percent of the possible 525 points, the number he would have if all 105 participants in the poll this week had ranked him first. |
|
The ruling class of the GOP don’t want Herman Cain. They’ve spent too much time and money grooming Mittens to let an outsider like Mr. Cain take the nomination. They seem to be ignoring one little fact…
We the people decide who will be our nominee.
It’s our votes that count…it doesn’t matter what Karl Rove or Charles Krauthammer or Chris Christie or any of the other good little GOP puppets want.
Herman Cain needs our help. NOW. He needs money and he needs volunteers. He needs people on the ground in Iowa and New Hampshire but I ‘m sure his campaign could use help everywhere.
Let’s help Herman Cain win the GOP nomination (and 2012 presidency).
Please go to his campaign website and donate….either your time or money or both.
The American people should decide who’s best for our country.
Ron Paul Wins 2 More GOP Straw Polls In Iowa
Ron Paul, via Slate.com
This weekend, Ron Paul won both National Federation of Republican Assemblies Presidential Straw Poll vote tallies in Iowa, one among Iowa voters only with 82% of the vote, and one tally among non-Iowa voters with 26%. These two tallies were the 13th and 14th straw poll wins for Ron Paul this election season, giving him the straw poll vote lead among all GOP candidates.
NFRA delegates went on to give Rick Santorum the organization’s endorsement, despite the fact that Santorum received only 1% of the vote of Iowa voters who participated in the straw poll. Delegates included Cocktail Party GOP insiders such as former Ohio secretary of state and treasurer Ken Blackwell.
H/T Wikipedia.org
There were two tallies: one of Iowa voters only, and one of non-Iowans who voted in the poll. Paul won both tallies. Here are the results:
In the Iowa voters result:
- Ron Paul: 82%
- Herman Cain: 14.7%
- Rick Santorum: 1%
- Newt Gingrich: 0.9%
- Michele Bachmann: 0.5%
- Rick Perry: 0.5%
- Gary Johnson: 0.2%
- Jon Huntsman: 0%
- Mitt Romney: 0%
It would appear that GOP voters in the Hawkeye State did not receive the Democrat-controlled media’s memo. Among Iowa voters, Democrat-media-annointed “frontrunners” Rich “I Heart Illegals” Perry and Mittens Romneycare got 0.5% of the vote and 0% of the vote, respectively.
In the non-Iowa voter tally:
- Ron Paul: 26%
- Herman Cain: 25%
- Rick Perry: 16%
- Rick Santorum: 16%
- Newt Gingrich: 11%
- Michele Bachmann: 6%
- Mitt Romney: 1%
- Jon Huntsman: 0%
- Gary Johnson: 0%
Ron Paul’s straw poll wins have included the influential Conservative Political Action Committee poll and the Values Voters poll, and he has finished in the top four in eight other straw polls. He lost the Iowa Straw Poll to Iowa native Michelle Bachmann by less than 1% of the vote, ending in a virtual tie.
