from a political perspective, I dont have a problem voting for a Mormon like Mitt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

. Santorum (sp?) is rising as well. .

---

My prediction at some point, perhaps a while ago now....?...Well at some point in this topic i predicted that the "Anyone but Mitt" wing of the conservative movement of the Republican Party would sooner or later land and remain in Rick Santorum's camp.

I think it was a few months ago I took a look at all the people in the race, and except for Rick Santorum I saw nothing but an embar***msnt.

I never liked this team, i never felt it was the best team to go up against Obama...and it seemed to me to be a long list of hyped-up names that were too weird or crazy, or silly to take serious.

I felt at the time that Christians like myself would end up in Rick's camp not because we like him, but rather we will end up supporting Rick because Mitt is liberal, Newt is crazy, and Ron Paul is more crazy still.

Rick is nothing more then just the last Conservative standing that does not seem to have any type of "Republican self-destruct" smell to him.

I think Iowa is on Jan 3rd?

and NH the next week

and SC soon after with Florida down the road from there.

I have made my guess already as to how things may go over the next 2 weeks.

It will be interesting to see how closely my predictions about how Iowa and NH results will change this race....

I expect by this hour in 2- 3 weeks the list of names running for President will be a lot shorter....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad
Michele Bachmann
Really is not even in the race anymore.
Might have a future position in the cabinet of a future Republican president...or might end up working at a bait shop on a lake in Minnesota.......hard to say right now whats more likely.



Herman Cain
The only fun guy in this election.
I only wish he had run for a mayor or govenor before this jump.
I dont know if he is actually any good at this type of political office holding.
I would still vote for him, if he ends up leading the ticket...
But i would do so with my fingers crossed


Newt Gingrich
The house guest that never caught the hint that it was time to leave.

Jon Huntsman
Who?

Ron Paul
smart, right most of the time, with just enough crazy to him to suggest he would just as likely **** up the world as be the best president ever.


Rick Perry
Make a wish children, its a falling star.



Mitt Romney
great hair,
Has no core views.
Seems to want to ride shotgun to whatever popular movement is going at the time....
I would vote for him over Obama...but not with a smile on my face.


Rick Santorum
who?

---

Do you remember this post? I posted it because I wanted to give you an idea of the changes in the christian right. I could find another of your posts touting Newt I am sure just a while later. It appears you ebb and flow along with "the christian right." ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

My prediction at some point, perhaps a while ago now....?...Well at some point in this topic i predicted that the "Anyone but Mitt" wing of the conservative movement of the Republican Party would sooner or later land and remain in Rick Santorum's camp.

I think it was a few months ago I took a look at all the people in the race, and except for Rick Santorum I saw nothing but an embar***msnt.

I never liked this team, i never felt it was the best team to go up against Obama...and it seemed to me to be a long list of hyped-up names that were too weird or crazy, or silly to take serious.

I felt at the time that Christians like myself would end up in Rick's camp not because we like him, but rather we will end up supporting Rick because Mitt is liberal, Newt is crazy, and Ron Paul is more crazy still.

Rick is nothing more then just the last Conservative standing that does not seem to have any type of "Republican self-destruct" smell to him.

---

And from the headlines:

Quote:

---

Iowa's evangelicals moving to Santorum

---

Yup---the last move before the voting starts. It would be so much more believable that Mitt was just too liberal for the "christian right" if they weren't so busy jumping from one candidate to another---those who have more garbage and history and even left leanings that Mitt. At this point, Mitt's moderation seems nothing more than an excuse. *sigh*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Do you remember this post? I posted it because I wanted to give you an idea of the changes in the christian right. I could find another of your posts touting Newt I am sure just a while later. It appears you ebb and flow along with "the christian right." ;)

---

Actually in my post you see what i have been talking about in this topic from the start...

My point is that this is just not the best team to put on the field against Obama.

NONE of the names on the list are any where close to a top of the line name that i would think might make a great president!


My feelings for Newt have not changed at all.
from the start I felt that while he is more able to speak from a true conservative mindset that mitt will ever be..I always felt that newt was just one more remark from dropping out of the race.

I liked Cain because he was the only fun person in this whole list....Cain kept the election interesting.

I think Perry was a good man to consider, but the debates showed him to be really not the best guy to run in a close election...Perry seemed to fall asleep in the bright lights.

Rom Paul has many great ideas...Ron paul has many good things to remind this country about...and yet, with all his good ideas he has every once in a whole a pure crazy idea that shows me that he would destroy this country if given a chance.

The chick in the race showed in the debates that she just was not equal to the task.....she might make a great person in congress, but as president?....I don't think so.

Mitt I think is a joke.
I predicted him to get the lead spot on the ticket, but as for beating Obama?.....I dont see it...he lacks any real core views on anything.

Mitt just goes with the mob.....

Rick is just the last man standing that Conservatives could support....

This means that in the real race that actually going on (For Mitt's VP spot on the ticket) Rick might end up at the top of the pile right when he needs to be there...

Rick needs to get the vast majority of the Christian conservative vote in the next 3 -4 weeks, and it may guarantee him the VP spot on Mitt's ticket.

SC will be very important for learning who Mitt should pick for his VP

So, from all this I see None of the names have shown me that have anything even close to being what i would seek out in a President.
Theyt are just the guys Im forced to pick from.....

I will never support Mitt in the primary....
I could support any of the 4 names on the list that are stronger in the conservative corner than Mitt.

But because I live in ND the question of who I support over Mitt is moot.

By the time ND is asked it's views this will be all over.


On a side note....why do you seem to ridicule the interest a Chjristian like myself has in looking at each name on the list and allowing them their time to show what they have to show?

I think that having a close look at each person means that none of the names on this team can claim that they never had a chance....

They all have had their time in the spotlight
They all have had their moment to shine.
I think that is actually a sign of a open and fair primary.....

Remember, in totalitarian governments, you dont get to ever have the chance to look at different names and hear their views.
Freedom, and free elections mean that there should be a way for people that were overlooked at the start of an election to rise to the top later based on hard work ....and luck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

At this point, Mitt's moderation seems nothing more than an excuse. *sigh*

---

Im a normal conservative Christian.....so I can speak in a small manner as a representive of this rather large section of the republican party.

Im seeking a person to vote for that is someone that i can trust?

name me someone the list of names that has shown a lifetime support for the very same issues I think are important?

Take Abortion for our 1st example.

Give me the name on our list of the person who has a lifetime record of fighting abnortion?
who has marched year after year for Life?

Who speaks every year to the prolife cause?

who is always known as the pro-life canidate?


Next issue : Gay marriage

Give me the name of the person that has voted to stop gay marriage, and has worked hard to stop gay marriage?


You can get back to me with that name.....
The fact is that there are names on our list that do have just what im looking for, and I would be able to support them strongly if they lead the ticket.

But because of other side issues, they all seem to carry with them some extra stuff that makes them not really the best team i would have liked to pick from....

Mitt is not a name I would have wanted to be on our list
Newt is not as well
Ron Paul is.....well...he is like that crazy uncle that is always saying crazy things, but is married to a nice girl so we have to invite him to every party we hold...

Thats brings us to the others on the lower end of the list.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

On a side note....why do you seem to ridicule the interest a Chjristian like myself has in looking at each name on the list and allowing them their time to show what they have to show?

I think that having a close look at each person means that none of the names on this team can claim that they never had a chance....

They all have had their time in the spotlight
They all have had their moment to shine.
I think that is actually a sign of a open and fair primary.....

Remember, in totalitarian governments, you dont get to ever have the chance to look at different names and hear their views.
Freedom, and free elections mean that there should be a way for people that were overlooked at the start of an election to rise to the top later based on hard work ....and luck.

---

I don't mind people looking and evaluating, but this is clearly not what is going on. This looks more like hysteria as the evangelical right jumps from one to another---and then to listen to the talk shows---the way I listen, it is one adulterer supporting the next adulterer. (Not to say that Santorum is---but the way they backed Cain and Gingrich, I wanted, as the "chick" on this forum, to throw up. Please, a bunch of men making excuses for each other...thank you, but no thank you.)

So, no, this did not look like a thoughtful, well educated decision process, but a bunch of people trying to make excuses for their selection until even they knew they looked pathetic and then a jump to the next one that is "not Mormon."

If our economy goes down the tubes, what will it matter our stand on abortion or gay marriage? Read up on what is going on. I keep praying that voters who support conservative values will look at the bigger picture and stop micro-focusing on what they think this "Mormon" represents rather than what he has accomplished in terms of economic stability. I have no doubt he will protect marriage and the life of a child. I just think that he will fight where the fight needs to be had.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

If our economy goes down the tubes...,

---

I actually see a lot of good news in my local economy.

The parking lots were full this Christmas,,,and a lot of this spending came not with credit cards, but rather came from savings..

This means that people are not ****ing money they dont have..

and that points to a pick up in the economy this spring.

I believe we may even be talking about the "Obama upturn" by then...with full credit going to Obama.

I believe that will be the message the media will be pushing so as to take the economy off the table.

So if the economy is off the table...what else has Mitt got?

Christians value social issues above much else.

Abortion....Gay marriage....the freedom to raise our kids and educate them as we think best....etc,

I dont see Mitt making any outreach to christian conservatives at all before the election.

I cant think of even one place he has tried so far to reach out to a voter like myself....and at this rate i would view it as 'fake" if suddenly he was talking all "Christian " on me...

Thus while I do expect that Mitt will win the primary, but without drawing the Christian Conservative he needs to beat Obama...I dont see Mitt moving into the White House..

I actually dont see any reason to vote for Mitt by Christians, do you?

It's not enough to say, "He is better than the other guy"

Thats not a good enough reason to go stand in line to vote....

A person has to inspire...

Mitt has to have a reason for me to support him...
and he dont...
and he dont plan to give me any.

Remember, he is not owed the vote of the Christian, he has to deserve that vote....

So far, there are 3 or 4 other names in this election that do legitimately deserve the vote and support of Bible-believeing Christians.

I believe Mitt has written-off the support of Conservatives like myself.
I dont see his making any effort to get us to vote for him....

Mitt perhaps thinks he can replace the Christian voter with the "undecided voter"
If this is true , then he is doomed.

To fail to seek out the largest and most important group of conservatives in the Party will only result of pushing such voters into Obama's corner.

[QUOTE]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

I actually see a lot of good news in my local economy.

The parking lots were full this Christmas,,,and a lot of this spending came not with credit cards, but rather came from savings..

This means that people are not ****ing money they dont have..

and that points to a pick up in the economy this spring.

I believe we may even be talking about the "Obama upturn" by then...with full credit going to Obama.

I believe that will be the message the media will be pushing so as to take the economy off the table.

So if the economy is off the table...what else has Mitt got?

---

Things may go well---but Europe poses a big problem that they have yet to solve. So does California and other states. Ben Bernanke is pumping money at a rapid rate---we shall see if this works. WHat is predicted right now is that housing prices will continue to drop next year. Greece is still a problem. Have we dumped enough money to solve the problem? We shall see. In the mean time---our government has promised more than it has the ability to pay. At some point, we need to pay the piper. Will that be under a president who doesn't know how to restore economic stability, or one that does?

Now as i have said before, I dont know the future, so I cant predict who will win in Iowa and NH , SC, etc in the next 2-3 weeks.

But I can guess what it might well mean if this of that person comes in at this or that ranking coming out of Iowa and NH.

In Mitt's case a win in Iowa would doom the final 4 names on the list right away.

I would expect that one or two names would drop out before the next week's vote in NH....

if Mitt were to win in Iowa it would also push one name above all the others as the lone Conservative voice to stand against Mitt going into SC and Florida.
So a Mitt win early on in this primary will allow whomever is in 2nd or 3rd to turn to all the lower guys and ask them to drop out and swing all their support to a "stop Mitt" movement with only one person at it's lead.
But the truth be told..a Mitt win is a near-guarantee of his final victory in this primary.

a 2nd place finish in Iowa would not be any real harm for Mitt at all.2nd place in Iowa is more or less meaningless as far as who wins big the next week.
So a 2nd place finish is "good enough" considering how little Mitt was actually in Iowa for most of this last year.

If Mitt came in 2nd in Iowa, it would keep a lot of names in the race, and would make NH fun to watch....But once again, it would mean that for a whole long week the media would have someone else in the lead, and that person is going to be working the phone to get as many as he can to drop out before people vote again in NH and SC. Florida.

What if Mitt comes in 3rd or 4th in iowa?
I dont see this as much of a chance given the most recent poll numbers, but "if" this were to happen?....

That would be some serious trouble for Mitt.

Mitt would have a huge problem to overcome, and he would need to win big in NH the next week.
If Mitt comes in 3rd in Iowa we might have a chance to watch anyone in the race pull this out...even the lower 4 names on the list could rise up and take it all in Florida.

So in other words.....
Mitt can lose Iowa.
But Mitt has to win big in NH.....or this game might go into extra innings.

SC. is the other big State that will show us how Mitt is doing with conservatives like myself.
If Mitt shows some good numbers in SC it will prove that he is being supported by Christians like myself.

on the other hand...no matter how big Mitt might win in Iowa and NH, if he gets to Sc and runs into trouble, then he really will be forced to pick a strong Born-Again Christian like myself to be his VP....

He needs a person as his VP who is not a flip-flopper on abortion and other issues important to people of te Christian faith...He needs a person who can walk in the door of a real Christian church and not hear "cult, cult, cult"

he needs the VP to be able to speak on matters of faith without just reminding Christians that Mormons spend eternity burning in hell's fire.

Right now the race is for who will be on the VP ticket....
There are 3 or 4 good names that Mitt can pick from, and he can go off that list and pick someone who is a more well known supporter of Christian issues...

But I think he will try to pick a name from one of the 4 good Christian conservatives in this race.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Right now the race is for who will be on the VP ticket....
There are 3 or 4 good names that Mitt can pick from, and he can go off that list and pick someone who is a more well known supporter of Christian issues...

But I think he will try to pick a name from one of the 4 good Christian conservatives in this race.

---

What about someone not on this list---like Chris Christie?

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/iowas-evang...234727190.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

My guess right now would be that if Newt falls in the next month that all the people who support him would suddenly switch to Rick Santorum.

---

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/iowas-evang...234727190.html

My quote above was posted 12-15-2011, but Im actually just saying that here that i have been saying to my friends on facebook for a few months now.

i cant predict the future, But I can look at the names in this race from a conservative point of view and see some mighty slim pickings......
Rick is not the best guy I would want to go up against Obama....
But Rick is about the last conservative standing at a moment when it pays to be ......

Rick has to really try to push hard over the next few days....he needs to come in 3rd or 4th to be still in this hunt by Florida.

I give him a very low % of being still around by Florida.....Mitt would have to really fall on his face for Rick to be still here by Florida....
But remember, Rick is in this now to place high enough to claim he would make the best VP pick....
So Rick does not have to beat Mitt at all.....
Rick just has to beat the lowest names in iowa and NH....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Right now the race is for who will be on the VP ticket....
.

---

http://decoded.nationaljournal.com/2...ing-romney.php

This is all about who is left standing and can be seen as a person the conservatives will support.

Once there is only one name left in the race with conservative views, then that is the moment we likely know who Mitt will pick as his VP

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

What about someone not on this list---like Chris Christie?

---

The big guy made it very clear that he is not interested in the ***.

And , so, thats-that...

He made some very clear statements that he was not really interested in being president, , and a VP has to be ready to do that.

I guess there is always the chance that he might yet try to get himself into this race for VP or President....But I dont see any way that could happen except for if Mitt drops out.

I dont see any real "lets pick someone else" movement if Mitt wins big in Iowa and NH in the next few weeks.

Right now there is only one little thing that is in the back of my mind that "might" spell Mitt's doom.
Well actually 2 little things.

The first is if anyone is sitting on a recording of Mitt as a Mormom missionary pushing his false religion.
The fact is, that Mitt has been able to keep his Mormon church out of this election up until now.
But if down the road it turns out that there is some type of recording of him preaching?....then his run is doomed as that would cause about every person in the country to connect Mitt to the Mormons, and that would spell the end of his run this time around.

Such a recording would receive constant play in the media....over and over it would turn up on YouTube and on the nightly news.
Every poll would turn on questions about it.
Every Christian preacher would have to come out with a statement about it...
The recording would take over the news....
Mitt would likely drop out at that point so that the Party would have a better chance in the election.

The 2nd thing that is a concern is SC.

The fact is, that when this primary turns to SC we will have the answer to the question - "Can Mitt find support within the conservatives?"


If Mitt has a good lead going into SC, and gets a win there?, it would mean that the conservative Christians had come over to his side, and he has a very good chance of even beating Obama in the general election.

On the other hand....Lets say that no matter how far in the lead Mitt is going into SC he runs smack into a wall, and ends up with a loss there?

At that point I would expect a lot of names not in this race right now to suddenly start getting phone calls from the Party leadership about getting in to save the Party.

So Iowa will tell us if Mitt has this in the bag?
NH will tell us if anyone will be left in this for later on?
SC will tell us if Mitt can draw conservatives?
Florida will tell us if Mitt can beat Obama?

a loss in Iowa is not that important to Mitt
a loss in NH meas that this will be interesting from now on
a loss in SC means Mitt can expect a lot of trouble from other names not listed right now.
a loss in Florida means Mitt will have his hands full against Obama

a win in Iowa means Mitt has this already won,
a win in NH means all the lower names will drop out
a win in SC is huge, and means he has a lot of christian backers
a win in Florida means that he has a good chance against Obama


So when it comes down to who will Mitt pick as his VP?
We shall have to see how he does over the next few weeks...

If he shows that he lacks support with the conservatives, then he will need to find a very good leading conservative to be his VP.
The more trouble he is in with conservatives, the more likely he will pick someone in the race right now like Rick to run with him.

On the other hand, if Mitt is sitting in a good position with conservatives, then he can use his VP pick to draw the middle of the road voter...
If he is in a very strong position, then he can pick any name he wants at that point.

If i had it my way....he would pick a person like Condoleezza Rice

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

I could find another of your posts touting Newt I am sure just a while later. It appears you ebb and flow along with "the christian right." ;)

---

I believe you better check that out again to see if your statement is all that correct?

.....and see how my views of Newt are about the same now as ever.

I like Newt
newt is a far better voice for the conservatives than Mitt ever will be.

Newt clearly has a set of core views that drive his words and teachings.

So i would vote for Newt over Mitt at this point in a primary.

But the trouble with Newt is the problem all conservatives know all too well...
Newt is always saying and doing things that go too far....

Newt going against Obama in a debate would be fun to see...but Newt attempting to control himself for month after month of a national race?.....thats asking too much of him.

I have always felt that Newt is just one more comment from dropping out of the race.

I cant support a guy that i am always going to be afraid will drop out tomorrow...who could?

Newt is a good guy to have on a team.
Newt turned things around back in 06.
Newt stood up to Clinton.
newt can take a lot of credit for many of the good things that congress did, and also credit for stopping many of the bad things that almost happened.

Newt only issue is that he acts a little crazy at times....his mouth has no "mute" switch.



So to sum up my views about Newt-
I like him.
I like him more than I like Mitt.
I think Newt has a real conservative core that is more real that anything I see out of Mitt.

But Newt is not a person i would really like to see lead the ticket.
The reason is that Newt tends to self-destruct right when conservatives needed him to be at his best.

So, I would vote for Newt over Mitt
But Im not sure I would vote for Newt over Obama....


This is how I feel about him.
I believe this is right in-line with all that I have ever written or said, or believed about the guy.

Now if down the road i see that Newt has turned over a new leaf?
Then I will judge him in a better light.
Im not going to say that "he is always crazy" just because I felt that way at one time...
I would give the guy a chance to improve his standing in my eyes...


I dont believe that we should say to people,,,"A while ago you said once you didnt like him, so how can you say you do now?"

That would be silly...and non-Christian to take an at***ude that once a person falls we wont allow them the chance to do better.

it's like with my friends that get divorced.
I would rather they did not get divorced.
i would rather they went back to their wife and got remarried to them again.
But be that as it may, I will still respect the new wife they have, and i will offer my friend the friendship we had with his 1st wife....

I allow the person to make a real honest change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Now if down the road i see that Newt has turned over a new leaf?
Then I will judge him in a better light.
Im not going to say that "he is always crazy" just because I felt that way at one time...
I would give the guy a chance to improve his standing in my eyes...


I dont believe that we should say to people,,,"A while ago you said once you didnt like him, so how can you say you do now?"

That would be silly...and non-Christian to take an at***ude that once a person falls we wont allow them the chance to do better.


I allow the person to make a real honest change.

---

Yes, it is clear that the "christian" will allow another "christian" to make changes for the better, but if that christian is also a Mormon, well then, he is labelled a flip-flopper for life. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Yes, it is clear that the "christian" will allow another "christian" to make changes for the better, but if that christian is also a Mormon, well then, he is labelled a flip-flopper for life. ;)

---

actually Mormons are not Christian, however they can 'act" very much like one would hope a Christian acts...

But as I said a while back...Mitt is a flip-flopper out of his political need to get votes.

Does anyone think Mitt actually has ever had a change of heart based on personal reasons?

nope.. Not even close.

We all know what he is up to...


I dare say that not one single person in this country believes any of the stories told by Mitt....LOL

So what we are left with with Mitt, is a guy who will tell one thing at one time, and then when he has a political need to, will tell another, different thing later.

This reminds me of a guy who stopped being married to one girl to hook-up with another after the 2nd girl won the Loto...LOL

I would not respect that type of marriage at all...because its not based on personal feelings, but rather in selfishness at the expense of others.

that's what i think of when I hear Mitt talking about why he is such a fip-flopper....
He changes views and supports different sides of issues when he thinks there is political advantage in doing so.

this points us to a fact that I think we all can see concerning Mitt is that he seems to not have a "core" conservativeness to himself.
That also is so very different than the lower 4 names in the race right now.
They might not have the money or origination that mitt has, but there are true believers in the conservative message.

They have hearts that have shown over the long-haul that they are made of Conservative Rock.


Mitt seems more to be a political feather ****ing in the wind....

[QUOTE]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

actually Mormons are not Christian, however they can 'act" very much like one would hope a Christian acts...

---

You may not call me a Christian---but I call myself a Christian because I follow the teachings of Jesus Christ--or as you say I "act" very much like a Christian. And to me behaving the way Christ taught defines a Christian more than a bunch of megalomaniacs trying to hold onto their own religious power by creating their own definition of 'christianity".

Quote:

---

But as I said a while back...Mitt is a flip-flopper out of his political need to get votes.

---

And to me, this is the mark of bigotry or stereotyping. Newt changed his way because he is a changed man and Mitt changes his ways because he wants the votes. See---you think you know the heart of the candidates because you think you know what it means to be "christian"--I don't see it the same way you do because I don't have bigotry against Mormons. ;)

Quote:

---

Does anyone think Mitt actually has ever had a change of heart based on personal reasons?

---

Absolutely.

Quote:

---

nope.. Not even close.

We all know what he is up to...

---

You make a judgement against Mitt that you do not make against Newt based on what you think is in their heart. See the problem?

Quote:

---

I dare say that not one single person in this country believes any of the stories told by Mitt....LOL

---

I am a single person and I believe him, but then again, I have no reason to be prejudice against him as you do.

So Finally!!!!!!

Finally we will have real answers tonight as to where things stand...

Will Mitt get the big victory that the media hype suggests?

Will Ron Paul get the victory he needs badly?

Will Newt and Rick fight it out tooth and nail?

Will tomorrow bring news that a lot of names are about to drop out of the race?

Or will tonight's results have us going into next week with a Battle Royale on our hands?


Time will tell......time will tell.....

which Rick?? ;)

Im going to let the events of tonight sit for a while....

I dont want to comment before I have had a chance to go over the numbers more....


But I think we can go over what they may mean to everyone in the next few days, as well as to see how well my views of the past month or so will compare with the results?

A "photo finish"---pretty exciting stuff for candidates!

Mitt by eight votes....wow!

ok......time to start summing up Iowa and look ahead to NH....




First everyone...I did not see a dead heat as an outcome.
I did not predict it would end up in a tie....I did not foresee that outcome at all.

But actually.....it doesn't matter in the long run.

It's just very odd.
It's an odd , interesting outcome that is unexpected.

I dont think it matters squat to Mitt.
I believe Mitt did great in Iowa, and is very much on-track to take NH and do very good in SC too.

But there are a few things that are now going to happen because of Iowa.
PHONE CALLS.......thats what is going on now.
Lots and lots of phone calls between the people left in the race and the people who now are looking for the best way out of this race.

Right now there is a lot of dealing going on.

Cabinet positions are being handed out like we are dealing Blackjack.

Im told that already Perry is pulling out of the race.
The phone calls to him all day today are going to keep him very busy cutting a deal.

It will be very interesting to see what person he ends up standing next to and giving his support to in the next few days?

The chick in the race is toast.
She lacks money and support.....and I expect her to drop out very soon too.
She also will be getting the phone calls....

Ron Paul did way better than many wanted.
Ron Paul has the money and supporters he needs to keep in this race all the way to the end.

Now as for Rick?

Rick had a good night.
Rick stood toe to toe against Mitt and did great.
If there is a winner as such in iowa, then it's clearly Rick.

But does that matter?
Not that much....
Rick showed the Party that a lot of people will vote for him.
Rick clearly now is the "Anyone but Mitt" guy.

But Rick is in danger now of running out of money and really has no org in NH to push his name in the media.

Right now, Rick has to get out there all on his own, hit all the talk shows, and keep his name in the news for the next week all due to the fre media hype that comes with winning Iowa.

Will that be enough to help him take NH?
Well, thats hard to say, its a long shot right now.
Its very hard to overcome Mitt's money with anything but lots of money.

NEWT?
Got his *** kicked.

Newt is the loser in Iowa.
Newt is now going to be shown the door and told to go home and watch the election from there.

It will be over the next 2 weeks when we will finally see on TV that Newt is standing next to someone.....and after that Newt will fade away.....sorta.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Right now Mitt has to come in a close 2nd in Iowa to clear the field of the lower 3 people in the race.
If Mitt comes in 2nd in Iowa i would expect all 3 of the other people to drop out right away.


.

---

Over the next few days we shall see how this works out....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

I dont know the future, and so I can only offer a guess, and then go back later as see how my guess worked out?

My current "guess" is that Mitt comes in a close 2nd in Iowa...
and that this leads to one or two names dropping out before the next week in NH.

.

---

We shall see now if this turns out to be true?....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

And guess what?
Should Newt fall, should he say something so bad that he drops out of the race, there will be such a swing by the the evangelical right to one of the others left in the race that it will be stunning.

My guess right now would be that if Newt falls in the next month that all the people who support him would suddenly switch to Rick Santorum.

---

This prediction turned out to be right on the money!

So far as I have went back over my posts of the time leading up to Iowa, and looking closely at my predictions....I got to say i was very close.

I have said that if Mitt won Iowa that the field would thin out very fast.
Due to the tie results in Iowa this seems a bit murky right now...But I still believe noting important has changed.

Mitt did very good in Iowa....the only person that did Great is Rick, and thats a small victory as Rick has no money to work with in NH and SC where Mitt has a huge team on the ground all ready to go.

Newt is going to be pushed off the stage in NH.....that's the thing that everyone left in the race has to try to do now.
They all know they each need the voters who support Newt if they want to win NH......so Newt has got to cut a deal and get out fast.

Mitt would LOVE for Newt to stay in the race now....Mitt will want to cut a deal with Newt that keeps Newt in the race until after SC has voted.....

we shall see.....we shall see..
\

But for the most part my predictions so far have been nice and close

How do I think the "Anyone but Mitt" forces did in Iowa?

Not too bad,



The results show that even after so much effort that Mitt got about the same percent of the vote as the last time he ran there....

The results show us that there is a huge issue with young and conservative voters that simply have not every supported Mitt in Iowa.


The interesting fact of the night was that Ron Paul got something like 70% of the youth vote.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

How do I think the "Anyone but Mitt" forces did in Iowa?

Not too bad,



The results show that even after so much effort that Mitt got about the same percent of the vote as the last time he ran there....

The results show us that there is a huge issue with young and conservative voters that simply have not every supported Mitt in Iowa.


The interesting fact of the night was that Ron Paul got something like 70% of the youth vote.

---

From CNN:

Quote:

---

At the same time, Santorum ran best among the state's influential born-again and evangelical voters. Nearly six in 10 caucus-goers identified with this segment of the electorate, and a plurality of that group went with the former senator.

---

As one poster said--evangelicals seem to think this election is about abortion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

From CNN:



As one poster said--evangelicals seem to think this election is about abortion.

---

Its weird how the conservative issues that were missing from the media's coverage of Iowa, turned out to be so very important to the voters there...

I know a lot of people that support Mitt feel that the main issue is ***s and the economy, but while there is some merit to that idea, the real truth for the conservative voter is that social issues are still at the top of the list.

abortion
prayer,
worship of God,
Gay marriage
The ability to raise children as our grandparents did..
etc.

These are the core conservative issues that drive lots of Republicans to vote for someone.

They were completely missing in Mitt's campaign but turned up all the time in the campain of the 4 conservatives in the race.

Time will tell what this means in the long run....

So far?......so far this seems to suggest that there is a huge opening for Rick to enter if he can stay in the limelight long enough to overcome Mitt's money in NH and SC.

What Rick has to do over the next few days is work the phone and get all the lower ranking guys and girls in the race to drop out and stand next to him in front of the TV cameras.

Rick needs......REALLY needs the following:

Rick needs Michele Bachmann to drop out, then give all her support to him.
Rick needs this to happen fast...very fast....

Rick needs Newt Gingrich to drop out after NH....
Im not sure it helps to get Newt's support...but Newt does have to go.

Rick needs Ron Paul to say something very crazy....

Ron Paul is just not going to go away...so this means that the best hope for Rick right now in dealing with the whole support there is for Ron Paul is for someone to dig up more dirt on Paul, or for someone to ask paul a question that leads to Ron saying something that goes too far over the line...

So what Rick needs is for Ron Paul to look crazy....and this has to happen before we get to SC.
As it stands now, Ron Paul can expect to get between 12% and 17% of the vote in SC.....
Rick needs that 12 to 17% in order to overcome the money that Mitt has behind him and the lead he may have by then from NH.

So Rick has to have Ron Paul pushed off to the side, while looking just like Ron to Ron's supporters.

Rick needs every voter that right now Ron Paul is getting.

Now....as for Mitt?
Mitt needs to appear as the winner .
Mitt should start appearing as though he was the front runner, and start making the phone calls to get as many people to stand next to him in NH as he can.

The idea Mitt needs is to mow them all down in NH....Dont let anyone in the race going into NH think that have any way to beat him or out spend him.

it's time for the Republican leaders to walk out onto the stage and put their arms around Mitt.

[QUOTE]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Its weird how the conservative issues that were missing from the media's coverage of Iowa, turned out to be so very important to the voters there...

I know a lot of people that support Mitt feel that the main issue is ***s and the economy, but while there is some merit to that idea, the real truth for the conservative voter is that social issues are still at the top of the list.

abortion
prayer,
worship of God,
Gay marriage
The ability to raise children as our grandparents did..
etc.

---

Mitt Romney will stand behind this issues--he is just not a radical about it. In interesting interview about Santorum--his wife got pregnant, her life was a stake---the doctor admitted oxytoxin and the baby was born at 22 weeks and died. I have no problem with this because I am okay with saving the life of the mother. On the other hand, if morality is the top issue and "evangelicals" see this as an abortion--I wonder how they reconcile this.

Mitt Romney is conservative on these issues but not radical. In other words he is smart enough to realize that if you open Pandorah's box, you may not like what you get. An example is the right fighting to have "christian clubs" in public schools. They won, but now their argument is what is used to allow "gay clubs" in school. The gay, lesbian, straight alliance has used these laws demanded by christians to support their own cause (and have won every time.) So, let's be smart and not radical about these issues.

Quote:

---

What Rick has to do over the next few days is work the phone and get all the lower ranking guys and girls in the race to drop out and stand next to him in front of the TV cameras.

---

Rick does not have the political machine in place to beat Obama, nor the money. I guess we will see if the evangelicals can produce another Huckabee/McCain.

Kids are off limits....always....



Unless you hold all the children of people seeking political office as "off-limits' you will soon end up with all your leaders being childless.

I read that some person asked Rick about his child...in my view that person who would bring up such a thing should be nailed to the wall by his *****....

Quote:

---

An example is the right fighting to have "christian clubs" in public schools. They won, but now their argument is what is used to allow "gay clubs" in school. The gay, lesbian, straight alliance has used these laws demanded by christians to support their own cause (and have won every time.)

---

I don't understand why this is seen as a problem. Both should be allowed..no discrimination based on sexual orientation or religion. ugh. It is exactly these social issues that keep me (an Independent) voting Democrat. I did vote for George Bush, after 9/11, only because I really thought he would be tough on terrorism, but that was a bit of an illusion, and Obama is the one who got bin Laden, in the end.

Anyway, Republicans and their "social issues" drive me a little nuts. The government is not supposed to impose specific religious values.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Libby

I don't understand why this is seen as a problem. .

---

You dont understand why a Christian like myself thinks its worth defending the unborn, defending the concept of marriage, defending things like prayer, and the duty we have as parents to raise our own children in a manner that reflects traditional values?

That reminds me of another conversation I had a while ago...

LETS REVIEW:


Within the heart of a conservative (Like myself) there is a core of faith in the Christian teachings and truths of the bible.

I did not come up with the things that I hold as important truths on my own.

My views are not things I came up with on my own.

My views are not just my own conclusions based on my own 'standards"

Rather all that true Christian conservative defends should be based on the traditional Christian teachings as presented to us in the bible.

So when there is a point of view that a conservative hold fast to, (Like the conservative's views on the Gays , Abortion , etc) and there is well known support for this view in the Christian church's Bible, THEN it's not the fault of the Christian that a non-Christian might disagree with them on such issues.


Nor is it the Christian's fault that many non-Christians get so spitting-mad at Christians when traditional values are promoted in the modern world.

What simply has happened is that the Christian's views have gotten in the middle of a struggle the non-Christian has on-going with their Lord.




An Example:
A while ago I was locked in a debate with a non-Christian over the question of ABORTION.
This other person went on and on and on with one nasty comment after another......
Mostly she was on about "Keep your hands off of my body you filthy Christians!" type stuff.....

Oh she had so many arguments all lined up to use.

It was her anger that was the most distressing.
The anger that rose up in her, and took over her ability to have a conversation on the issue.

There was just too much to see as a result of my defense of the unborn child.

But when I started to question her things started to drop into place.
I learned that this was the main issue as to why she fell away from the church and why she now completely rejected the whole Christian faith!

It was the wall she had built between herself and her Lord.

It became clear to me as she talked more in depth about her own reasons, that this wall was her attempt to justify some unfortunate decisions she had made a few times in her past concerning her own personal life.

I had just wandered into the middle of her own little private war.

Her own little private hell...

All the justifications they revealed to me that she had worked on them over the years in a vain attempt to insulated herself from the guilt that was ALWAYS there, chained to her heart.

It wasn't really me or my conservative views she was upset with....
It was that I reminded her of some very personal matters that try as she might she could not get over.


And she is going to have to deal with that sooner or later.
My advice would be to give all that to the lord.

So I totally dismiss her arguements, for they simply come forth from her screwed up relationship with her Lord.
Her views have just colored her ability to see the real duty conservative Christians have in this world to "Stand up for what is RIGHT!"...in all places and in all times...

Even in the voting booth


So while the Conservative voter has no right to impose any religious 'teachings" on the country, such teachings like there is only one God, and that Jesus was resurrected from the dead, and that Mormonism is a CULT, yet that same conservative voter can seek to push Christians values in this world with his vote.

Things like defending life.

Promoting the idea of prayer.

and, defending the traditional marriage.




Remember it was Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Kids are off limits....always....



Unless you hold all the children of people seeking political office as "off-limits' you will soon end up with all your leaders being childless.

I read that some person asked Rick about his child...in my view that person who would bring up such a thing should be nailed to the wall by his *****....

---

Wait--on one hand you want morality to be your top issue to determine which politician to vote for and on the other hand you can't see if this morality applies to their own decisions regarding their family?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Libby

I don't understand why this is seen as a problem. Both should be allowed..no discrimination based on sexual orientation or religion. ugh. It is exactly these social issues that keep me (an Independent) voting Democrat. I did vote for George Bush, after 9/11, only because I really thought he would be tough on terrorism, but that was a bit of an illusion, and Obama is the one who got bin Laden, in the end.

Anyway, Republicans and their "social issues" drive me a little nuts. The government is not supposed to impose specific religious values.

---

Libby---I don't think either club has a place in our schools. I see school as a place for academic learning and we need to leave value training (other than honesty, etc.) at home. It is not that these clubs are a problem, but I think they become a distraction as kids try to find themselves and also begin to stereo-type, etc. based on these types of clubs. This is why I also support school uniforms. School is not about discovering your individuality (accept in academics), but about learning. To me, the less distractions the better. I think if I tried to go to a mostly evangelical school and set up a "Mormon club" and start handing out pamplets (which is what these other clubs do)--you would see a backlash of upset parents, etc. The school then becomes the stomping ground for a political contest rather than an academic setting. The frontal lobe doesn't develop until at least 16---so, leave it to the colleges to let kids explore their religious beliefs, sexual beliefs, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Even in the voting booth


So while the Conservative voter has no right to impose any religious 'teachings" on the country, such teachings like there is only one God, and that Jesus was resurrected from the dead, and that Mormonism is a CULT, yet that same conservative voter can seek to push Christians values in this world with his vote.

---

Let me get this straight---after this whole discussion--you see religions teachings as "one God" "Jesus Christ was resurrected" and "Mormonism as a CULT"---as part of religious teachings?

To me that is like saying something akin to "I believe in being honest" "I believe in being kind" and "I believe every Chinese person should be considered a threat to our society." What a strange belief system you have Alan.

:confused: