ABC New Hampshire GOP Debate

So, this past saturday, ABC hosted the most recent Republican Presidential debate for the 2012 election! Oh, the excitement!

Anywho, in my opinion,  it was one of the better debates recently. The past few (especially the one before the Iowa Caucus) have been dreadfully boring. Fortunately this one provided a little bit more entertainment value.

I'm just going to touch on some of the main points/highlights/noteworthy events of the night for those of you who have lives and aren't political junkies life myself.

Here goes!

1. Governor Rick Perry of Texas stated he would, in fact, send troops back into Iraq and pick up on the war where Obama left off. Oh Rick...when will he learn...

2. They cut Ron Paul's mic -- of course. Just as Representative Ron Paul (R-TX) was laying into Rick Santorum for being a "big government conservative" and a "revolving door lobbyist", his mic was cut off. He suddenly stopped mid-sentence and muttered dishearteningly (barely audibly), "There it goes again..." (to which Santorum replied arrogantly, "It's because you're not telling the truth, Ron."). In the last debate, CNN blacked out the Television right as Ron walked onto the stage and the crowd roared in applause. It really is rather shocking and embarrassing the lengths to which our media will go to diminish Ron Paul as a candidate and his libertarian ideals. As someone on reddit put it, "Fuck this gay earth and the media that bashes the one honest politician on stage." Too true.

3. Newt had the balls to pick on Romney regarding his tenure at Bain Capital, and his profiting from disassembling companies and laying off workers. Apparently, the NY Times did an article about how Romney destroyed jobs rather than created them, and Newt quickly made a point of that. Romney weakly replied something along the lines of "Well, of course the NY Times would say that about me...", implying a liberal bias over actual facts about Romney's business past.

4. Jon Huntsman did a particularly excellent job in connecting with the youthful voting demographic. He was concise and charismatic, and tended to forgo jabbing and sparring with his opponents to promote his positions and leadership credentials instead. Huntsman '16 -- I'm calling it right now. Mark my words.

5. At the end of the debate, the moderators asked each candidate, "If you weren't here running for president, what would you be doing on this saturday night?". Ginrich's response was the worst, saying "I'd be watching the college championship basketball game". Several seconds of awkward silence ensued until Santorum kindly said, "Football game, Newt. Football".

Ouch. That's embarrassing, Newt.

Rick Santorum

Welp - now that the Iowa Caucuses have blown over, let's talk Rick Santorum!

Just in case you didn't get the memo, he lost to Romney by a mere 8 votes. Yes, eight! Of course, he was definitely the most committed candidate when it came to Iowa, having visited and spoken at each of the 100+ counties in the state. But who honestly, truly thinks he can put up a real fight against Mitt Romney? I wonder whether or not he believes that he really can...

Michele's out, Rick's on the fringe, and Cain is looooong gone. But what gives? Why do these candidates come and go without so much as a real fight? Here's what I think:

Mitt's a "Massachusetts moderate" - as Gingrich put it. And although he will, beyond a reasonable doubt, become the GOP nominee, other candidates have the ability to rouse and influence voters when it comes to particular issues. What I'm saying is this: the longer Rick Santorum stays in the race and fights for "conservative, family values", and the longer he maintains a sizable support base to back his message, the further he can push his family-values/anti-gay agenda. If he ends up a close second to Romney in the end, having fought tooth-and-nail on issues including marriage, abortion, and gay rights, he will inevitably force Romney to adopt (to some degree) Rick's conservative positions in order to win his supporters over.

If Romney really wants Santorum's supporters to support him on election day, he'll have to preach anti-gay, pro-marriage sentiments to the masses. If Mitt wants Perry's supports, he'll have to dumb things down and preach common sense in his speech-giving. If he wants control of Bachmann's base, he'll have to go out swinging hard against Obamacare. And if he wants Gingrich's fan base, then he'll have to -- er, wait...what exactly does Newt stand for, anyway?

Ron Who?

If you haven't yet seen this clip from the Daily Show with Jon Stewart, then take a look.

In essence, after Ron Paul's second place finish at the Iowa Straw Poll just a few weeks back, the media shuns him. Coming in less than 200 votes behind winner Michele Bachman, Ron Paul received hardly any credit from the major media outlets nationwide. Even though Jon Stewart and Ron Paul reside on opposite ends of the political spectrum, Stewart still criticizes the media for not fairly educating the public and illuminating Ron Paul as a potential 2012 GOP contender for the nomination.

As the ABC anchor says, "We are in the business of making or breaking elections". And with that sort of responsibility, the media has to remain objective and unbiased, lest they seek to push their own agendas. Amirite??

Hmm. Ron Paul, a self-proclaimed libertarian and defender of individual rights is not your typical establishment Republican -- or politician, for that matter. He has voted against the Middle-Eastern wars since the very beginning. He wants to end the war on drugs, bring our troops home, and slowly phase out the Federal Reserve system. I can understand why liberal news outlets like CNN and MSNBC would benefit from censoring and obscuring Ron Paul: they are attempting to prevent democratic voters from switching their support to Paul. But why does Fox News ignore him? He's a republican. He's been in Congress for over a decade. He participates in all major televised debates. So what gives?

Is he too extremist for the Republican party to adopt  him? If you answered yes, then take a look at Michele Bachmann or Rick Perry. Still think Paul is the extremist one?

Unelectable, you say? With 4,000 votes and a stunning second-place finish, that is a claim without substance. If he is unelectable, then the media has nothing to lose. Who in their right mind thinks Herman Cain is going to win the nomination? But he still gets media attention.


What do YOU think? Why is the media shunning Ron Paul? What are their motives?

2012 Election Fundraising Totals

The numbers are in for the second quarter fundraising totals of 2012 prospective Presidential candidates. Barack Obama, the inevitable democratic nominee, leads the pack with a whopping $46 million haul. In second, GOP front-runner and Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney trails at about a third of Obama's haul: $18 million in donations. In third and fourth, respectively, Ron Paul and Michele Bachmann possess about $5 million each. 

The Republican base's division among several possible nominees has given incumbent President Barack Obama a healthy lead in the fund-raising competition thus far. Sooner or later, a GOP nominee will officially be named and then -- and only then -- the dollarocracy race will be in full swing.

Until then, who do YOU think will get the Republican Party's nomination for president?