Good morning on the power-broker front for Mittens. Scores the endorsement of South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, has the governor of Iowa (who hasn't endorsed) come out and question Newt's discipline.

Yes, just in Texas, but the only candidate that has won a national election is Obama. Not much of a chance to win a national election in this country.

According to the AP, Pro-Mittens third party groups are outgunning Pro-Newt third party groups by a ratio of 8 to 1.

Des Moines Register endorses Mittens.

PPP has Newt falling into 3rd in Iowa, behind Paul and Mittens.

 

Newt is also scrambling to get himself on the ballot in Virginia, facing a 3 day deadine for a ton of signatures.

I think I'm seeing about 3 Rick Perry commercials per television show.

I am glad to see my money is being spent. And by my money, I mean the $5 i sent to see how much stuff I get from each campaign.

The only 2 candidates to qualify for the GOP Primary ballot in the state of Virginia are Ron Paul and Mittens. None of the others submitted the required number of signatures. If this nomination fight lasts a while, that will be, um, bad, for anyone other than those 2.

I would like to see states come up with a national plan for Presidential races instead of the state by state method. I understand it will cause some small states to receive even less attention from campaigns, but this always seems too random.

I would like to see states come up with a national plan for Presidential races instead of the state by state method. I understand it will cause some small states to receive even less attention from campaigns, but this always seems too random.

 

We don't actually have a national election. We have 50 state elections.

Right, and if those 50 states could agree on the same requirements, I believe it would be a nice step forward. We know who the main candidates are for the two major parties well in advance. Wouldn't it be nice if the top six or eight are on every ballot? What would it hurt? It seems like it hurts that, for example, in Virginia they will not have the same choices as someone in the next state over.

Right, and if those 50 states could agree on the same requirements, I believe it would be a nice step forward. We know who the main candidates are for the two major parties well in advance. Wouldn't it be nice if the top six or eight are on every ballot? What would it hurt? It seems like it hurts that, for example, in Virginia they will not have the same choices as someone in the next state over.

I think you could also make the same argument in reverse. That the people in Virginia may be better served by Presidential candidates who actually take the time and effort to reach out to 10,000 registered voters in a state of several million. In a state wide election in a state that size, .10000 signatures requires mostly a campaign presence and some organization. If you can't cobble together a petition signing campaign over several months, why should you deserve the ballot access you seek?

I agree for the parties knowing which candidates have a campaign presence is a good thing, I don't believe it is as valuable to the voters. In a prequel to a national election, isn't it valuable to know how every candidate performs in every state? In the general election everyone will have the same choice, shouldn't that also hold true in the primary?

Just another thought, how do the voters in a state where the candidate is left off the ballot benefit? Their state gets ignored.

I think you could also make the same argument in reverse. That the people in Virginia may be better served by Presidential candidates who actually take the time and effort to reach out to 10,000 registered voters in a state of several million. In a state wide election in a state that size, .10000 signatures requires mostly a campaign presence and some organization. If you can't cobble together a petition signing campaign over several months, why should you deserve the ballot access you seek?

 

That almost looks like a states rights argument.

Not fully confirmed yet, but we might well be seeing a Santorum surge in Iowa (no, someone else used the phrase first.) Rasmussen's latest poll has him pushing up to 10%, up from 6% 2 weeks ago during the Newtlet. And national polling seems to have him doing slightly better than that.

SS I am certainly conflicted here, but shouldn't voters in every state have the option to vote for any of that party's candidates? Why should one state be given the choice of nine candidates and another state only two? I see Rex's point that a candidate should show some organization in a state, but if someone can win a stae without much organization,doesn't that say a lot about that candidate?

SS I am certainly conflicted here, but shouldn't voters in every state have the option to vote for any of that party's candidates? Why should one state be given the choice of nine candidates and another state only two? I see Rex's point that a candidate should show some organization in a state, but if someone can win a stae without much organization,doesn't that say a lot about that candidate?

the point is that it's the states decision how they want to make the rules, and all y'all federalists should be happy that it works that way!

 

listen, if Newt and Perry's organizations were SO BADLY run that they didn't realize they needed more signatures to get on the ballot that's just too bad for them. The other candidates knew. This is a safeguard against badly run campaigns - which is the hallmark of a candidate that doesn't deserve to be in office.

the point is that it's the states decision how they want to make the rules, and all y'all federalists should be happy that it works that way!

 

listen, if Newt and Perry's organizations were SO BADLY run that they didn't realize they needed more signatures to get on the ballot that's just too bad for them. The other candidates knew. This is a safeguard against badly run campaigns - which is the hallmark of a candidate that doesn't deserve to be in office.

 

Unless elected officials forge signatures to get them on the ballot in a state anyway...

Unless elected officials forge signatures to get them on the ballot in a state anyway...

obviously most of the GOP campaigns weren't even organized enough to do THAT. That's saying something.

Perry campaign files suit for ballot access in Virginia. Perry Campaign's legal argument centers on the fact that Virginia has banned paid signature gatherers from working in Virginia unless the signature-gatherer is also eligible to vote in Virginia.

obviously most of the GOP campaigns weren't even organized enough to do THAT. That's saying something.

 

I don't know, I'd rather my party be disorganized versus committing criminal activities, but that is just me apparently.

Nearly 1/2 of the campaign spending currently happening in Iowa is being done by super-PAC's. ~$5 million worth in December alone.

Nearly 1/2 of the campaign spending currently happening in Iowa is being done by super-PAC's. ~$5 million worth in December alone.

Iowa is so NOT worthy of that money. Time for a different state, or better yet, several states, to be first.

Iowa is so NOT worthy of that money. Time for a different state, or better yet, several states, to be first.

Don't worry, in a week they'll justify all this faith. By voting for Ron Paul, hopefully.