I said it 2 days ago and I'll say it again: the VOTE was rigged!

And the show must go on....!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1D5Sa2Yq-2g

Yeah no kidding. It really doesn't matter except for public perception. And that perception will most likely have completely changed by the time the Iowa convention rolls around.

GOP is so good at election fraud, that they even try to beat themselves.

hey they wern't even subtle about it, it was a boldface manipulation admitted to the day before the caucus...

In reality, Mitts and Santy's totals and how the got them are in absolute question now, the only one to come out of Iowa clean was Dr Paul.

GOP is so good at election fraud, that they even try to beat themselves.

Really, Cygnus? How about all of the dead people and illegal aliens who voted for Obama in 2008? Neither party has a monopoly on honesty.

This has santorum written all over it, disgusting.

Mitt Romney, with his bedroom eyes, has my vote of confidence, and his wife

is lovely And, No, I am not into a 3-something O:) That would be wierd!

Nobody won the Iowa caucus, be serious, ten votes, 20 votes or 1000 votes it matters not, effectively it was a three way tie between Romney, Santorum, and Paul.

If you look at many of the smaller areas you will see random large vote counts, for instance "Appanoose - Union" where 32 out of a total population of 150 people voted for santorum. Its possible but it just seems odd.

See the full vote chart here:

google.com /fusiontables/DataSource?dsrcid=2475248

Also should be noted that Paul started out the night with 47% and was still leading by 1500 votes until the last 12% when all of a sudden he was down by 4,000 votes? Seems a bit fishy to me.

Really, Cygnus? How about all of the dead people and illegal aliens who voted for Obama in 2008?

I don't know about illegal aliens but McCain was very popular with dead people.

Yeah no kidding. It really doesn't matter except for public perception.

But right now public perception is EVERYTHING and the only thing that matters. If Santorum had been declared the actual winner the night of the caucuses, he could well be the new front runner instead of Romney. Gingrich had a huge lead on everyone three weeks ago until Romney started running "hit ads". And what did those do? They changed public perception. Right now EVERYTHING is ONLY about public perception and capturing momentum, so an error in reporting the results could have well given Romney MORE momentum than he deserved and Santorum less.

What really bothers me is how much the polls change from day to day. If people REALLY knew anything about the candidates and what they believe and would do, then they would not be so easily swayed by an ad or a debate. Picking a president has become as superficial as picking an American Idol, where we lose sight of the goal (picking a wise and strong leader) and instead jump on the "who had a great performance last night" bandwagon.

How cum Iowa doan have no hangin' chads? I must admit that if the vote was always non-binding on the delegates, why would ANY of the candidates spend a bean on the caucuses?

I always wondered if Bush truly won that second 4 years? Now, it makes me wonder even more. Because I have yet to meet or speak to anyone for all parties who voted for him that year.

Anyway, I believe that our voting needs to more transparent. Sure the machines are great and easy, but, can they be rigged? I voted this fall for a new Mayor... the machine said 521 votes casted... I stuck my card in and it spit it out half way... they told me the machine is testy, try again, I did... It took my ballot... but the number stayed at 521. Right away I call the guy I was voting for and told him it was strange that the number never changed. He lost... but, he had several people voting for him and before that night he had a 700 lead. Strange.

I feel every state should have the machines AND after that count each ballot hand counted with representative of all parties in attendance. I can wait. I can wait for a month if that is what it takes to make sure we have a fair and honest count.

Voting machines speak to the fact that very few reasonable and intelligent people are willing to serve as judge of elections for either side. Who is going to fairly count all these votes? From my experience, judge of elections, in general, have had to scrape the bottom of the barrel. In many cases, we have retirees, unemployed, and the difference in training is extreme. Having served as a judge and having gone through the training classes and the refresher classes, it is positively scary who is in charge of most polling places. I can see where errors and even intentional poor reporting is possible and even likely. It is reflective of the apathy of the people who will complain bitterly, but will not exert themselves to be informed, to participate by voting, to actually make it their business to research candidates' positions and and the issues at hand. Mechanized voting machines seem to only make it easier for people to skirt their civic duty, and become sheeple

The Iowa GOP caucus organizers still don't know how to count!

Santorum said he had been informed by Strawn that there were two errors in reporting, a 20-vote mistake in his favor and a 21-vote error in Romney's favor, which would give Romney a net gain of one vote on top of his 8-vote margin.

Cmon Mr. Strawn, it's not rocket science. By ordinary arithmetic, and the facts as stated above, Romney doesn't gain one vote on top of his 8-vote margin, he loses one vote bringing his victory margin down to 7.

Also, I hesitate to mention this, but it actually does matter whose votes the candidates were given in error; e.g., if the 21-vote error in Romney's favor were really cast for Santorum, instead of say Paul, Gingrich, or anybody else, then Santorum would pull ahead if these were counted properly. Of course, the opposite holds for the 20-vote error in Santorum's favor (there's also the likelihood that the erroneous votes were not all cast for the same candidate so that would have to be sorted out too).

However, I realize that trying to solve this head-scratcher would be too much to expect in only 14 days. So, why don't you just go with the count that was reported and if we all try hard enough to believe it, while clicking our heels together, we can just pretend it's correct. After all, that's how the GOP/Tea Party sells it's economic strategy to the base, isn't it?

I agree with you Royal. I believe the President will be re-elected regardless of who the GOP picks as it's standard bearer. The GOP congress has seriously damaged the brand.

National polls show that the approval rating for Congress is at an all time low and that the voters blame the GOP by a factor of three to one for the problem. They have shot themselves in both feet and are reloading.

Despite this interesting little blip on the screen it's still a statistical tie. Yes, Santorum had an amazingly fast surge in Iowa. I had discounted him completely and I'm having to re-assess that position. But I still believe Romney will be the nominee and Barack Obama will be re-elected.

I think Santorum's rapid "surge" can be interpreted as an indication of just how luke-warm the GOP is regarding Romney. The "anybody-but-Mitt" party is desperate to find someone else, ANYBODY else to be the nominee. The divisions in the GOP are becoming greater and may eventually cause a complete split. It's very interesting and hopefully someone with a lot more brain power than me is studying the evolving situtation.

The evangelical/tea party fringes of the GOP will sit on their hands on election day. They will not be able to support a "Mormon" and a "moderate" and the biggest voting block for the GOP, the Old South, will not support Romney.

2012 is not a good year to be a Republican, but watch out for 2016 when the empire strikes back. Darth Christie and the Emperor Rove have big plans for 2016.

Obama/Biden 2012

I find it hard to believe that Obama with a 45% job approval rating could possibly win. Even that idiot George W Bush had a better job approval rating than Obama, his rating was over 50% this goes to prove the the fact that a person is always promoted to their highest level of incompetence.

I'm suspicious that the GOP manipulated the votes to keep "Santroum wins Iowa" off the headlines.

obama better hope that the monthly jobs report released by the labor dept shows a continued increase in employment numbers and the long term unemployed start finding work.

The question will remain in november on whether the voters feel that obama has delivered and that they are better off.

If the economy doesn't show solid growth and obamas continued rhetoric on if only the wealthy pay their fair share, or its the republicans fault or its the corporate/banks fault will be like an anchor around obamas neck, regardless of who becomes the GOP nominee. After all an incumbants blaming others is more a sign of weakness than strength.

One interesting aspect of a steady increase in jobs now is that neither the left or right can point to any government policy (or lack thereof) that was implimented (since the 2009 stimulas temporary bump in jobs and GDP) that created more jobs.

Rather negates the argument of increased government spending (outside of a long term infrastructure budget) will create jobs. However, with the political gridlock between the WH and congress, a solid jobs growth points out that the private sector and the consumer can do better without government interferance in trying to create jobs.

Wakehead - Iowans would be very offended by your post. Clerical errors are not necessaritly rigging, especially on that small of a number

American "If the economy doesn't show solid growth"

considering how it was when he entered office, thats all the economy has shown is SOLID GROWTH - so try another strawman arguement.

"and obamas continued rhetoric on if only the wealthy pay their fair share, or its the republicans fault or its the corporate/banks fault will be like an anchor around obamas neck, regardless of who becomes the GOP nominee."

yes, because who likes a president who's smart and wise and can RIGHTFULLY see where the issues lie? but you're right...the idiot americans just want to hear ignorant rhetoric like "if we lower taxes on the uber wealthy, then magically everyone else will be better off"...yes, of course...im so stupid for not realizing who's spewing the wrong rhetoric, it's been obama...not the republicans.

im sorry, what was the republicans solution to all this mess, other than lowering taxes on rich people even more?

"After all an incumbants blaming others is more a sign of weakness than strength."

so, it's logical all while campaigning to blame the guy sitting in the white house for all the problems, as republicans have been doing about Obama...but SHOULD they get elected in 2012, they will instantly and magically stop blaming Obama and start blaming themselves?

only an idiot believes that kind of stupidity...but, keep believing buddy...it's your right to be as dumb as you want.

Iowans would be very offended by your post.

I'm offended that Iowa is given an outsize influence in choosing a candidate.

"I'm suspicious that the GOP manipulated the votes to keep "Santroum wins Iowa" off the headlines "

Why in heaven's name would you feel that this was something that the Republicans or Democrats, either way, would necessarily be doing? I think it is more reflective of a media who has become so overblown with it's own importance that it thinks that it can manipulate the public opinion, and when it cannot do so in reality, it will do so by how it reports events. The glass is half full or half empty-the media decides that for us instead of allowing us all to read that the glasses are pretty much the same.

Yes...obviously it's all MSNBC's fault.

Da Noid,

Guess someone need 50 lashes from a wet noodle for upsetting our friend from the right! LOL

Maybe our friend should go over to FOX News.

Oh, wait...they hate Romney a whole lot more over there!

Wow!! +1 Now there's something to celebrate! Its still a TIE anyway you look at it.

Love the fact that Rubert is supporting Rick Santorum. That probably set the cat amongst the pigeons!

I am not upset at all. I am just tied of incomplete reporting on both sides. Did you noticed they did do an update?

Did they find out that Romney flew in his 20 illegal gardeners to vote ?

Effectively a tie then as the margin of error is usually within 3 plus or minus...and that is not necessarily good nor bad. It should allow candidates to assess themselves and figure out how to stand our from the group. At present, it would seem that all of them share lukewarm support. The results could prove a very positive thing for all the candidates as they move forward.

Yep, they said that about Reagan also that he would be "crushed" if he ever became the Republican Candidate.

This Country will never have a real conservative as President. President Regan was a moderate Republican that we respected. Today such a figure as Ronald Regan would be thrown out of the Republican Party as being too moderate.

Job1

Many thumbs up on that!

If Reagan would be "thrown out of the Republican Party as being too moderate", many others in there would have been thrown out. As far as I know McCain is still in the party. Job1, out of respect, you contraticted yourself, You say the Republican will never have a "real conservative" as their candidate, yet in the same comments, if too "moderate", would be "thrown out". So which one is it? Joe Lieberman was the one kicked out for being a "moderate" but that was from the Democrat Party, not the Republican Party.

Lieberman was never kicked out, he was beat in a fair primary, and then for all intents and purposes he left and the other party bereft of a real candidate reelected him. Lieberman is going away now and good riddance. He was the Senator of Israel much more than that of Connecticut. He won't be missed.

I repeat, this Country will never have a real conservative as President.

Job1===Even if the idiot Trump runs?

Phine you only have two thumbs, unless your doing thumbs up Chicago or Detroit Style. Than you can have as many votes errrrr thumbs up!

I agree with Job. No one with any REAL principles would sully themselves by running for federal office. Maybe we have some good people on the local level, but the feds are all about the money and the perks.

I think hallucenagenic smoke is coming off some of the keyboards this morning.

First, Reagan was medium conservative for lack of better term. His demeanor made the very conservative and the moderate accept him to a large degree.

The Term conservative is as polluted as the term liberal. There are about as many variants as there are flue viruses.

These terms vary greatly because individuals like to "customize" what they need for their own purposes. Opponents of one thinking stretch what the terms mean of another because they feel they gain the upper hand.

It's true that the people with money in Iowa the Country Club/Chamber of Commerce GOP all supported Romney, but the GOP who head most local county committees are not Romney supporters. Look at the caucus map. Romney won far fewer counties than he did in 2008, but he won in the counties with larger populations. Whether Romney won by 8 or lost by 100 to Santorum, it has to be an embarrassment to Romney, and to Iowa's Country Club/Chamber of Commerce Republicans.

fuzzy,

Turned my tv off and iPod on!!! If they show the ads during football, I am going to mute the tv and use the time more productively (like getting more wings, etc.)

Phine--sounds like a grand idea to me! I am in the NW, so we haven't had the onslaught yet.

"We have met the enemy and he is us!" Pogo by Walt Kelly

nurse,

I guess the only positive way to look at it is we are getting it out of the early (not as early as Iowa, but early enough)

Of course, until then, I see much cooking and experimenting time for me!!! LOL

Phine, Unfortunatly for us here in Florida, by the time the Republican primary is over, we may get a one month break until the general election negative ads start.

Gonna have to rent a lot of movies this summer.

Eh, just cancel your regular broadcast TV and use Hulu or Netflix. No commercials! Of course, everything is at least a year old, which gets annoying, but you can always turn the cable/satellite/other provider back on AFTER the election is over!

Not paying attention to the TV circus sounds like the most promising, productive way to survive campaign season which is all Madison Avenue hype anyway designed to tell each and every one of us what we want to hear. Perhaps the ticket to campaign funding limits and limits on campaign spending is if we were to all universally decide not to participate in the circus. Do I hear correctly? Is America tired of having its votes purchased?

Odd that you say that, Kurt. My hubby was talking with some of his guys at work, who complain about everything but do not vote. When asked why, excuses range from not having the time to not wanting to serve on jury duty!!! If you know someone who doesn't vote, ask them why. It will sadden you.

Less than one third of registered republicans voted in the Iowa caucus. A sign of things to come. The Republican party doesnt have a candidate that holds any weight.

Be you a Progressive or a Republican, it is sad that a country like ours cannot have higher turnouts for elections when so many citizens of other countries do not have that option

yep, after seeing Iraq vote for 1st time in their 5000 year history back in 2005, one would think we here in the USA would not take the right to vote for granted and actually exercise the right to vote. If you don't think the right to vote is such a great thing, try telling those rotting in prison in Viet Nam who dared tried to form an Opposition Party (Viet Tan) as the Communists Despots there only allow them as the sole party

What do ya know? A progressive and a conservative agreeing. See, there is hope for us!!!!

Happy football wild card weekend!

Darn, hate to admit it, there is a progressive here that I agree with, OUCH!! :)

So everyone, unite by voting on November 2012, even if we are uniting to vote against each other :)

There you go. An idea I can agree with!!!

I will not vote since GWB was "installed" as our president after he lost the popular vote...does this sadden you? Look up Jeb Bush voting fix software in Florida and you will start to understand how people get "elected" in this country.....

nabbed25,

Then get off this site, shut up and don't talk about politics.

Ah, Phine, if we didn't have the conspiracy buffs on this vine, it would be soooooo boring!

Besides it was a caucus, always low turn out but 122,000 turned out more than in '08 and a record for Iowa caucus

You're just jealous because you Wish you had enough intelligence needed to

structure and save failed corporations.

By your comments, its obvious you have no idea why they do it.

Mac...considering that both Mitt Romeny and Santorum are both Republicans your rant is a little off. If you read the actual article it wasn't Romney or Santorum that complained about the vote count..it was the county itself. Santorum is correct..the vote was a tie and as also was pointed out, Iowa is just a caucus and not a primary...it doesn't count towards the nomination.

There is a VERY long way to go yet and many primaries ahead. Any of the candidates at this point could be the nominee..well, except Bachmann and Cain...thankfully.

Mac, are you saying the democrats behave any differently? A poor politician is a poor politician, as the saying goes. I don't see a single person in office that hasn't somehow lied to get what they want. They're all a bunch of crooks. The only thing we can do is vote in the ones that are at least SLIGHTLY likely to do a few good things for America to keep us happy, rather than simply shoving their agenda down our throats, like Obama has done.

Love the term "adopting the practice" because it, at least, admits what has been going on all along, everywhere. The practice was worked to perfection in the last campaign by our current president who still attempts to do the same thing (appointments made in absence of the constitutional authority to do so) Why shouldn't we even the playing field and allow them all to play by the same rules or lack thereof? Why should we hold any party to a higher standard than the rest in terms of campaign conduct?

Where I live at in Florida (voting machines vary from county to county), we use paper ballots that are then scanned electronically. Been that way for years (even in 2000) We are one of the few counties that even in recounts, are numbers are spot on. Having paper ballots as the back up really works.

Our only problem here is ..............don't want to say it..........I hate the word..........

HANGING CHADS!!!

There I managed to spit it out!

fuzzy,

It will be okay. Maybe our superhero governor will fix the problem by stifling the vote! (Ok, just typing superhero governor makes me gag)

Jody,

Have you folks in Iowa been learning to count from Rick Perry? LOL

rick,

Any word on what that does to the delegate count? (Also wonder if this will make Mr. Romney a wee bit testy today?)

After reading comments made in here over the last few days, I decided to do some research on Ron Paul just to see what he was about. I read some things on him as well as watched some of his interviews and every question he was asked about what he would do for things like unemployment and the threat of Iran with their nuclear program, were like well we just need to make some jobs and when asked if he would attack Iran if necessary, his answer was that he would just have to look into it. He also said he would end all foreign aid. It's alot more complicated than just saying your are going to do that or to say it just needs to get done. I realized that he really doesnt have any set plans or an agenda how to get these things accomplished. So for me, he seems like all hes about is saying what people want to hear without having a plan as to how to go about it.

I agree. While Ron Paul makes some very astute comments at times,

his position on securing the border and defense are disturbing. And those are 2 very important areas you can't dismiss.

I can't say I'm too happy with ANYTHING that Ron Paul has said. He makes a lot of statements about what he would do without seeming to fully understand the consequences. While I am all for ending foreign aid to dictators who just pocket the cash and ignore their own people, there are other deals we have that are truly beneficial to both sides. Trades and such. More of our money needs to be kept at home, but can you imagine if we just ignored countries like Indonesia that have been pounded half to death by natural disasters? Paul says what he thinks people want to hear, but he would be a terrible president. Any good he would do would be far outweighed by the damage he would cause.

Who says they date back to the stone age? He has a right to think anything he wants, just like you do

Ya, he has that right but when hes running for political office, we all have the right to give our opinions as well. And I think that his ideas are antequated. He would rather see women kept barefoot and pregnant and that isnt going to happen in this day and time.

He has the right to think anything he wants, but to impose his view on others is WRONG! I am anti-abortion, but his "from conception" stance that would prevent mothers from ending pregnancies that are life-threatening, or forcing rape victims to carry babies to term, just goes way too far. He isn't a woman, he couldn't possibly understand the trauma that could cause, especially to a young teenager who isn't ready for that kind of responsibility.

What I find disturbing about your stance on abortion....in every instance you cite-rape/incest, medically dangerous pregnancy, teenagers not ready for the responsibility.....in all these cases, you are making a value judgement that one life is worth more than another. You also cite the most extreme and violent examples, yet, I would tend to believe that abortion statistics, were they available and accurate, would reveal that only a small percentage of those seeking abortion fall into these extreme circumstances, with the possible exception of teen pregnancy. We are living in a society which will protest the way we raise chickens as being inhumane, while at the same time never acknowledging an unborn child as having worth. We send people to prison for dog fighting rings, or puppy mill abuses, but when it comes to talking about unborn children, it is suddenly the rights of the woman as if the child does not exist, or does not have the potential to exist. But wait, society has another quirk....they all want the stem cells-the wonder cures for awful diseases, the ultimate weapon in the battle on aging, but the society doesn't want to acknowledge that the reason these stem cells work is that the source is a human orgnanism. Suddenly, the unborn child has worth, but it is a cash commodity, much like people who sell their blood or plasma for money. So are unborn children actually human beings (and if you claim not fully functional-then why should we fight for medical treatment and care for those who are born not fully functional due to illness, deformity, mental deficiency) In our world, I don't think it is only the teenagers who are unready for responsibility, I think that we have created an entire society looking for a way around responsibility.

no, but he was the last great president we have had.

Reagan was a conservative of the times, but he certainly wasn't as conservative as many of today's right wingers. After all, it was Reagan who opened up the door to nuclear arms reductions negotiations with the Soviet Union in the mid 1980's when Gorbachev came to power. A true anti-communist would have simply let the Soviet Union collapse without bothering to talk to Gorbachev. He also negotiated with the Democrats on the budget, rather than forcing a government shutdown, which is what most tea partiers of today favor.

Still Ronnie was a typical Big Money Republican. He was anti-union, pro big buisness and the father of the Voodoo trickle down economic theory which is still being touted today by the conservative 1%. It was Ronnie Rayguns who perpetuated and perhaps even started the myth of the "job creators". Those "small" businessmen out there just aching to hire a whole pack of folks if only someone would give them a tax break. Give me a break. It is economic nonsense, it is as it was back in the Reagan heyday and it is now. Businesses hire when it is in their best economic interest, which is when consumers buy more, which is when regular working stiffs(that includes those terrible public employees like policemen and teachers who are so evil with their pensions and extraordinary salaries.) have a couple of more dollars in their pockets.

When you don't have the astronomical Debt and deficit that we have today....

you can do many more things that you'd like to do.

Ronald Reagan did not have anywhere the Debt $15 TRILLION that we have Now.

Republicans are Not obstructionists at all. They are smart enough to realize

we are $15 TRILLION in Debt, with Huge Deficit, and its not prudent to spend More, when you're in this situation!

Raygun SUCKED

Your statements make it clear that no single person is ever completely moderate or extreme, but that it is a sliding scale depending upon the topic for consideration. Perhaps the biggest problem we all have in choosing candidates is not seeing them as three dimensional people. One person will never be equally strong in all areas such as economics, foreign policy, morality, constitutional governance. Perhaps instead of reviling people for not being 100% conservative, or 100% liberal, we need to look at what the most serious challenges present right now and choose the person or persons strongest in those areas. A Presidential term is 4-8 years, and by the end of that time frame, we should, as a society be ready to move on and address other issues, so somebody with different attitudes and skill sets would be more appropriate to these other issues. I have seen others comment that our political system is like American Idol-at least American Idol has a specific goal-I am not sure that our chameleon government is capable of picking a specific goal and working toward resolution.

Another myth perpetuated to deprive minority voters of their rights. The Great Voter Fraud Conspiricy, get a life.

I have a life, but Al Franken and several other people who were elected through voter fraud have it even better.

As somebody who has spent the better portion of my life in Northern Illinois, and a goodly portion in Cook County and Chicago......Voter Fraud is not a myth, and it is not a joke... it is real, pervasive, and has nothing to do with disenfranchising the poor and minority voters.....It has everything to do with establishing dynasties and preserving them at all cost. Those who pay homage to the appropriate dynasty, show proper fidelity to the "party" thrive and do well despite their economic, ethnic, or social backgrounds. It also prevades all strata of society within the city or county. Elected officials, appointees, contract holders, financiers...the list doesn't end, because an empire requires all of those things to run. Mayor Richard J Daley spent many years as chief of the national Democratic party as well as controlling Chicago, yet the man was not well educated, nor truly qualified by previous work experience (as we seem to demand from our politicians now-college degreed) to hold the office which he held for many terms. In his rise to power, he used almost mafia tactics to quell opposition to his position, and later when firmly entrenched, he was able to use patronage and nepotism to keep things rolling along.

Bobl...

I'm curious...who do you like and why? And how old are you?

By being a union leader, Reagan was exposed to the Corruption, theft, etc. in Unions. That's why he was Against unions! Duh.

Anyone who's worked in a unionized company or unionized public sector, knows damn well about the corruption and deceit.

Most union reps and leaders have Felony backgrounds.

I have always been amazed that union workers will go on strike, deprive their family, jeopardize their homes, savings, credit ratings etc at the word of a union steward. A union boss, who, while the workers are out on the picket line for their meagre union stipend, continue to be paid in full for organizing labor. How is this good? A few fat cats shoot off their mouths and do more to alienate the company owners and convince them that workers are a discontented rabble who are never satisfied and who are lazy, and union workers still continue to defend them as righteous sword bearers. One wonders if workers actually communicated with management and ownership in a reasonable, responsible, adult fashion-sharing ideas, offering suggestions to make things better all the way around instead of threatening and shouting "unfair' all the time, if we wouldn't all be better off. Perhaps less companies would have felt the need to send jobs to other countries. The company doesn't feel the loyalty and love of the worker, so why would you expect them to show it in return. By the way labor has handled things, it would paint the picture that dollars are the bottom line, not the quality of the work or the quality of the product, not the productivity of the company-its ability to deliver a saleable product at a competitive price so the company can expand its market share, expand its whole business....It is harsh to suggest that all union reps have criminal backgrounds, but they do often behave in the same fashion as thugs.

We need a universal voting system. Everyone votes the same way. This is 2012 not 1776 and we have technology to make sure all voting is fair and accurate.

As far as I know, whites and blacks built this country after the colonist stole it from the Native Americans. Give it back to the Native Americans and everyone else go back to your own motherlands.

I'm native/ African American and my family has been in the county for centuries and we are losing it to foreigners who have nothing to do with our history of this Country because white folks are so intimidated by black folks. Soon we will be the United States of foreigners. Time to wake up .........

They are scared sh*tless of Ron Paul! Especially if we can fill the Senate and Congress with people who will support him.

Is there anyone in the Congress or the Senate who would support Ron Paul's positions? Just asking.

Ron Paul has some good ideas but when it comes to securing the border and defense, he's downright flaky.

Those two areas are way too Critical to ignore.

A lot of young Democrats like Ron Paul, so he's actually affecting both Democrats and Republicans.

The corrupted status quo is scared sh*tless of Ron Paul. Especially if we're able to fill the Senate and Congress with people who support his platform.

My fear is that his life will be at great risk.

His life is at great risk because he's two hundred years old!