Gingrich wins South Carolina primary by a landslide!

Click here to watch this episode of Face the Nation with Bob Schieffer (1/22/12)
Source: CBS


The episode starts out with the host, Bob, congratulating Newt Gingrich on his big win in SC. He then asks Gingrich how he did it despite Romney leading the polls just a few days before. Gingrich answered that residents of South Carolina must have seen that he is "tough enough and bold enough to take on Obama." Gingrich added that the voters probably saw that Romney is very liberal underneath his conservative facade (pro-choice, pro-gun control, pro-tax increases, etc.) Bob also talked to Gingrich about his ex-wive's "open marriage" allegations. Gingrich said that it was almost as though ABC partnered up with Romney, but it backfired and the people saw that bringing such a topic into a presidential debate is very inappropriate. Bob played a clip of Romney comparing Gingrich to Obama, saying that the both of them can't run businesses or a state. Gingrich defends himself saying that he has a lot of experience in government, he balanced the federal budget four times, wrote 24 books, wrote many speeches, and has seven documentary films under his belt. Gingrich said the it seems as if Romney is running for the CEO of the United States, but Gingrich wants to be the President of the United States and he is authentic about it.

I got to see a different side of Gingrich in this episode. He is an extremely talented public speaker. If everything he is saying is true, then I can see why conservative voters wouldn't want to vote for Romney. It seemed as if Bob Schieffer was on Gingrich's side in this episode. Bob kept giving Gingrich topics that Gingrich could easily elaborate on. The republican voters need to recognize who they want as their nominee because ultimately it'll be one of these candidates. They should pick someone who shares their views. Even though Gingrich came off as a nice guy in this video, he hasn't won me over yet...

Mistake in Iowa caucus may change the entire GOP race!

Click here for the article, "Santorum supporters upset that title has asterisk" by Jennifer Jacobs
Source: The Des Moines Register

So it's official! Rick Santorum won the Iowa caucus by 34 votes, Mitt Romney came in second. But in official papers and textbooks it'll say that Romney won on January 3rd (night of the caucus), and that Santorum won the certified ballot recount. There was a recount because some precincts and counties of Iowa didn't submit their voting papers soon enough. Before the recount, Romney was in first place by eight votes. Both Romney and Santorum felt like it was a "virtual tie" because of how close the results were. For the past 2.5 weeks GOP officials have been counting and collecting forms from various regions of Iowa in order to have the most accurate results. The officials thought that a recount would be fair to not only the candidates, but also to the voters. Now that the new results are out Santorum is really happy and kind of bragging about it.

The author was very neutral. She just stated all of the facts, and the very complicated recount process in an informative way. I think that this article is very important. It might change the entire GOP race. Up until now Romney was the frontrunner, but right now it's really uncertain. Santorum won Iowa, Romney won New Hampshire, and Newt Gingrich won South Carolina (January 21st), so it's not really clear who will become the Republican nominee. This might influence voters' choices. I really thought Romney had the nomination in the bag, but now I'm not so sure anymore...

Juiciest bits from the SC debate

Click here for the article, "Highlights, lowlights from Monday's debate" by Adam Beam
Source: The State

Many topics were discussed at the recent debate in South Carolina, moderated by John King. Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich fought over foreign policy. Paul said, "...maybe we ought to consider a golden rule in foreign policy. Don't do to other nations what we don't want them to do to us." But the audience booed Paul and instead sided with Gingrich's idea to kill all of America's enemies. Another candidate whose answer wasn't sufficient was Mitt Romney. He hasn't released his income tax returns yet. Romney said he'll do it in April like everyone else. After that, Gingrich shined once again by calling Obama "the food-stamp president." Later, Rick Santorum defended himself referring to Romney's negative ad about him. Santorum said that he voted on the Martin Luther King Voting Rights Bill because he wanted anyone who served their sentence to still be able to vote. Romney ignored this and said that criminals shouldn't be able to vote. Rick Perry perfectly interrupted by saying that these matters should be handled by state governments. -- That might be the smartest thing Perry ever said.

The author explained the debate in a very vivid way. I felt like I was part of the audience. Adam Beam wrote a great article without any bias, which can be hard. The article is important because it lets voters see what the candidates acted like during the debate. These debates let us judge the GOP candidates most accurately because they're in a tense setting. Voters can pick whoever they agree with most, the voters of SC apparently agreed most with Gingrich.

Mitt Romney: not the best choice?

Click here to watch this episode of Face the Nation with Bob Schieffer (1/15/12)
Source: CBS 


This week Bob Schieffer talks to Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum about Mitt Romney and whether or not he is the best candidate. They both say that Romney doesn't have a conservative record. Santorum says that he, himself ran five times, and all of those times he ran as conservative. Romney ran three times and he ran liberal once, moderate once, and conservative once. Santorum also adds that no matter how many times Romney denies it, Romney Care is very similar to Obama Care. Gingrich feels that he has a better chance at standing up to Barack Obama during the 2012 election because he has a clear record of conservatism. Romney supports Planned Parenthood (huge provider of abortions), he raised taxes by 400% on guns, and he appointed liberal judges while being governor of Massachusetts. Gingrich thinks that he can win South Carolina in the upcoming primary because he is from the neighboring state of Georgia. Overall, Gingrich thinks that Romney would collapse under the heat of Obama's $1 billion campaign.

I think that Schieffer asked Gingrich some difficult questions because he wanted to get some juicy details, but these candidates are too smart to say anything stupid. Gingrich and Santorum basically just said the same thing over and over again -- Romney doesn't have a conservative record. I agree, the Republican voters should have a nominee that stands for what they believe in. This video showed once again why Romney shouldn't win. It included many facts from Romney's record that could help voters make up their minds about who they want to vote for.

Huntsman drops out and endorses Romney!

Click here to read the article, "Huntsman will leave Republican presidential race, endorse Mitt Romney, officials say" by Dan Balz and Chris Cillizza
Source: The Washington Post 

Jon Huntsman is dropping out of the GOP race! He is giving all of his support to Mitt Romney. The former ambassador to China must have realized that he wasn't going to win the nomination after getting less than 17% in New Hampshire, the state that he was setting his sights on the most. Huntsman never really had a chance because he entered the race rather late and he didn't get much support from the Republicans to begin with. Huntsman didn't  appear in the media much, either. Now he decided to endorse Mitt Romney which should really help him win South Carolina. Huntsman is the second (Michele Bachmann was the first) to drop out since voting began in Iowa. Jon Huntsman will officially announce his decision tomorrow, January 16.

I think that the authors are neutral, they just want to inform their audience of the breaking news. This is a huge change and will definitely influence voters' decisions. Now that Huntsman dropped out, all of his voters will have to vote for someone new. Huntsman's endorsement of Romney will greatly influence voters as well. Huntsman wasn't very popular and didn't get many votes or publicity, so him dropping out didn't come as a big surprise to me.

Make it or break it in South Carolina

Click here for the article, "South Carolina GOP voters think Mitt is it: 'I'm here because I'd like to shake hands with the new president'" by Liz Goodwin
Source: Yahoo

Now that the New Hampshire primary is over, where Romney took first and Paul came in second, all the attention is moving to South Carolina. This state could either make it or break it for some candidates. Since 1980, the winner of SC went on to become the eventual Republican nominee. Rick Perry needs to win or else there isn't really a point for him to run anymore, especially after only receiving 1% of the votes in New Hampshire. He's planning on getting many votes because South Carolina is such a conservative state. The thing that's turning some voters away is the fact that Perry allowed illegal immigrants to pay in-state tuition for public universities in Texas. Ron Paul is a crowd favorite throughout the younger folks, but he isn't exactly president material in some people's eyes. Paul's foreign policy (which I am a fan of) seems too outrageous for many people. Santorum is very conservative and many SC residents are attracted to him, but his high spending puts some voters off. Mitt Romney is very popular simply because of the fact that he's won the past two states. Jonathan Lizotte even said, "I'm here because I'd like to shake hands with the new president" at one of Romney's speeches.

I think the author is very neutral, she presents each candidate in the same way. Goodwin writes about the positives and negatives of the top candidates. I think reading this article could help some voters decide who they want to vote for. I agree with some of the people that were interviewed, Mitt Romney is a very strong candidate and even though I don't like him very much, he will probably go on to be nominated. I guess we have to wait until November...

David Gregory grills Rick Santorum

Click here to watch David Gregory's Meet the Press interview with Rick Santorum (1/1/12)
Source: MSNBC 

After Santorum immensely jumped in the polls in Iowa, David Gregory wanted to interview him. Santorum has spent more time in Iowa than any other candidate, visiting all 99 counties in a pick up truck due to limited money and staff. Not too long ago Santorum was at 5% and people were wondering when he would drop out. Gregory asks Santorum why no one has endorsed him yet, even though he's been serving Washington D.C. for 20 years. Santorum answers this question by saying that he didn't ask anyone to endorse him because he had really low percentages up until recently. He isn't doing this to get endorsements, he wants to change what's going on in D.C. Gregory started talking about Santorum's new ad saying that he's "rock solid on values issues," which lately Santorum has been accusing Romney of not doing. Santorum has been saying that Romney is a liberal Massachusetts moderate, when only four years ago he was saying something completely different. Santorum supported Romney in the Republican primaries in 2008, he even said that "Romney would always stand up for conservative issues and principles." Gregory asked Santorum what has changed, and Santorum said that he only said this when comparing Romney to McCain.

I'm not a huge fan of Santorum, but he's an alright guy. He stands up for what he believes in, and he must be doing something right since he won 2nd place in the Iowa caucuses! Gregory was definitely trying to find some negative things about Santorum by throwing these difficult questions at him (ex. endorsements and Mitt Romney). I think that Santorum handled the questions well, but could've been a little more diplomatic with the Romney topic. I think this interview informed voters about Santorum, and I think he really struck a chord when he said that he's not looking for endorsements. I find endorsements to be unnecessary because if you want to vote for someone, you'll end up voting for them regardless of who supports them.

Rand Paul supports his father

Click here to watch this episode of Face the Nation with Bob Schieffer (1/1/12)
Source: CBS 

Bob Schieffer interviews three different people in favor of three different GOP candidates. The three people are Sen. Rand Paul (supporting his father, Ron Paul), Congressman J.C. Watts (supporting Newt Gingrich), and former Sen. Jim Talent (supporting Mitt Romney). I will concentrate on the Rand Paul part of this episode, which were the first 7 minutes of the show. Rand Paul thinks that his father is a great candidate because he is surging to the top of the polls at all the right moments. When asked whether he thinks Ron Paul has a chance to actually win the nomination and then the election, Rand Paul said that he really does think his dad can do it. Ron Paul is scoring best among the independents and democrats out of all the other GOP candidates. Rand Paul said that you can't win with just the Republican votes, you need the in-betweeners as well. Ron Paul is attracting new and young people thanks to his foreign policy. Ron Paul thinks that we should only go to war if Congress declares it, a lot of Americans are tired of war after ten years in Iraq. Both I and Rand Paul think that this is a wise and not reckless decision on Ron Paul's part.

I am not afraid to admit that I adore Ron Paul! His foreign policy is perfect according to me. I hate the fact that America always butts into every other country's business, that is not what America is for. The facts that his son was stating are all great points that should attract voters. Even though Paul isn't the perfect conservative, that's okay because we need a Republican who can also reach out to Democrats. After all this is a country where both parties are pretty even. I think Schieffer was asking good, neutral questions and I liked the way Rand Paul answered them.

Sneaky question at the NH debate...

Click here to watch the Meet the Press debate in New Hampshire moderated by David Gregory (1/8/12)
Source: MSNBC 

This is a very important debate because the primaries are coming up in New Hampshire soon and this small state will have a big impact on the GOP race. Mitt Romney is the frontrunner after Iowa, and he's up in the polls in both New Hampshire and South Carolina. David Gregory asked Newt Gingrich this question in the debate "Why shouldn't Gov. Romney be the nominee of this party?" Gingrich responded that Romney is a moderate, not a Reagan conservative like himself. Gingrich adds that Romney has an economic plan so timid it resembles Obama's and also that Romney would have a hard time during debates with Obama. Gov. Romney replied that he's cut taxes 19 times as governor, and the people of New Hampshire definitely see him as a friendly face seeing he's from the neighboring state of Massachusetts. Romney also said in his defense that he created more jobs in Mass. alone than Pres. Obama has created in United States. Afterwards, Rick Santorum answered the question by rhetorically asking Romney "If your record was so great in Massachusetts, why didn't you run again?" Santorum said that he was in a similar position in a 71% democratic location and he ran and even won. Another thing that Santorum adds is that Romney has proven to be inconsistent. To this Mitt Romney said that he didn't want to have a political career, to him "politics is not a career, for me my career was being in business."

This debate is important and I think that throwing such a difficult and honestly, mean question out there is a smart move on David Gregory's side. The answers to this question inform the voters about the candidates opinions on themselves and their opponents. I like Mitt Romney and I agree with him, he went to do what he wanted to in Massachusetts and after that he left. I'm sure it was hard for him to leave after doing so much for a state he clearly loves, but life goes on. He went to pursue his career in business. If I was a candidate and I was asked that question, I would've found a diplomatic way out of it, because no one likes a person that attacks another person.

Paul shows lots of hate towards Gingrich

Click here for the article, "Paul's aggressive ad campaign may alter Iowa race" by Beth Fouhy
Source: The Florida Times-Union

Ron Paul has put lots of ads out in the media criticizing Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, and Rick Perry; but mostly Paul concentrated on Gingrich. These ads vary from the debt ceiling to abortion. These ads called Gingrich a hypocritical politician. This article was written before the Iowa caucuses and therefore the author wondered how these ads would affect Gingrich's results. It looks like the caucuses were affected by the ads because Gingrich ended up in 4th place with about 10,000 less votes than Paul. The ads expose all of Gingrich's flaws, which also just shows that Paul is a somewhat dirty politician. The author definitely views Ron Paul as one. But I just think that he took what he could find and wanted to show the public who Gingrich really is. These ads didn't guarantee Paul a win, but they didn't allow Gingrich to win either.

I like Ron Paul, but I'm not a fan of bad talking your opponents. Paul is such a great politician and he could show ads about his own great ideas, not others' flaws. But I think these ads will have a great impact on the voters, no one wants to have a corrupt politician as their president. The author, like I mentioned before, is not a Paul supporter. But I still am, and I just think that Paul was looking out for the people of this nation, because the next person in line to win in Iowa wasn't Paul, it was Romney.

Blame Florida for such a messed up primary schedule...

Click here for the article, "Blame Florida for the GOP's holiday craziness" by Byron York
Source: Washington Examiner 

Have you ever wondered why the primaries and caucuses take place when they do? I sure have and this article explained it to me a little. The Iowa caucus was originally supposed to take place February 6th, but Florida decided that they need to have more of a say in the primaries so they moved their date from March to January 31st. This caused turmoil in the Republican schedule because Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada were supposed to be the first states to vote. So all of the primary and caucus dates had to be moved up resulting in Iowa's caucus taking place on January 3rd. The last GOP debate is usually a few days before the first real caucus/primary which meant that it would take place on New Year's Eve which was impossible. The debate took place on December 15th, nearly three weeks before the caucus. It was crazy that the candidates had to campaign most around the holidays, which is already a crazy period in everyone's lives. All this confusion occurred because Florida wanted to be first! But it might backfire, because of the weird scheduling the later states might actually have more of an impact on the GOP results, as opposed to the first states.

The author was definitely against Florida, he made it seem as if Florida thought they were above it all. This article doesn't really educate the voters about the candidates, but it does address a problem that could affect the voters. The primaries being so early may not have given voters enough time to make up their minds. Just because Florida is the biggest swing state doesn't mean that they should cause chaos just because they can. I learned that Florida is a very selfish state, politically speaking. If Florida kept its date, then we would still be in the phase of just learning about the GOP candidates.

Results of the Iowa Caucus

Click here for the article, "What, if anything, did the Iowa Caucus results really show?" by John A. Tures
Source: Ledger-Enquirer 

The Iowa Caucus has successfully ended and the winner was Mitt Romney. In second place was Rick Santorum, who was only behind by eight votes, and in third place was Ron Paul. But as the author puts it, the big winner was not Romney. He was bound to win after putting so much money and time into the race, yet he only won by eight votes and with roughly the same percentage as in 2008. The big winners were Santorum and Paul because they nearly doubled their results, and didn't have as much money to invest as Romney did. After all, Romney will probably win the GOP primary and go on to run against Obama, unless he really messes it up.

I think that the author is conservative, seeing his view on the race and the candidates but that doesn't really change the way he reports about the results. Tures still gives accurate information and I think he is right. Romney's win cannot really be considered an accomplishment, it was expected. The voters should stop voting for the one with the money, and they should start voting for the one that really cares for the people. Santorum and my personal favorite, Ron Paul are certainly doing so! Even all of Mitt Romney's money can't put this nation back on its feet, and without his money Romney doesn't have much.

Even God can't help Rick Perry!

Click here for the article, "Rick Perry to Drop Presidential Bid if God Tells Him" by Christine Thomasos
Source: Christian Post 

Rick Perry has once again brought his faith into this election. Perry decided to rely on God during the Iowa caucuses. He said that God will definitely be present in the caucuses and the outcome will be God's will. Perry wants to make America stronger by bringing in more faith. He wants to incorporate more faith into politics. I think this is a complete joke! The settlers came to America for freedom of religion, now centuries later Perry wants to make everyone a Christian. I am a Catholic, but even I think this is ridiculous, and I'm sure many other religious people would agree with me. Politics are meant to be politics, and religion is meant to be religion. Those two subjects shouldn't be mixed together, because this isn't a theocracy. The voters really need to realize that and just cross off Rick Perry. A vote for Perry is like a vote for a priest to be the president of the United States. Even though this is The Christian Post, the reporter seems to stay neutral and gives us the information without any of her own comments.

Now that the Iowa caucuses has already occurred and Rick Perry ended in 5th place, I think that's a "sign from God" that this religious nut should eliminate himself from the race.

Candidates gang up against Romney

Click here for the article, "Final debate: Why isn't Romney the best candidate to face Obama?" by Tom Buckland
Source: The Union Leader 

During the debate on January 8th, the moderator David Gregory asked every GOP candidate why they think that Mitt Romney isn't a good candidate to run against Obama in the 2012 election. Every candidate started taking shots until Ron Paul decided that it was stupid to think of reasons why someone shouldn't run, he wanted to discuss actual issues, but his request was ignored. This once again shows that Paul is concerned about world problems and not worried about gossiping. Huntsman and Gingrich started attacking Romney and asking him why he didn't run for Massachusetts governor again. Romney answered that he didn't want to pursue a political career, if he ran it would've been all about him. This is true, but Gingrich then added that Romney already has a political career whether he thinks so or not. Another thing that I wanted to add is that Huntsman shouldn't really be talking because his numbers are very low after the caucus in Iowa. I personally haven't read any articles about Huntsman or heard anything about him.

This article shows the public what the candidates look like when asked about their opponents. Paul was the bigger person while the others took as many shots as possible. But neither one of them mentioned in what way they were a better fit to run against Obama, that shows that Romney might be a great candidate after all. This New Hampshire newspaper took a conservative stance because they only talked about the GOP candidates and supported what they said. Just because Romney is getting bad mouthed doesn't mean it's bad, publicity is still publicity. I wouldn't be surprised if he ended up winning the NH primary.

Santorum gets verbally attacked by high schoolers

Click here for the article, "Another Crowd Confronts Santorum" by Katharine Q. Seelye
Source: NY Times 

Rick Santorum visited a high school in Dublin, NH and received some hostile questions. The students were asking his opinion on gays serving in the military, healthcare, and abortion. Santorum is against all of those things. His answer is that gays should live according to the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, people should get help from family and friends before turning to the government, and abortion can be prevented by using contraception. One of the students was confused because on Santorum's website it says he is against birth control pills, yet here he said he was for them. The author seems to be neutral and reports about the entire visit, especially when she mentions a woman that will most likely vote for Santorum. Marian Schwaller Carney said she started paying attention to Santorum after Iowa. Carney said that Santorum is very smart and knows how to handle a crowd well.

I think that Santorum did keep his cool and the information he gave is what he believes so we can't really blame him for his beliefs. If a voter seems to agree with Santorum then that's great, if they don't then that's also fine. This article showed us how Santorum behaves in difficult situations and it showed us what he stands for.