New Hampshire Polling Problems

You Racist Bastards!


It turns out that the polling information about the New Hampshire primary was not wrong. It was the voters who were wrong. It wasn't flawed methodologies or undecided voters, it was racism. You see, whenever the polling turns out to be wrong, it is inevitably the fault of racist pigs. And we all know how racist New Hampshire is.

Please don't get confused. It wasn't racism when the polls got it wrong in 2004. That was just everyone's super duper love for Commander Guy. And it wasn't racism in 2006. That was everyone just voting for a change--albeit a confused, drug-induced vote for change.

But in New Hampshire, it was racism, pure and simple. What evidence do I have other than Chris Matthews' man crushes and rants? Well, let's just take a look at the facts.

New Hampshire is almost 97% white.
Only 1% of New Hampshire is Jewish.
New Hampshire is home to the White Mountains.
The capital of New Hampshire is Concord. The Concorde was a white jet.
The largest city in New Hampshire is Manchester. Melissa Manchester is a white singer.
The highest point in New Hampshire is Mt. Washington. Washington owned slaves.
The McDonald's brothers were from New Hampshire. Black people love McDonalds. They get fat and die. McDonald's hates black people.

The evidence is overwhelming. Barack Obama lost in New Hampshire not because 20% of the electorate was undecided, but because those cross-burning, black-hating, lynching-loving bastards of New Hampshire couldn't bring themselves to vote for a Negro.

I hope you're proud of yourself, New Hampshire!

New Hampshire State Fair

by Blanca DeBree
[images: Blancasphere;thinkorswim]
Source: You Racist Bastards!

Other New Hampshire posts from the Blancasphere: * New Hampshire Primary, Part Tredici * New Hampshire Primary, Part 0011000100110000 * New Hampshire Primary, Part viii * New Hampshire Primary, Part V

Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.

Fred Thompson Announces New Hampshire Pro-Life Endorsement

Endorsement comes as some call Thompson the winner in ABC Debate


In the run-up to the New Hampshire primary this week, the Fred Thompson campaign announced another endorsement from a conservative, pro-life group.

Yesterday, Fred Thompson announced the endorsement of Citizens for Life, the New Hampshire affiliate of the National Right to Life Committee.

"Granite State voters like no-nonsense candidates who stand up for their beliefs. Fred Thompson is such a candidate," said Roger Stenson, Citizens for Life Executive Director.

"Fred Thompson had a 100% pro-life voting record as a member of the United States Senate. For all of us who care about the dignity and sanctity of human life and the most basic freedom upon which our nation was founded - the right to life - Fred Thompson is a leader of great promise."

Citizens for Life is the 14th state pro-life organization to endorse Senator Thompson for President.

"I'm blessed and honored to have the endorsement of Citizens for Life for President of the United States," said Senator Thompson.

"These folks in the Granite State are the 14th organization coast to coast that has voted to endorse my candidacy, and more likely will, because they know I have stood with them yesterday, I stand with them today, and will stand with them tomorrow. They know I have the ability to win this election. They know I believe in the sanctity of life and as President I will do all that I can to do to protect life."

The Thompson campaign also issued the following statement.

Fred Thompson is pro-life. He believes in the sanctity of human life and that every life is worthy of respect. He had a 100% pro-life voting record in the Senate and believes Roe v. Wade was a bad decision that ought to be overturned.

He consistently opposed federal funding to promote or pay for abortion and supported the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act, the Child Custody Protection Act, and President Reagan's Mexico City policy. While Fred Thompson supports adult stem cell research, he opposes embryonic stem cell research. He also opposes human cloning.

As Fred Thompson got a much later start than the other candidates, organizational help from such grassroots groups as New Hampshire Right to Life most likely will come in handy in the days immediately before the New Hampshire primary.

The endorsement comes on the heels of an encouraging--some called it a "winning"--performance in the ABC News Republican debates. The Thompson effort will try to build off of both the debate performance and the pro-life endorsement.

The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder's appraisal:

On points, Fred Thompson won the debate.

Every answer was thoughtful and well-crafted; his tone matched the tone of the question; he wisely refrained from interjecting in the back and forth squabbling. He very deftly reminded viewers that he served on key Senate national security panels and is bringing his experience to bear.

Even his insults were subtly and gently constructed In some ways, Thompson did McCain’s bidding. You skeptical readers can tell me that if Thompson had finished a solid fourth in Iowa, I might not be writing about Thompson at all, that said, he's still a candidate, and his performance tonight tells me his mind is not elsewhere.

Thompson has seen a steady, late-building stream of conservative endorsements come his way.

After the campaign's late start, they'll no doubt need every one of them.

But there's a long way to go and many, many people have yet to even put "politics" on their front burner--let alone make up their minds.

A late start won't matter to that late-deciding horde of voters.

by Mondoreb
[image: msnbc]
Sources:
* Thompson announces NH Pro-Life Endorsement
* GOP Debate Thoughts





Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.

Ron Paul and the Non-Debate: RP Supporters Not Kooks, One Guy Though...

DBKP Tries to Maintain a Reasoned Tone
Against One-Man Tidal Wave of Indignation

One-man Army [Name Changed to protect the innocent-well, sorta innocent, anyway]:
"But I was on the Phone!
I Do Too Have a Phone!
But there WAS a debate!! I Know it!!
You're Fucking Me Here!!I Just Know It!!"

NOTE: 99% of Ron Paul supporters we come into contact with are regular, everyday people. When they write and email us, they are pleasant--passionate to be sure--but genuinely nice people.

That's one of the reasons we've never bashed Dr. Paul and his supporters: someone needs to attack the overweening nanny state and it's insane intrusion into more and more aspects of everyday life.

Ron Paul is a principled Libertarian who never misses an opportunity to attack an ever-growing federal government. We can't do anything but cheer for him on that issue.

We don't agree with Ron Paul on all of the issues. But we don't have to: we still wish him well, even if we're not working for his campaign.

But it only takes a few over-wrought supporters--apparently viciously abused during potty-training as a child--to alienate potential allies.

We have purposely not joined in the gratuitous Ron Paul bashing taking place in many venues because it seems to us a lot like hitting the double chocolate dessert buffet at Happy Wong's 'World's Biggest Asian Food Smorgasbord': it might feel good at the time, but you just have to work your ass off the next day to undo the damage.

Against our better judgment, we're gonna vent a little.

We made phone calls, fielded emails and generally spent yesterday chasing down the details of the supposed Fox News Debates that had excluded Ron Paul.

ORIGINALLY, we were going to write that we didn't see how this could benefit Fox, Republicans, or Ron Paul. When we first heard the exclusion, we were concerned: a viewpoint that should be heard more was going to be heard less.

In the course of writing the post, we suddenly had the thought: why can't we find anything out about this "Debate"?

Fox is in business to get publicity and viewers.
If they were holding such a high-profile event, why would they put it on double-secret probation?

So we stopped and started checking.

In the meantime, we started getting emails and comments, and saw 10 times the amount we got on other blogs and websites.

"Screw Fox! It's a conspiracy!"

NOW, this wasn't most RP supporters, just a couple. But those couple supporters were little armies-of-one.

We continued to check.

Mr. X Searches for More Evidence of Non-Existent Debate

Late last night ( or early this morning) we found a piece we thought summed up what we had been able to find out. All of its facts were checked and its tone was reasoned. It was by a Libertarian, to boot. It was a post by William Westmiller at Nolan Chart.

We then got a comment from a disgruntled RP supporter--Mr. X, by name.

After calling us 'morons' and telling us who he had talked to and his theories on everything from Ron Paul to how Vince McMahon planned on taking over Chippendales using a juiced-up combat team of pro wrestlers (kidding on the last one), Mr. X really got upset.

Right about then, we learned for sure what we had privately been saying most of yesterday and what we said when we put up William Westmiller's article: there was no debate.

It was a spoof by Big Head DC. AP got sucked in, as did tons of other people. When we were checking out BHDC's site, we saw what may have been a world record for consecutive comments on a post by the same person using his real name: Mr. X.

They started out reasonable enough and Mr. X, like us was asking for verification. But his tone soon changed and, like some of his buddies, he was sure that the conspiracy--any conspiracy--was out to get him.

Mr. X Gears Up for Next Big All-Nighter

NOW, we're not upset (anymore). As Mr. X himself said in one of his posts to us: he'd been up all night. Lack of sleep will impair anyone's judgment: ours included.

Chris's last post to us.

I just spoke to John Moody, Sen VP at Fox News, who implicitly acknowledged the existence of the forum.

Who do you claim to have spoken to in the last 12 days who said it was canceled?

We would have said "Try reading our stories, Grasshopper. There you will find the knowledge you seek."

But we're kinda tired too.

We aren't trying to make fun of Mr. X (Okay, okay, so we are. Sorry.), we're just saying when we were writing this, it occurred to us how many other people we spoke to that were pleasant and helpful.

Ron Paul has a lot of really nice supporters who believe in his message and work hard and donate their money to help him out.

They build 60-foot signs along Interstates, go to rallies, talk to people, put up blimps, wear crazy wigs and paint their faces, call in talk shows, write emails and relentlessly search the Internet for any news of an overly-neglected congressman with a principled Libertarian message: in short, what any candidate would love to see his supporters do.

We take issue with calling these thousands of mom and dads and ex-Marines and Boy Scout leaders "kooks". They aren't. They see Ron Paul as an antidote to a federal government that doesn't seem to know quite when and where to quit meddling in people's everyday lives.

We don't have to agree with Paul on every issue to appreciate a candidate that has galvanized everyday people into getting involved in the political process.

The same people who propose putting a voter's registration certificate in every box of Captain Crunch in order to cure voter apathy are--in some cases--the very same people who are dissing Ron Paul and the ordinary people who've decided to participate in the political process by supporting him.

Our advice and wishes:
1- Don't believe everything you read on the Internet, including DBKP.
We try hard, but we sometimes don't quite get things right. We 'fess up when that happens, though.
2- Don't use Ron Paul (or any candidate) to vent your spleen at your particular bogeyman. If you don't like Fox, bash him in your own name.
3- Ron Paul's supporters are not all kooks.
Ron Paul's raised, by our calculations, about $20 million dollars at $50 a clip. That's not one guy with a spambot. That's a lot of mom and pops and aunts and uncles.

And finally,
4- Mr. X, get some sleep.

by Mondoreb

[images:imagefile]

At 7:50 pm December 30, 2007 I shouldn't be hard on Mr. X. He was trying hard to run down the story and he was full of passion and got tired. I was tired too. When I get tired, I put up funny pix. If I ever get a chance to meet Mr. X--maybe at the Republican Convention--beer's on me (limit: 2).

Sources:
*Let's Put On our Thinking caps
* Ron Paul Was Not Excluded from Debate

* Ron Paul Supporters Not Kooks There was 1 Guy though... * Ron Paul & New Hampshire: What is Known Now * Ron Paul Excluded? No Debate, No Forum * Rumors RP Dissed by Fox Untrue * Ron Paul Blimp Parodies * RON PAUL GREAT DEBATE MAP! * Last Hope? Secret Nazi? What do YOU think about Ron Paul?

Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.

Ron Paul: Debates, Forums, Fox, NH and What We Know

Huh?

DBKP was going to publish a timeline later today on the Ron Paul situation at the New Hampshire forum/debate/brunch/luncheon/get-together on January 6th.

We have sifted through a ton of reports, blog postings, sources, phone calls, emails and comments. We'd first like to say "THANK YOU" to everyone who has attempted to help bring order to a confused state of affairs.

That being said, there are some inaccurate reports and postings out there. When trying to trace the source of these, it either is 1) the same sources repeating wrong or inaccurate information and linking back and forth to each other, or 2) reading information into what has actually been stated.

A third possible source of inaccuracy is the "friend told it a friend who heard it from a friend" syndrome. We have several emails which directly contradict each other, each claiming the same source as proof.

While checking to see if anything new and known has popped up--not recycled reports from somewhere else already checked--we came across this posting by William Westmiller on Nolan Chart.

We do not know William. But his report below is as accurate as we have been able to verify at this point in time. It may prove to contain errors, but we couldn't find any, based on what DBKP knows at this moment.

Let it be repeated: it is the best we have seen, based on WHAT WE CAN VERIFY at the moment.

We also noticed that Westmiller has taken some grief over this account. That's too bad. One thing that the story of Ron Paul and the New Hampshire event on January 6th seems to have revealed, at least to us: there are people who profess to be working for the good of the Ron Paul campaign effort who are more interested in bashing someone.

Today it happens to be Fox News.

It may be that Fox News needs to be bashed. But they cannot know that now. Whether or not it helps Ron Paul's cause seems secondary to these flamers. That's too bad.

That being said, the vast majority of people appear to be trying to find out what really happened before throwing any stones. That was encouraging to see. Over the long haul, any campaign is better served by optimism and hard work, rather than rage.

Okay, enough of the lecture: back to William's account. Here it is.

What?

There is NO NH DEBATE on January 6th. Ron Paul was NOT EXCLUDED. That event was canceled three weeks ago.

Ron WILL participate in the January 5th ABC/WMUR GOP debate in New Hampshire.

So, what happened?

Months ago, NH GOP chairman Fergus Cullen had been in touch with FoxNews about a possible forum on January 6th. He had even contacted all the GOP candidates to see whether they were available. However, plans for the ABC debate were finalized with all candidates early in December and Cullen "threw in the towel." See "OUTFOXED" in the NH Union Leader of December 16th.

At that time, Cullen had not received a response from Ron Paul, who had committed to a conflicting luncheon at the NH Liberty Forum at the same time.

Skip ahead to December 27th, when the Union Leader reported that all candidates had agreed to the ABC/WMUR debate and reporter Garry Rayno added a confusing paragraph about Giuliani finally agreeing to the (canceled) January 6th forum, which had already been converted into a simple state GOP brunch.

Huh?

Due to the timing of this article, there was no way to confirm who will or won't attend the brunch, but it is not a broadcast debate and has nothing to do with FoxNews. Nevertheless, a blog in Washington picked up the story, scrambled it and their "BHDC Staff" reported a list of the candidates who would be attending, which did not include Ron Paul (he hadn't officially confirmed, due to the conflict).

That story was picked up by the AP Newswire, which added some information that it had from a month earlier about the format being discussed.

Finally, the AP article was picked up by Lew Rockwell and passed along to DailyPaul.com, with all the errors intact. Of course, a firestorm ensued on all the Ron Paul nets before the information could be verified. Immediately, thousands of messages went to FoxNews and the NH GOP protesting the exclusion.

Unfortunately, the Ron Paul campaign didn't sort out the facts before sending out a news release blasting Fox for their "outrageous" conduct, even if they did note that the information had not been confirmed. From there, the report spread into dozens of blogs and news commentaries.

An unfortunate false alarm. Lesson: Fast news is sometimes "bad" news. Faux News is worthy of criticism for what they have done, not for what they haven't done. Look before you leap.

Update2: The New Hampshire GOP website makes no mention of any events on January 6th, but it does promote the NH Liberty Forum scheduled for January 5th, where Ron Paul will be speaking. I'm informed that the campaign was working with Forum sponsors and Cullen to accomodate any possible NHGOP event.
Fox News does mention the January 5th ABC debate on their schedule, but nothing in New Hampshire on January 6th.
There does appear to be some residual confusion about the GOPNH brunch on the 6th, which may occur, where some candidates may attend, and which Fox may cover as a news item, but it certainly isn't a live, broadcast debate or forum. Those questions probably won't be answered until after the New Year. Best wishes to all, particularly Ron Paul.

Update 3: If you believe there is an error in my report, please provide a link.

There is sure to be hard news and information on several aspects of this today. Until those come out and can be confirmed, I think the above account will serve as our timeline.

And remember tomorrow night to have a Happy New Year!

by Mondoreb
[image:istock; bayareacommunity; ecsd; howard saunders]
Source:
* Ron Paul NOT excluded from NH Debate
* Ron Paul: Excluded by NH GOP, Not Fox
* Rumors of Fox Dissing Ron Paul Untrue





Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.

Rumors Ron Paul Dissed By FOX News Untrue

A drumbeat of faux outrage from the Ron Paul campaign is gaining momentum across the web.

"Ron Paul's been dumped from the FOX Republican Debate," bloggers beat out on their drums.

Where did this message originate from? Did FOX really dump Paul from a debate, forum, or Sunday Brunch?

The pieces of the Chinese Finger Puzzle:

The Boston Globe's James Pinell put out this piece:

Paul: Fox News is 'scared of me'

PLAISTOW, N.H. -- Ron Paul said the decision to exclude him from a debate on Fox News Sunday the weekend before the New Hampshire Primary is proof that the network "is scared" of him.

Pindell goes on to enclose a quote from Paul:

"They are scared of me and don't want my message to get out, but it will," Paul said in an interview at a diner here. "They are propagandists for this war and I challenge them on the notion that they are conservative.

Ron Paul supporters found this "Press Release" on the Ron Paul 2008 website:

Press Releases › Has Fox News Excluded Ron Paul?

December 28, 2007 10:39 pm EST

ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA – According to the New Hampshire State Republican Party and an Associated Press report, Republican presidential candidate and Texas Congressman Ron Paul will be excluded from an upcoming forum of Republican candidates to be broadcast by Fox News on January 6, 2008.

“Given Ron Paul’s support in New Hampshire and his recent historic fundraising success, it is outrageous that Dr. Paul would be excluded,” said Ron Paul 2008 campaign chairman Kent Snyder. “Dr. Paul has consistently polled higher in New Hampshire than some of the other candidates who have been invited.”

Snyder continued, “Paul supporters should know that we are continuing to make inquiries with Fox News as to why they have apparently excluded Dr. Paul from this event.”

The Ron Paul 2008 Campaign website press release cites the New Hampshire State Republican Party and the AP as sources. The release goes on to place the blame on FOX network.

Further investigation by DBKP (actually reading the AP story) revealed the culprits in the non-invitation brouhaha wasn't FOX but the New Hampshire State Republican Party. We also discovered the AP piece referred to a "forum" and not the debate. FOX News is broadcasting the event.

Forum Not Debate!

We contacted the New Hampshire State Republican Party, their press secretary, Barney Keller, told us he wasn't answering any questions and to call the Paul campaign.

We contacted FOX. They didn't know anything about the debate because by now, the story had been turned into, Paul was excluded from the Republican "Debate."

We contacted the Paul campaign and were told they had no idea what was going on, that they were trying to "sort it all out."

The only AP story we could find that related to an upcoming Republican Debate, Forum, or Pancake Breakfast at a New Hampshire Rotary Club.

GOP candidates to meet in N.H. forum

WASHINGTON (AP) — The New Hampshire Republican Party is sponsoring a forum for Republican presidential candidates on Jan. 6, two days before the state's first-in-the-nation primary.

The forum, where the candidates will be questioned by Fox New Channel's Chris Wallace, will be held a day after ABC holds back to back Democratic and Republican presidential debates.

"Never underestimate New Hampshire voters' appetite for politics," said Fergus Cullen, the chairman of the state Republican Party.

Participating in the forum will be Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson.

Unlike a debate, the candidates will face questions from Wallace around a table in a studio on the campus of St. Anselm College in Goffstown, N.H.. The 90-minute encounter will air live beginning at 8 p.m. ET on the Fox News Channel and on Fox News Radio.

FOX News will be broadcasting the New Hampshire State Republican's Forum not a "Debate."
The debate is going to be held by ABC News.

It was the New Hampshire State Republicans who decided to not invite Paul. If this is indeed the case.

What we'd like to know is why Ron Paul and his campaign are carrying on this "faux outrage" at FOX News? Why did they write that it was FOX News' fault that Paul was not invited to the New Hampshire State Republican Forum?

We went and looked again at Plindell's original story. Did Plindell refer to a "forum" or a "debate" in his story about Paul's reaction?

Here's what Plindell wrote:

PLAISTOW, N.H. -- Ron Paul said the decision to exclude him from a debate on Fox News Sunday the weekend before the New Hampshire Primary is proof that the network "is scared" of him.

Another blog, USA Daily, recycled the story once again, but this time, claimed the forum is a "FOX Forum" but also cites an "AP" story as his source.

Ron Paul excluded from Fox News forum
Larry Fester
Published 12/29/2007 - 5:50 p.m. EST
Republican fund raising front runner Ron Paul will apparently be excluded from a Fox News Forum scheduled for just two days before the New Hampshire Primary.

Paul’s campaign said "According to the New Hampshire State Republican Party and an Associated Press report, Republican presidential candidate and Texas Congressman Ron Paul will be excluded from an upcoming forum of Republican candidates to be broadcast by Fox News on January 6, 2008." The decision appears to have been made by Fox News.

We found only one AP story about this imbroglio and we've it copied above. Nowhere in the AP story is FOX News cited as the sponsor of the forum, debate, or Sunday Brunch!

We've also heard rumors that it was FOX News who somehow made the New Hampshire State Republicans not invite Paul. Only someone who fell off a turnip truck could ever believe such an idiotic premise, that FOX News has the power to tell a political group who they are can and cannot invite to their own forum or debate.

At this point, this is sheer nonsense. It's a "forum" not the debate. Angry Paulians are being urged to boycott FOX because Paul wasn't asked to the FOX "debate." Very few know it's a forum sponsored by the New Hampshire State Republicans. Not FOX.

One more time: Forum, not debate. Fox is broadcasting the forum put on by the New Hampshire State Republicans. ABC is putting on the New Hampshire Republican Debate.

* Ron Paul's Exclusion from Forum: NH GOP's Fault, Not Fox plus updates to 7:40 pm

By LBG
Image [Phoenix Woman - Crybaby]

DBKP.com - Bigger, Better!.
Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page

McCain: "I'd Shoot Osama": "OK, Maybe I Wouldn't"

[e-graphic]
by Mondoreb & Little Baby Ginn

Presidential candidate John McCain wouldn't be mistaken for Dog, the Bounty Hunter, but he sounded a bit like him today in New Hampshire.
Boston.com:

Republican presidential candidate John McCain told workers of small weapons factory that he not only wants to catch Osama Bin Laden if elected, but said he "will shoot him with your products".

"I will follow Osama Bin Laden to the gates of hell and I will shoot him with your products," McCain said.

After making the stirring soundbite, McCain then issued a statement making listeners think his next stop was breakfast at the Waffle House.

McCain told reporters afterward he was joking when he made the comment at Thompson Center Arms in Rochester.

"I certainly didn't mean I would actually shoot him. I am certainly angry at him, but I was only speaking in a way that was trying to emphasize my point," McCain said. "I would not shoot him myself."

McCain later made a stab at a clarification and backtracked. Daily Pundit, on the other hand, issued no clarification:

I, for instance, don’t need to be elected to anything to want to put a slug through Islamabama’s murderous skull, nor do I need that slug to be from any particular “weapon’s factory.”

Why is it that presidential candidates have this urge, this tender feeling, about not offending anyone? Even if the offended person is a terrorist mastermind holed up in a cave somewhere in Pakistan? Or his apologists and well-wishers?

Sign at the next McCain rally: "Fight the Reflex, John!"



Back to Front Page.