Tag Archives: republican

Someone’s upset: Cantor defeated in Primary

Eric CantorThe House Majority Leader Eric Cantor has been upset in Virginia’s Republican primary.

Results are still coming in, but several agencies are reporting that the political newcomer, economics professor Dave Brat went up against Cantor Tuesday in the 7th District Republican primary and pulled out the impossible. Continue reading Someone’s upset: Cantor defeated in Primary

The Face of Fraud?

Colin Small
Colin Small, accused of voter registration fraud in Virginia

A 23-year-old is becoming the newest face of voter fraud in America. Collin Small, was arrested last week and charged with several counts involving voter fraud after he was caught throwing away voter registration forms in Virginia. Wednesday, Virginia’s State Board of Elections has asked the state’s Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli to investigate the case as Democratic Party officials are alleging this instance is part of a widespread effort of the Republican Party suppressing Democratic votes. There are strong cases out there where new legislation is threatening people’s right to successfully cast their vote. Maybe it’s not as blatant is it was 50 or 100 years ago, but Democrats and Republicans are involved in disputes across the nation over voter ID laws. There’s also a case where a GOP consulting firm is being investigated for suspicious voter registration forms that had been submitted in Florida. Is this case of the young man tossing forms one battle in the never-ending voter fraud war, or an isolated incident not intended to manipulate votes as many have suggested?

Colin Small was working for the Virginia Republican Party when he was seen throwing a bag of voter registration forms into the private dumpster of a local business. He was arrested and charged with four counts of destruction of voter registration applications, eight counts of failing to disclose voter registration applications, and one count of obstruction of justice. Small, who describes himself as a grassroots field director for the RNC, is becoming the poster-child of what Democrats are saying Republicans are trying to do across the country. Immediately after hearing news of someone working for the Republican Party throwing away voter registration forms, it’s easy to assume that it was intentional and those names on the forms were likely Democratic supporters. After it happened Democrats called on the attorney general’s office to investigate and they also have requested a federal investigation into it as well. After firing him, the Republican Party of Virginia Chairman Pat Mullins released a statement saying, “The Republican Party of Virginia will not tolerate any action by any person that could threaten the integrity of our electoral process.”

So now, apparently we are to believe that 23-year-old Colin Small is the mastermind behind getting Mitt Romney the presidency by implementing a voter registration scheme in the crucial swing state of Virginia in favor of the Republican Party. Either that or he’s just a pawn, or secret operative, put in place by higher-ups in the Republican Party to alter votes. But looking further into the case of young Colin Small, we know it was just eight forms he’s accused of discarding. While every vote counts, eight votes would hardly swing the pendulum. In addition, Small was contracted by the Republican Party of Virginia to follow-up with voters whose registration forms were incomplete. Even though Virginia does not require voters to register by party, those forms that were trashed were likely potential Republican voters. The day the offense took place was on the same day of the voter registration deadline. It would seem that Small missed the deadline and chose what he thought was the easy way out. So he unwittingly chose arrest over getting fired for not doing his job properly.

Not for nothin’ but let’s not jump to conclusions. If anything, we probably should congratulate Colin Small for actively being involved and “trying” to get others involved in the election process. While there does seem to be some efforts out there to suppress votes, specifically those voters who are voting for the Democratic ticket, I don’t think this is one of those. Republican lawmakers are creating laws, modifying them and interpreting them in a way where people may not be able to vote. Perhaps there is a valid claim to want to prevent voter fraud, but in reality people will be prevented from voting. It has not been officially determined that Colin Small intended on doing either. However we can say he’s not in office and not influencing any laws. So part of a conspiracy, probably not. But no disrespect, he’s probably just a dumb kid who didn’t know any better.

Who Won? Who Lost? Who Cares?

President Obama and Mitt Romney meet in second 2012 presidential debate
President Obama and Mitt Romney meet in second 2012 presidential debate

Tuesday we had our second presidential debate of the 2012 general election. The Republican candidate Mitt Romney took on the incumbent President Barack Obama. The first debate, from two weeks ago, had all sorts of mixed reviews, but the bulk of them had Mitt Romney looking good and the president not as much. All week long people talked about how bad the president performed in the first televised debate. Post debate polls had Governor Romney taking a slight lead among likely voters. The vice presidential debate between Joe Biden and Paul Ryan provided some relief for Democrats as Vice President Biden seemed to attack more and be more of a debater. This time around, Obama needed a positive result, and it looked like it worked. For those of you scoring at home, it would seem that Governor Romney won the first one and President Obama won the last one. So let’s take a look at those who are keeping score.

According to a new CNN poll, out of 457 registered voters, 46% say President Obama won the debate Tuesday night, as opposed to 39% for Governor Romney. Another group of 430 people who were polled after the first debate on October 3rd had the debate 67% to 25% in favor of Romney. It is known that some people intend on watching the debates objectively, but others of course are rooting for their candidate of choice. By now, the majority of America has their mind made up on who they will be voting for in November. Typically we fall along party lines and vote with whoever aligns best with our ideologies. These debates serve to try to convince those voters otherwise and to capture the vote of the undecided voter, the people who have not committed their vote one way or another. These people are the ones who’s “scorecard” matters most.

We’ve seen undecided voters play significant parts in recent elections. Several states such as Florida, Ohio and Virginia have great populations of voters who sometimes vote Democrat and sometimes vote Republican. How have they been watching and gauging the debate between the two candidates is the question. The lay person can watch the debate, and no matter who they admit to performing best, they’re still probably going to vote for whoever is in their party. The so-called “winner” of the debate is allegedly decided by the non-committed voter. If one poll leaned toward one candidate after the first debate, then those polled were those who could be swayed. If the other candidate won the following debate then those same swayed voters would have to come back the other way. If undecided voters were watching attentively then they will decide the ultimate winner of the debate on Tuesday, November 6th.

Not for nothin’ but can someone really win without a score? There’s no official count in debates, and this is definitely not a game. So why must we declare a winner; just to appease the undecided voter and the public for an outcome? You win when you vote. Decide on whoever you want to win, if you haven’t done so already, and vote. Most of us have decided. A debate will probably not influence us any further. If I’m a 49ers fan, and they lose a game, I’m still going to like the 49ers and think their the best team ever. And with the way voter turnout is these days, the undecided voter is losing the “voter” part of their name. Usually it’s people who are not going to vote, don’t care to vote, or who don’t know what they are voting for. These are the people who are going to decide who the president will be?

Don’t Take What You See Face Value

Map of early voting states
Map of early voting states


In the final weekend before the election, presidential candidates, vice-presidential candidates, politicians, celebrities and others on the campaign trail doing everything they can to make their respective campaign successful.  After a number of states opened polls early for early voting, many are closing Sunday and Monday in lieu of Tuesday’s Election Day. 

Over 30 states allow their voters to vote early.  In a few of them you need an excuse to vote early, but in most early voting at polls has seen record numbers.  Over 20 million people have cast their vote before election day.  And we’ve also seen widely reported that most of those cast have been democratic, but don’t get too excited.  While a large share of those cast were by democrats, the voters are only registered democrats, but are still free to vote which ever way they want.  In many cases that wouldn’t be a problem, we can all assume that registered democrats will vote for the democratic candidate and registered republicans will vote for the republican candidate, but assumption can be the base of many mistakes.

As we all know this is quite the historic election that divides the population as any election, but this one has to potential to polarize the American public like none before.  Primarily because of what has been represented from the two campaigns.  Many democratic voters are not voting for Barack Obama for various reasons, still bitter from Hillary loss, don’t feel comfortable with him, or just do not want to vote for an African-American.  That’s similar to republican voters do not want to vote for McCain because they feel he doesn’t represent the party fully, no confidence in his VP candidate, or actually feel he isn’t the best candidate.

And as an added bonus some thought has to be put on the “Southern Democrat” population.  Close to a third of early voting states are southern states.  As many of us know, several years ago the republican party were liberal and the democratic party were more conservative.  With Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal administration came an actual new deal in American political structure.  After the impact his administration had on American politics, the party values essentially switched making republicans more conservative and democrats more liberal as we see it today.  While many politicians since the start of the 1960s began to switch parties to align more with their values, many democratic voters in the south did not get that memo.  That’s why you’d see civil rights leaders in the republican party in the south because they were in direct contrast to Southern Democrats who opposed the civil rights movement.  And that’s why to this day many old school southern democrats, while still registered as democrats, vote conservative and for republican candidates.

Not for nothin’, but these are just two of the reasons why we can be misled by polls.  Unless you see an actual number of how many people are voting for which candidate, we’re not going to know officially who’s in the lead.  No matter how much you think or are told that the Obama campaign is ahead, no pundit, analyst, or strategist has a crystal ball, nor can they see the future. 


Enough About Hillary Already

Sen. Clinton speaks at the Democratic National Convention
Sen. Clinton speaks at the Democratic National Convention

On the evening when many of us saw New York Senator Hillary Clinton give her speech to the Democratic National Convention, you can’t help but hear all the talk and buzz that has been about her in recent days.  It was an extraordinary speech.  She would be a great candidate for the democratic nomination.  But she is not the candidate for the democratic nomination.

It’s obvious that Senator Clinton still has a huge following.  She won a lot of support during her run for the nomination.  The primary battle, specifically between Clinton and Obama was fought pretty hard by both parties.  Both campaigns of Clinton and Obama gained the unwavering support of millions around the country.  This democratic primary battle was the closest in the history of primaries.  Some would say it was essentially splitting the party in half.  Even though Obama pulled it out, there were wounds that need to be healed.  The good news is, both candidates managed to get a huge following all of which are registered democrats, more to go to battle in November against the republicans.  The bad news is, many of those who gave their unwavering support to Clinton are really emphasising the “unwavering” part.

I read an article earlier today on how the Republican party is in Denver, hosting a Happy Hour for Hillary event.  This event, like I stated sponsored by the GOP, is for the ever growing population of democrats who are/were in support of Clinton during the primary, and cannot see themselves voting for Obama.  They cite things of Obama’s inexperience, no substance in Obama, his message, or some just believe that Hillary got the shaft by the DNC. 

Okay, so if a democrat can see themselves voting for Obama because of his experience…well Clinton has twice as much as experience as Obama.  But then again, seven whole years in congress isn’t that impressive either.  And if you’re talking about Obama’s substance or message, if that’s a problem with you then you’re likely deaf or just don’t agree with liberalism.  And for those of you who are upset because you believe Clinton got a raw deal by the DNC and that they push Obama so much that they wanted him to win.  Well if you really believe in government conspiracy’s such as that then you’re likely afraid that aliens are still coming to get you, or have persistent questions of the lone gunman theory.  If the latter was your excuse, and if it were true, then would it be reasonable to believe that a bunch of people who share your same political ideology, who have the tons of experience that you say Obama lacks, would actually know what they were doing.  Anyway, that’s a moot point.  The point is, I do not understand how someone who is a so-called democrat not support a candidate when their candidate didn’t win the primary?  I need someone to help me with this one.

Not for nothn’, but she didn’t win the primary, she didn’t get the support she needed to win, and she wasn’t chosen for vice president.  All the support that’s going to Clinton now, has to go to Obama in order for the democrats to come out on top.  Unless you don’t want that to happen, and you really are switching sides.  Otherwise, do what she asks of you, be a proud democrat like herself, and vote for Barack Obama.