A funny thing happened on the way to the expected Barack Obama blowout in New Hampshire. Hillary Clinton won.
The stunning victory for Clinton instantly propels her back into front-runner status and again emphasized just how volatile and wide-open this presidential primary season is on both sides.
Modern political polling has become something of a science and is highly accurate in many cases, but New Hampshire proved that anything can happen when voters cast their ballots.
How did Clinton do it? Among other things, she won back the women’s vote that she lost in Iowa (her last-minute show of unguarded emotion probably helped) and aggressively went after Obama, raising doubts about his ability to deliver change.
For whatever reason, voters weren’t ready to write her political obituary, and they weren’t ready for the Democratic race to be over.
And that’s good for democracy. An extended nomination fight sharpens and tests the candidates further and gives millions of Americans more of a say in the process.
Republican John McCain, also once written off as finished, enjoyed a huge comeback victory in New Hampshire and could do well in Michigan next week — a make-or-break state for Mitt Romney. But it’s anyone’s guess who the GOP front-runner is.
It will be fascinating to watch.
One thing is clear: Voters, not polls and pundits, will have the final say.
129 Comments
Huh? I thought the media told me last week that the primaries were over and it was Obama and Huckabee. Clinton legacy is over I was told.
Yawn.
This thing was stolen on both sides.
Doug,
The media was quoting the polls which said Obama was going to win New Hampshire.
The polls which I thought you guys loved so much?
Or is that only when they are being used to say how bad people think Iraq is?
I LOVE this picture!
heh heh She’s pointing right at all you Republicans!
I’m still not crazy about the dyansty thing. But we did not need nice guy Obama waltzing to the finish line. He NEEDS this battle.
WE need this battle. The Democrats ARE going to win. Let’s have our best as President.
On the Republican side, Mitt Romney has the MOST delegates.
Romney won Wyoming and came in 2nd TWO other times.
If Romney takes “Silver” or “Gold” in every race, he will win.
Romney has never been less than “Silver” — nobody else can say that.
—-
As for New Hampshire, the Independents went for McCain rather than voting against Hillary or for Obama.
It is time for the Eagle to quit defending the “science” of polling and admit the flaws in any polling process.
The conspiracy kooks have been trying to use polling as a way to “prove” election fraud.
These polls, in the Obama/Clinton race, were WAY off the mark — and NO Republican was involved in any “fraud” in this case, huh?
I think a lot of Americans are looking at Iowa and New Hampshire today and saying, “you suck”.
Why should a state with no income or sales tax have any right to tell me who my nominee is?
Shoutout to MonkeyHawk: There will be a meeting of Edwards supporters tonight at 7 at 2100 E. Douglas. We’d love to see you there!
Econ101,
Funny to see supporters of a GOP that regularly breaks the law to keep Democrats for voting, and which denied Bill Clinton’s electoral legitimacy, beating their chests over the significance of elections.
However, it DOES bode well for American democracy that the voters of New Hampshire did as they did, if for no other reason than to register their rejection of fifteen years of mainstream media attacks on Hillary Clinton.
That’s right: the voters of New Hampshire appear to have told the media to butt the out of coronating their preferred Democratic front-runner. And it’s about time the prejudicial hand of the media was called for what it is.
Wheeeeee! WordPress allows CF2K to use his favorite word!
Wheeeeeee! Thanks, editors!
I’m happy for ya there CF!
Ya know what I notice? The cons are only talking about OUR candidates.
Are they not happy for John McCain? Where’s the love?
Sometimes the news media responds like a little kid on Christmas morning – the next new toy is his favorite – until he opens the next one.
I have been a Obama supporter since before he announced his candidacy, but I thought the media was far too quick to write Hillary off. Just like that little kid, they had a new story and they ran with it. Now they are playing the Hillary as Comeback Kid angle, comparing her narrow victory in New Hampshire to Bill’s comeback (to second place) in 1992.
A month ago, a Obama second place showing by two percentage points to Hillary in New Hampshire would have been viewed as a great performance by the Junior Senator from Illinois and a defeat for the Senator from New York. Now, the media is playing this like Obama lost big and Hillary won in a landslide.
Next week, the media will have a new toy to play with and New Hampshire will be forgotten……..
New toys for little boys and girls.
To add my two cents to this article, it’s interesting to see the break-down of those who supported each of the Democratic front-runners. Obama seems to be preferred by independents, and it’s interesting to see how women will continue to choose between him and Hillary. He enjoyed their support in Iowa, but they switched back to Hillary in New Hampshire. Check http://www.projectweightloss.com/ for an interesting and somewhat unusual survey of the characteristics of each of the Democratic candidates’ supporters.
JR,
I talked about the Republican candidates last night.
I saw that Nathan. And you were real unwelcome to your new frontrunner. Where’s the love?
Econ101,
“As for New Hampshire, the Independents went for McCain rather than voting against Hillary or for Obama.”
Perhaps they did. But if that’s the Republicans’ best hope, I’d say they are in big trouble. In New Hampshire, here’s the total vote breakdown:
Democratic candidates–287,849
Republican candidates–238,841.
http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/states/NH.html
That’s almost 50,000 more votes for Democrats than for Republicans. So even if independents broke overwhelmingly for McCain, all it does is highlight the astonishing weakness of Republican voting strength in New Hampshire.
Looking at the head-to-head match up, here’s Hillary Clinton vs. John McCain:
Hillary Clinton: 112,238
John McCain: 88,447
That’s about a 14,000-vote difference in Hillary’s favor. And given the backlash we’ve seen against media negativity toward Hillary Clinton, McCain–who really is a nasty piece of work–goes negative on her at his own electoral peril.
The Republicans’ only shot at the White House is to wage the nastiest, most divisive, racist campaign imaginable, and to try to run Michael Bloomberg as a stalking horse to suck away Democratic votes. Because from these numbers and the numbers in Iowa, the GOP currently isn’t competitive at the national level.
JR,
I already explained why I don’t like McCain. I have no love for the man.
I highly doubt he will be the nominee either.
New Hampshire was probably the only state he will win beyond Arizona.
Poor ol’ John.
A whole big ol’ blog and no one to love him and say attaboy. It just don’t seem right.
Next stop – Michigan. Six days. Predictions?
Can Mitt win one?
Looking at the head-to-head match up, here’s Hillary Clinton vs. John McCain:
Hillary Clinton: 112,238
John McCain: 88,447
Those were not the choices on the ballot. Very retarded analysis CF.
You get:
F-
Michigan….
Hmmm.
They are hurting economically. Of course in a primary they HAVE to vote for a Republican choice not to vote for in the fall…
I have not seen any polls. I’m gonna guess Michigan breaks about even between Hickabee and John the unloved.
The Dems side is a tougher call.
Can Mitt win one? No, Ben, he can’t.
Romney looks and speaks like he came out of Central Casting as a presidential candidate. His flip flopping on major hot button issues have turned off many Republicans. I am sure that most see him as an opportunist that flipped from a Massachusetts Republican (quite moderate) to a party of Bush conservative.
The Mitt is done.
A bigger question is where is the supposed Republican front runner Rudy the Ghoul?
Mitt Romney 21%
Mike Huckabee 19%
Rudy Giuliani 12%
John McCain 10%
Ron Paul 4%
Fred Thompson 4%
Tom Tancredo 1%
Duncan Hunter 1%
Unsure 26%
This is a paste from a December Michigan poll.
With his new momentum, does John cut a deal with one of the second tier? The unsures will break mostly his way too.
An earlier poll showed Senator Clinton WAY up on Obama.
Perhaps faulty memory, but I seem to recall that as “punishment” for moving up the primary dates, the Dems weren’t going to recognize any delegates from either state, and, if one will, “prohibited” any of the candidates from campaigning there. Thus, while Michigan approaches for the GOP, the next primary for the Dems is South Carolina.
Sorry, guys and gals; first sentence should be after “dates” in the second line, “in Michigan and Florida”.
Will Mitty go even more negative than he already has?
Speaking of Gov. Romney, he’s “gone dark” in SC and FL, according to the link.
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/01/romney_goes_dark_in_fl_south_c.php
New Hampshire and Iowa have gone Dem for President for several election cycles, now.
They don’t count, in November.
For those who enjoy this type of thing, a breakdown of the numbers from New Hampshire’s primary vote, and one opinion as to what this means.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7809.html
Prior to the NH primary one major poll had Obama beating Clinton by 10% and another had obama beating Clinton by 3 ‘poits.’ Has anyone read any explanations by the pollsters why the missed the target by that huge of a gap?
McCain won Michigan in 2000, but whether they’ll vote for him or their kinda-sorta favorite son remains to be seen.
Hillary will win some primaries, Obama others. As for Edwards, I think he’ll have to fight Obama for S.C., but he’ll get it anyway. I wouldn’t want to predict beyond that.
Oh, and the Huckster will continue to do will in states with large rightwing evangelical numbers, and suck everywhere else.
“New Hampshire and Iowa have gone Dem for President for several election cycles, now.”
WRONG! NH narrowly went for Bush in 2000. Had Gore carried it then FL would have been moot.
Nader made the difference.
WAR,
Here’s one from Gallup. You’re welcome.
http://blogs.usatoday.com/gallup/2008/01/theres-no-way-a.html
Iowa went for Bush in 2004, so Econ, you might want to rethink your post.
Polls don’t matter as they are obsolete. Who own a land line anymore?
Has anyone read any explanations by the pollsters why the missed the target by that huge of a gap?
Yes, VT, the gist is that “voters changed their minds.”
Possibly. I think it more likely that the pollsters were interviewing people who never voted.
They have no idea if the person they talk to will vote or not.
Hillary had a good ground game and got her people to the polls.
BTW, Nathan, opinion polls are accurate guages of <iopinion. Polls aren’t so good at guaging future behavior.
For example, if you had a poll that asked “are you going to lose weight,” a lot of people would answer yes even though they won’t be losing any weight.
That’s very different that “do you like or dislike George W. Bush’s job performance?”
Vaughn Tolle
Posted January 9, 2008 at 2:20 pm | Permalink
Perhaps faulty memory, but I seem to recall that as “punishment” for moving up the primary dates, the Dems weren’t going to recognize any delegates from either state, and, if one will, “prohibited” any of the candidates from campaigning there. Thus, while Michigan approaches for the GOP, the next primary for the Dems is South Carolina.
I thought the next for the Dems was Nevada. I believe it’s on the 19th. Or do those not count either?
TDT, Nevada is the next caucus. I was referring to the next primary. Sorry for any confusion.
Wahawk,
So, are you saying that Hillary Clinton and John McCain WEREN’T on the ballot in the New Hampshire primary? You don’t even know how stupid you are, evidently.
The only thing “retarded” thing apparent here is your inability/unwillingness to do two things:
a) count up the total numbers of Democratic versus Republican voters in New Hampshire
b) compare the respective totals won by each of the front-runners.
Nice job providing a substance-free post, however.
Econ101,
A bit reality-challenged as to the importance / non-importance of Iowa and New Hampshire, I see.
Capn – The article VT posted gave a couple of points that make sense. First, although they were WAAAY off base with the Democratic numbers, they were spot on with the Republican. Second, they ended their polling on Sunday around 4 pm. In the article it stated that they usually do a follow up the Monday before, but failed to do so in the New Hampshire primary, apparently thinking that people wouldn’t be changing their minds. Bad assumption on their part.
VT – Gotcha, my reading comprehension is not at its highest today apparently.
These polls, in the Obama/Clinton race, were WAY off the mark — and NO Republican was involved in any “fraud” in this case, huh?
Polling is the art of probabilities and sometimes, the coin comes up heads 20 times in a row. However, it is likely that the polls were accurate at the time the polls were taken. Mrs. Clinton won it with a catch in her throat, a tear in her eye and a feisty debate performance. And remember, all the candidates are getting a “third” at best. Keep this up all the way to the convention, and watch the fun.
To read the News Media Polls you would think they control how the voters would vote. Guess not. Still I hope Hillary and Bill goes down the tube. No Hillary Care.
Sarah Bellum – the difference is that these were ‘pre-election’ polls. The kind of polls the US State Department uses in looking at an election’s validity (such as in Ukraine, Kenya, etc) is EXIT polls.
In New Hampshire especially people change their minds between pre-election and the election itself.
Yes, Sarah Bellum, that is the difference. Don’t know if this was in the articles I posted earlier or in another article read but not posted, but the EXIT polls in N.H. were very accurate, and the likely outcome of the Dem (and GOP) primaries were known as the day went on.
I think that last 24 hours made a big difference. Hillary came on strong and so did McCain. BOTH hurt Obama in the end.
“I already explained why I don’t like McCain. I have no love for the man.
I highly doubt he will be the nominee either“.
I can easily see him as the Nominee Nathan if he will just give a reasonable explanation to the Moderates as to why he seem to fall lock step with Bush on the surge. I knew why, it was taking four steps back. There was not enough troops to do the job in the first place, so you add troops. It was not a strategy or even a tactic, it was simply “Oh crap I did not put enough flour in the mix!”. If he were to actual outline what he would do to use the lull in the fighting to bring a solution instead of just playing a waiting game. That is a game that we can not win! It cost too much and adds to the lost of life without weakening the enemy. Mc Cain if he were to show a smart thought out plan for Iraq with out the meaningless phrases and cliques of “ we can not surrender” and “The end will come with the installing of a free and Democratic government in Iraq”. These words show a bit of clueless-ness otherwise saying “we don’t have a clue what to do and we are going to just keep the status quo till we get our head out of our ass!”. If I could ask Mc Cain one question it would be “ can you give me an educated, experienced, well thought out plan for using the lull to get us out of Iraq?”. If he could not, he could never get my vote.
Exit polls are only valueless in a Presidential election, in a very few states.
I was remiss, there are also some dictatorial countries where exit polls won’t hold up to the end result!
Many walk in wanting change, but once in the booth decide for status quo. Even if they do not like the candidate, they go with the known over the maybe. They may like the idea of finally a woman President or the first Black man as President. But in the end would go with the standard tried and true White, male, Christian, known factor.
Thanks Vaughn …
I guess that, ultimately, New Hampshire Democrats are confused about what they really want. Some got soft whem Hillary went all misty and maybe some latent racism in New Hampshire. (I would have thought Iowa would have been more prone to that. I guess I just don’t know as much as I thought I did.)
I smell a rat here. Usually if something does not make any sense there is a reason for it. There is no way in Hell that 7 major scientific polls could be 15 points off!! Sorry but I just do not buy it.
“Seventeen percent of 18-to-29-year-olds voted in the Democratic contest in New Hampshire, a proportion similar to the 2000 and 2004 general elections and about 5 percent fewer than in the Iowa caucuses.”
Cable in New Hampshire must have better programming than cable in Iowa. I guess “Generation X” just doesn’t care who is running their country for them. Times sure change.
“”" LOVE this picture!
heh heh She’s pointing right at all you Republicans!
I’m still not crazy about the dyansty thing. But we did not need nice guy Obama waltzing to the finish line. He NEEDS this battle.
WE need this battle. The Democrats ARE going to win. Let’s have our best as President.”"”
Obama has not quit yet. Neither has Edwards. And there are more primaries to go. But it will be harder for Obama with the wind knocked out of his sails. And Edwards never has had any sails but he has lots of cash and will fight to the convention floor.
“”"Cable in New Hampshire must have better programming than cable in Iowa. I guess “Generation X” just doesn’t care who is running their country for them. Times sure change.”"”
Young people have never voted in high numbers. Not just gen x people. Even when Veitnam was going on and they could get drafted, few of them voted. Never put your hat on that hanger!
Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, and Fred Thompson are the real winners. They speak their minds, they put their beleifs out there, they don’t beat around the bush, people actually know what these people stand for while all the other canidates regurgitate rhetoric, and people still have no idea what policies and beliefs they support besides God, and Change. I’d give Huckabee a fourth place finish as an honest winner, but his Fair Tax is a very bad plan.
The problem is White elephant that like the line from a few good men “you can’t handle the truth!”. Part of what has made G.W. Bush popular with many is he un-dying optimism. No matter what he does not say it is bad, in part that is because he depends so much on those who will not tell the Emperor he has no clothes. When hit with bad news he checks with Cheney to see if it is true.
But the end result is that he makes people feel better, those who speak the truth are often ignored because it makes people feel worst.
Young people aren’t “Generation X.” I know: I’m 39, and ‘young’ ceased to be an accurate descriptor for me some time ago, though I’m on the high-end of Gen X. “Generation X” denotes those born (roughly) between 1964 and 1981.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_X
The young’uns are Generation Y, or the “Baby Busters,” who, it seems to me, are largley flocking to Obama.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_Y
Not to belabor what may already be too fine a point, but here goes anyway. :D
If Democrats choose Obama because they find him an excellent candidate who’ll represent the D column best against R candidate x, great. If this is what’s happening, then the Democrats are going to be very difficult to beat in the fall.
If, on the other hand, the Democrats choose Obama because they think he’ll attract R votes, then even though that may be an artifact of the election it it will be fatal to Obama in the fall. That’s because whoever the D candidate is, there is a tidal wave of Swift Boat mud coming his or her way come about September.
If Clinton is the nominee, the mud will be heavy and it will be very ugly.
If Obama wins, then the mud will be heavy and it will be very ugly.
In any case (ie, independent of the D candidate), the Republics will be forced to wage a campaign designed to limit Democrat turnout. They’ll do that gleefully if Clinton is the nominee — and I guarantee you she’ll be ready for it, make no mistake — but only the target will change as they’ll be doing it out of the necessity to blunt a “hope message” if Obama is the nominee.
In any case, thanks to the record they’ve been happy to build and stand on for the past 8 years, the R’s are left with one, and only one, weapon this election cycle: Swift Boat attacks on the Democrat.
If you think you can avoid them by nominating Obama, think again.
Pedant – I agree to a point – the Republican will Swift Boat any and every Democrat – but I honestly believe that the American electorate has wised up to their tactics. I also believe that the media is going to do a much better job of calling them on it, after they were burned by the Bush Misadministration on so many issues.
The Republicans have already started the smears… Obama does not salute the Flag……. (He was photographed hand over heart during the Pledge at the same event that the Repub’s claim he didn’t show proper respect) ………. Ed Rogers (R-chairman)on Hardball referring to Obama as Barack Hussein…. The repeated claims that Obama is actually a Muslim.
The difference now is that the media and Americans in general are not buying the bull crap.
Well, most, other than a few wackos on this blog.
WSClark
Posted January 9, 2008 at 7:58 pm | Permalink
…I honestly believe that the American electorate has wised up to their tactics. I also believe that the media is going to do a much better job of calling them on it, after they were burned by the Bush Misadministration on so many issues.
—
Sure, if they catch on in time and if the D candidate fights well. The SBVFT are dead as dodos now, so the 2008 attack won’t be similar. But what happened in 2004? Half the media loved the SBVFT smear, and the other half treated it as serious news after Kerry decided to take the high road. So you had a mix of nuts and a mix of serious, sober MSM types creating a media context that was very difficult to maneuver in. Kerry didn’t help himself, obviously, but as a heat-seeking missile it was very well designed.
So the Swift Boat smear won’t look like a Swift Boat smear. It will be presented as something completely outside the R candidate; it will come from a different angle this fall. And the D candidate will have to fight effectively.
My point is that if the D’s think Obama can best represent them, fine, nominate Obama. If, on the other hand, they want to appease the R’s, then that is a losing proposition. The R’s are coming no matter what. Of all the Dems, I believe that Clinton is proven to be an effective fighter. Obama may be as well, and I like him, but only Clinton has proved it.
You may be right, Pedant, but I think Hillary provides the Right with more ammunition, even if it is 99.9% bull crap. Even after the Ray Report cleared the Clintons of any wrong doing, sans Monica, the Republicans still dredge up the same old baseless accusations from ten years ago.
I will vote for the Dem, regardless of the nominee, but I am tired of the bash-the-Clintons mentality and would like to see the end of the trend.
Heard on one of the talking head shows that the polls were probably off because they were taken on Sunday and almost 36 hrs had passed at election time. Enough time for people to react to Hill’s verge of tears speech and either decide to vote or change thier vote …
Maybe there could be an open season on Clinton :-)
See this is what I have been saying to so many on our side pedant.
They think Obama can somehow make the right nice and end the hatred.
Oh we can end the hatred from this side. Lower our hands and get our teeth kicked in.
NO thanks. Where is THEIR candidate calling for playing well with others?
If Obama is gonna be the nominee, he and Senators Clinton AND Edwards need to throughly blood each other first. That is the only chance that Obama will survive agains the nastiness to come.
Pedant – one point I am sure that we agree on is that John Kerry ran one of the worst campaigns in recent memory – that is why the Swift Boating was effective.
There are still folks on this blog that believe that Kerry nominated himself for his Purple Hearts.
The Right just can’t help themselves, Pedant.
Stolen from Bartcop……
“She pretended to cry, and she won.”
Bill Kristol
They are shameless. That we can agree on, also.
J R
Posted January 9, 2008 at 8:28 pm | Permalink
… Where is THEIR candidate calling for playing well with others?
—
Exactly. If any Dems find themselves wanting to “play nice,” then do you not find it exceedingly odd that there are no serious R’s wanting to do the same?
You should.
WS
It is NOT what Kerry did, or didn’t do, in Vietnam, that Veterans have a really hard time dealing with.
It is Kerry’s behavior, and dishonesty about that behavior, when he returned to the United States, that lost Kerry the election.
(However, I do think Kerry’s lie about “Christmas in Cambodia” hurt him a little bit.)
ON the bright side, I will know my choice is being seen as a serious threat when I read something like this I made up:
FLIGHT CREW FOR TRUTH SAID “WE KNEW HIM AS RONDA PAUL”
The “Flight Crew For Truth” formally known as the “Swift Boaters For Truth” Announce today that before they served with John Kerry in the Navy. They served with Presidential hopeful Ron Paul in the Air Force.
But knew him then as Ronda Paul, a cross-dressing, Lesbian , Trekiee fan, who bathed in blood and eat rat droppings. “There were some Saturday night while the rest of us were enjoying a cold beer. Ron Paul would have his hands covered in blood while he would “fondle “ little babies!” To hide his identity he would wear a “Mask“ and gloves. While half naked women would be laying on a table in front of him!”.
Writer
Ron Paul is a kook.
Nobody has to make anything up about him.
Ya, I know, Salon is a left wing rag, but here is what they printed about Ron Paul:
http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/01/08/paul/index.html?source=rss&aim=/politics/war_room
If we are to believe Ron Paul, he allowed racist comments to appear in a newsletter that HE ran, but those racist comments are not his own.
How does that work?
“It is NOT what Kerry did, or didn’t do, in Vietnam, that Veterans have a really hard time dealing with.”
So why did the Swift Boaters lie about his service in ‘Nam and his Purple Hearts?
The Swift Boat smear was all about Kerry’s service IN COUNTRY.
The swift boat vets were slime. Those who support them are slime.
I am SO enjoying the right wing circle firing squad. Couldn’t happen to nicer folks! Let me help!
Mitt Romney the mormon? Well, I can’t be sure as to this. I DO need to look into it more. Or maybe somebody better informed can advise.
I do genealogy. The roots thing? Yeah. Well, the mormons are big into that.
And I THINK I found out why. I find references to people who have been dead for 200 years and more being baptized into and endowed by the church of latter day saints?? Am I right here? Are these people going about baptizing the DEAD? See they did it to some of my distant ancestors. Now I never knew these people but I find these after death baptisms presumptive and MORE than a little creepy. Anybody got anything on this? Now everybody knows I aint religious, but how DO Christians feel about this rather strange stuff??
Kerry lied before Congress in the early 70s, he should be in prison for that. Kerry knowingly concocted stories he knew were false and testified before Congress.
Kerry is a liar and scam artist.
Correct James.
Hey liberals, how is it that you can jump all over people who make claims about Kerry —
But — Kerry can lie, repeatedly, about other Veterans and get away with it?
Kerry was NEVER in Cambodia, ever in his life. Yet, Kerry lied and said that he spent one Christmas in Cambodia.
Kerry NEVER released his full military record to the public.
It is easy to understand why.
Kerry was, more than likely, dishonorably or less than honorably discharged. Kerry later had his discharge upgraded by the Carter Amnesty Program.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41200
Again.
Kerry NEVER told the truth, about Vietnam or his activities after Vietnam.
Kerry decided to make Vietnam the centerpiece of his campaign.
Kerry was crazy to do so, and a large number of Democrats agree that Kerry’s campaign made no logical sense.
Kerry SHOULD have campaigned as an “anti war hero” and not a “war hero” —
You just can’t have it both ways.
YIKES it’s true!
“In the practice of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a living person, acting as proxy, is baptized by immersion on behalf of a deceased person of the same gender. The baptism ritual is as follows: after calling the living proxy by name, the person performing the baptism says, “Having been commissioned of Jesus Christ, I baptize you for and in behalf of [full name of deceased person], who is dead, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.” The proxy is then immersed briefly in the water. Baptism for the dead is a distinctive ordinance of the church and is based on the belief that baptism is a required ordinance for entry into the Kingdom of God.”
HEY! I am not religious. But some of my ancestors were. Who do these cultist Mormons think they are going about besmirching the faith of the dead? Do we want a President who believes in this stuff? What ELSE might he presume is the priviledge of him and his religion?
Geez I thought Romney was a plastic corporate raider. I didn’t imagine he was some freaked out weirdo.
The above comment is from a bigot.
It does not reflect the views of anyone but the bigot.
Mornons are good, decent people. I disagree with their faith, but they do not deserve such ridicule.
I agree Econ101, that was a bigoted post. Only a small minded bigot would post such a thing.
They deserve people knowing more about them is what they deserve!
Some of my ancestors were Quakers. Certainly all of them had their own religious preference. Now I don’t have one but who the heck do these people think they are doing religious ceremony on my family after they are dead?
I just found out about this stuff today and it honestly angers me.
If Willard Romney is to be a serious candidate I think a deeper exploration of his….unusual beliefs is in order.
Most adults knew about the Mormon belief J R, with the exception of yourself.
Only ignorant bigots like yourself would bring it up and apply it a political candidate.
Evidently, the only thing that exceeds your ignorance is the bigotry you show for people who believe in God.
Many faiths pray for the dead.
It is a point of disagreement between Protestants and Catholics.
However, Catholics, Eastern Orthodox and others believe that there is a “purgatory” (maybe where Lazarus went. Did Jesus not pray for his friend, upon his death?)
We do not need your permission to pray for you, while you are alive.
What harm can come, to you or anyone else, if we pray for you, at death?
Now, the idea of post mortem Baptism is something else.
However, it is Bigoted to claim that a Mormon is not qualified to be President, based solely on Mormonism.
Me up against the two low lifes of the blog?
I’ll take it.
I don’t think your average American knows about this stuff. I sure didn’t. For me this is a learning experience and I want to know more.
Some of my ancestors have “recieved their endowment” from the church of latter day saints. Now it is after their death and so outside their choice. What does this mean?
Who ARE these people creeping about graveyards for converts?
“Only ignorant bigots like yourself would bring it up and apply it a political candidate.”
Like when Mike Huckabee asked if Mormons believe that Satan is Jesus’ brother? Does that make Huckabee an ignorant bigot?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm……………………
If you are an atheist, what does it matter?
If Mormons are wrong about their faith, then nobody is ever really converted.
God will ignore their conversion attempts.
If Mormons are right? Well, I share in the widespread doubt, but their good intentions are evident.
Low lifes Junior?
Go walk to the store with your vision card and buy your son some more junk food.
You can’t do lawn care during the winter, so you depend on the government to feed you.
#
WSClark
Posted January 9, 2008 at 10:33 pm | Permalink
“Only ignorant bigots like yourself would bring it up and apply it a political candidate.”
Like when Mike Huckabee asked if Mormons believe that Satan is Jesus’ brother? Does that make Huckabee an ignorant bigot?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm……………………
That’s right Clarkie, Huckabee asked a question, he didn’t make an accusation nor did he say someone was unqualified to be a political candidate for president based on their religion.
There is a difference between asking a question and making bigoted comments like J R does.
In Huckabee’s defense, he never said that Mormonism was a reason to vote against someone, did he?
“God will ignore their conversion attempts.”
How can one “convert” after death? Correct me if I am wrong (I’m not), but I don’t recall Jesus stating anything about post-death conversion to Christianity. He did state that “he who believes and is baptized shall be saved.”
Kinda of hard to believe after you’ve been pushing up daisies.
Okay, Rossell and McCluer, I’ll bite…… why DID Huckabee ask if Romney believed that Satan was Jesus’ brother?
Just curious?
Not likely.
WS
Faith is faith.
I did not say that I was a Mormon.
Romney should be able to run for President based on his character and accomplishments, without having to apologize for his faith.
My point is that this particular tenant of Mormonism is harmless.
Who cares?
Except for you liberal bigots who want to get other bigots fired up over it.
WSClark,
The Mormons also have the Book of Mormon to refer to. I don’t agree with it, but I’m not going to use it as a standard on who runs for office.
Buddhists have weird beliefs as well. That doesn’t disqualify them for running for office nor should it be used in judging their qualifications.
Evidently WSClark, neither you or J R believe in our Constitution. In article VI it states:
“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
WS
Who cares?
It does not matter.
Huckabee either asked a harmless question, or Huckabee asked a politically motivated question that he should not have asked.
Either way, that is for Huckabee to defend and explain.
It does not give anyone on this Blog the right to be a bigot.
I, myself, enjoy discussing both Religion and Politics, but I try to do so with some degree of respect for other beliefs.
The Senate Majority Leader is Harry Reid, a:
MORMON!
(And a Democrat)
I am not on public assistance James. You are.
Oh and my comment is only “bigoted” in that the Mormon faith is not forthcoming as to their practices. Though I am not a person of faith, I have resolved to treat those who are with more deference.
I am outraged that the faith of some of my ancestors is not so respected! Some of my ancestors fled religious persecution. What they get it after they are dead?
Sick!
Oh and Rosells church is that of the holy dollar.
He’s a kneeler.
Too each his own I guess.
So, Paul, Harry Reid is a Mormon. What’s your point?
It was Huckabee that suggested that Romney’s religion was off kilter when asked about it during a Q and A session.
Last I checked, Huckabee was a Republican.
JR: “who are these people creeeping around graveyards for converts?” Not much different than those Mayor Daly people going around graveyards for JFK votes that won him the election. Seems like if your goal here is religious or spiritual, you are gonna be hammered into submission, but if you dig up the dead to get votes, its ok. There are a Lot of things in the Mormon closet, such as a massacre of a wagon train of non mormons in Utah authorized by Brigham Young himself, but its pretty much all history and Mormonism is no stranger a religion than scientology , or Jehova Witness, or whatever might be the singled out belief of the day. Bottom line is that its a free country and one can believe what one likes. I remember Bill Clinton as President making an appearance in a Jewish service complete with the little beanie that they wear. He knew that if you just believed whatever the people that you needed believed, you would be popular. Hell, he could probably have gotten by on the blog with no admosity, because he had no convictions. By the way, no one seems to have a problem with Harry Reid’s Mormon beliefs, whassup with that?
“Evidently WSClark, neither you or J R believe in our Constitution. In article VI it states:”
Cut and paste a comment where I suggest that ANYONE should be disqualified for the office of president based on his religion or lack thereof.
I’ll be waiting.
Still suckling off your mama’s teat then J R?
#
WSClark
Posted January 9, 2008 at 10:53 pm | Permalink
“Evidently WSClark, neither you or J R believe in our Constitution. In article VI it states:”
Cut and paste a comment where I suggest that ANYONE should be disqualified for the office of president based on his religion or lack thereof.
I’ll be waiting.”
I’ll be waiting that you deny are not using a religious test on candidate.
Willard Romney attacked those without faith.
Clearly, he did that to distract from his own.
Who the heck are these people to mess about with the dead?
If Willard Romney is to be a serious candidate, his faith needs better explanation.
John Kennedy faced this before I was born. Willard should not get a pass.
James?
Bring it. Now I have afforded you your meltdown on the open thread. I know you are ill.
Come after me and mine? You’ll wish you were confined to protect you from yourself.
So it is true J R, you are still sucking on your mama’s teat.
“I’ll be waiting that you deny are not using a religious test on candidate.”
Say what? I don’t even believe in religion – period – so why would I have a religious test for a candidate?
Christ.
“I’ll be waiting that you deny not using a religious test on candidate.”
That’s right. He has to sacrifice a goat to Baal and read the entrails. How does your tribe do it?
Who is it you live with there James?
You said your wife left and took your kid.
Now I don’t like this kind of fighting. And I know you are ill. But I will not let your attacks that displace your own illness stand. I owe you better.
Back to the point…
The Dem. Kennedy faced serious questions and concerns because of his Catholic faith.
CERTAINLY Willard Romney deserves the same or even greater scrutiny. If his faith lets him baptize my dead ancestors into it what does he have planned for the living?
#
WSClark
Posted January 9, 2008 at 11:05 pm | Permalink
“I’ll be waiting that you deny are not using a religious test on candidate.”
Say what? I don’t even believe in religion – period – so why would I have a religious test for a candidate?
Christ.
*******
Okay Heebie, then this shouldn’t bother you, since you’re not religious.
“Okay Heebie, then this shouldn’t bother you, since you’re not religious.”
What? Just what the Hell are you babbling about? Are you back on the attack over my partial ethnic Jewish heritage? Have you slipped completely over the edge?
Christ, J R is right, you are ill and need some serious help.
Huckabee holds a theology degree I would assume as part of that degree would be several classes in comparative religion, for him to ask asine questions about Mormonism to me seems subtle slams against Romney’s religion. And I’ve met many evangelicals who beilive that mormonism is a cult or think that the pope is the Antichrist
And the ill poster who called ME a bigot reveals his anti semitism. Not the first time.
Paul bailed on ya James. He always will.
HIS church is the pursuit of the holy dollar.
In a fight to the bottom he beats you. You are ill. He is evil.
J R
Posted January 9, 2008 at 11:17 pm | Permalink
Who is it you live with there James?
You said your wife left and took your kid.
Now I don’t like this kind of fighting. And I know you are ill. But I will not let your attacks that displace your own illness stand. I owe you better.
You see bloggers, J R’s statement
“Who is it you live with there James?”
proves that he has stalked me and where I live.
And you give this low life a bye.
CapnAmerica has readily admitted he drives by my house often.
Both are real life stalkers and both admit it.
Yet, not a word from any of you on this real life stalking.
Plus, Brownlee encourages it by keeping these criminal stalkers on this blog.
I only know what I read here James.
You got that on yourself and I wasn’t even around.
From what I know it was you that went into looking into exposing people. Again, I don’t know for sure as I wasn’t posting.
You attacked and have on many occasions threatened me. Yup I will hit back. And I’ll use whatever advantage I have.
Please James. You are ill. Seek help.
“Yet, not a word from any of you on this real life stalking.”
My, my, McCluer, within the past twenty four hours you have suggested that you are going to do bodily harm to people and now you are having paranoid delusions about people stalking you.
Get some help, brother. Life is far too short to live in a constant state of rage. Honestly, have a sit down with your doctor and discuss your issues and get treatment. It is never too late to let go of your hatred for your fellow man.
Your doctor’s office most likely opens at 9:00 AM. Make that call at 9:01.
Don’t let another day go by.
Naw WSClark and J R,
I will hire a detective agency to provide me with photos and evidence about J R and CapnAmerica.
Surveillance is very good these days and reveals much.
The Lib lackeys are defending their troll behavior by making excuses for criminal stalking.
“I will hire a detective agency to provide me with photos and evidence about J R and CapnAmerica.”
You have truly slipped into a state of paranoid delusion, McCluer.
Set your alarm. Get up early. Make that call.
Good night.
James McCluer
Posted January 9, 2008 at 2:44 pm | Permalink
Let’s get it on the table Libs. Meet me on the same terms, post your real names.
Let’s get down with it and get into some serious ass kicking.
Hey I bet I can do more ruination to your lives than you can imagine.
*****
If you don’t like it, maybe we can meet up and I can stomp a mudhole in your ass.
*****
Of course, Brownlee won’t do anything, so I am doing something.
Oh yeah, Steven Davis, I have your blog website recorded and that nice pic of you standing in the trout stream.
I’m coming for you Steven Davis.
You want it personal? Let’s do it.
Posted by: Kansas | December 21, 2007 at 06:15 AM
*****
He’s also threatened to post information about my wife, my bank account and my dog’s bank account.
The funny thing is James McClure the post-er that outed you was somebody under the nic “Huh?”
None of us libs that you continually lash out against and threaten even know who he is.
But we know what your game is, James McCluer. It’s making the WEBlog all about you.
You’ll have to excuse us if we no longer want to play . . .
Still ashamed to post your real name huh Crapn?
Since you have no balls I can do what I can to further your pain.
You won’t have a choice if you no longer want to play Crapn.
You and your buddies went criminal and I’m going to push it.
“CapnAmerica has readily admitted he drives by my house often.”
Thing is, I drive by a lot of houses. And you know what else?
A lot of other people drive by my house.
It’s what happens when one lives on a public street.
Well I have to sleep.
I want you to take notice of how your only ally Paul econ abandoned you James. You need to remember that.
You will use your government provided benefits to investigate me? Well you will be very bored in what they find.
Long time posters here can vouch for me. I don’t enjoy hurting people.
That said, you threatened me on many occasions. If I can destroy you more than you already have yourself, I will. I’d much prefer that you seek the help you need.
You don’t have the capacity to make me angry anymore, JM.
Just sad.
I feel nothing but pity for you . . .
J R
Posted January 10, 2008 at 12:14 am
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/01/still-a-wide-open-primary-season/#comment-270796
“If I can destroy you more than you already have yourself, I will. ”
Thanks for that admission J R. It will become quite useful in the future.
ALTHOUGH Clinton won, it was a narrow victory of less than 8,,000 votes which produced a TIE at 9 delegates apeice for Clinton and Obama. Looks like a squeaker at best, but following the surprise in Iowa, I guess she will take anything!!
Democrats
22 pledged delegates, 8 unpledged
Candidate Vote % Delegates
Hillary Rodham Clinton 112,251 39.1% 9
Barack Obama 104,772 36.5 9
John Edwards 48,681 16.9 4
Bill Richardson 13,249 4.6 0
Dennis J. Kucinich 3,919 1.4 0
Others 3,218 1.1 0
Joseph R. Biden Jr. 628 0.2 0
Mike Gravel 402 0.1 0
Christopher J. Dodd 202 0.1 0
100% reporting
Goddamn, are you people incapable of ignoring the trolls like JM?
I promise you, it will take all of the fun out of their trolling. Sometimes I think the liberals secretly love the drama.
LMFAO
Great post Pleefer
Thanks, I have to laugh at that stuff. but I’m still a little freaked out.
I have had an issue with polls for a while. This explains a lot. I think this is one step closer to the MSM telling you whom to vote for. NPR caught a democrat voter leaving after casting his vote. When asked he stated that he voted for Hillary. When asked why he stated something like “Because this nation needs a female president, you know like mother earth, a mother figure.” “Then went on to say something about how she sounded educated and intelligent.
I was shocked. No mention of her policies or what she would do for the nation. Just “Mother Earth”. How freakin scary that people like this will determine the next president.
This is no worse than the NH coffe house crying video telling the weak-willed women of NH who to vote for. This is a calculated fraud that set back feminism 50 years and DUPED THE WOMEN OF NH.
http://www.google.com/search?q=clinton+fake+southern+drawl&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-US&ie=utf8&oe=utf8
Well, as a life long republican, I just finished watching the republican debate on Fox.
After two hours, I have to admit, there is not one leader amongst the nitwits running for president on the republican side.
Oh some made points on some of the questions and some lost points.
But not one single leader in the pack.
I’m reminded of the toys on the island of lost toys on the Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer show,
“Why am I such a misfit……….”
You can answer a question with passion, truth, and sincerity. But not one of them has charisma, boldness, confidence, or resolution. Romney came close on one answer to one question.
But the smirking at the “lesser” candidates blew any points he may have had. I HATE someone who thinks they are superior.
Waiting for the thread…….
4 Trackbacks
illinois payday loan…
The best source for quick cash advance and payday loans online….
amy poehler clips…
…
Jessie…
I love this web stuff!…
beanie toys…
My kids love Webkinz.Also they learn how to take care of things….