Hi everyone! As you can tell due to my lack of blog posts, school is back in session and my classes are keeping me quite busy. This week, though, I had a little free time and decided to do some research on a candidate that I haven’t discussed on Present Day Patriots yet—Newt Gingrich. He won South Carolina with 40.4% of the vote, and has continued to maintain something of a lead, close to Mitt Romney. Until now, I’d only heard bits and pieces of Gingrich’s political views and his past record. I took some time to do a little in-depth research, so I’ll share what I found.
Newt Gingrich was born in 1943 in Harrisburg, PA and grew up in a military family. He went to Emory University and Tulane, and got a Ph.D in Modern European History. For several years, he worked as an assistant professor of history and geography and West Georgia College. He married his first wife in 1962, divorced her—married his second wife in 1981, divorced her—and married his current wife, Callista Bisek in 2000.
In 1978, he won a House seat after losing in 1974 and 1976, and was subsequently reelected to Congress ten times. Gingrich is credited with energizing the “Republican Revolution” in 1994, when the GOP won back a majority in the house after decades of a Democrat majority. Gingrich was named Speaker of the House in ’94.
http://www.biography.com/people/newt-gingrich-9311969
In debates and in the news, I’ve heard quite a bit about the “Ethics Violations” that Gingrich was supposedly guilty of. The whole situation seems to have been a complicated, partisan mess. While serving in Congress, he taught a class from 1993-1995 called “Renewing American Civilization” at two Georgia colleges; it was funded by a tax-exempt organization called the “Progress and Freedom Foundation.” Critics said the class “had little to do with learning and was in fact a political exercise in which Gingrich abused a tax-exempt foundation to spread his own partisan message.” A Georgia Congressman who was defeated by Gingrich, Ben Jones, brought the whole ordeal to the public sphere and requested that the House Ethics Committee investigate it. Gingrich eventually made a “limited confession of wrongdoing in 1971 for not getting advice on a tax lawyer for the funding of the course, and for providing “inaccurate and incomplete” information to the House Ethics Committee. He was fined $300,000 and reprimanded. A quote from his attorney at the time regarding Gingrich’s confession: “The atmosphere at the time was so rancorous, partisan, and personal that everyone, including Newt, was desperately seeking a way to end the whole thing.”
Later, the IRS further investigated the situation to see if the class was political or educational in nature. They reviewed student evaluations and listened to recorded classes, and eventually, it was determined that it was purely educational; Gingrich was exonerated of the charges.
http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/what-really-happened-gingrich-ethics-case/336051
The GOP lost a great deal of House seats in 1998 and Gingrich received much of the blame—for this, he resigned as Speaker and from his position in the House in 1998.
From 1999 to 2008, Gingrich associated with Freddie Mac—the infamous mortgage lender. The released contract specifically indicates that Gingrich position is not that of a lobbyist, but he “advised the company’s chief lobbyist on business and public policy issues.”
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71930.html
There you have a basic summary of Gingrich’s past. Something that particularly caught my attention with the former Speaker is his apparent admiration—or obsession?—with the Roosevelts. He identifies himself as a “Teddy Roosevelt Republican” and really, really loves FDR. Numerous times, he’s expressed his belief that FDR was the greatest, most effective President of the 20th century. Franklin Delano Roosevelt was certainly “effective,” but I, personally have never been a huge fan of FDR because of his contributions to the growth of government and entitlement programs. Here are some of Gingrich’s statements on FDR:
In researching his past and current political views, it was at times difficult to pinpoint his opinion because his opinions on many things have changed. I’ve heard people say that Mitt Romney has “flip-flopped” on many issues, but I think it’s fair to say that Gingrich has, as well.
Here are few notes on the issues—past and present— that I found pertinent:
• Gingrich is pro-life (except in the cases of rape and incest) and opposes same-sex marriage.
• He appeared in an ad with Al Gore and Nancy Pelosi saying how our country needs to take action to address climate change. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi6n_-wB154). He was, at one point, for cap-and-trade, and then later said it would lead to corruption and would harm the economy.
• He was for the formation of the U.S Department of Education.
• Supported the TARP Bailout
• Wants to replace the EPA with an “Environmental Solutions Agency” to “incentivize green technology” rather than regulate it.
• At one point he was for a federal mandate on health insurance, but then later called it unconstitutional
This article has a few more of Gingrich’s “flip-flops”: http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/11/newt-gingrich-flip-flops.html .
During one of the many, many debates that have been held thus far, Gingrich said this regarding how the United States should handle Iran and their efforts to go nuclear (beginning at 2:37):
Personally, that aggression does not sit well with me. I don’t think that kind of aggressive foreign policy would be in the best interests of the United States. But Gingrich has a sort of “aggressive” air about him at all times, especially in debates, and especially when he is going after Mitt Romney. (It got pretty ugly in last night’s CNN Debate!)
I hope this has given you a little more insight into GOP candidate Newt Gingrich. I don’t know if he can honestly run as a “Washington outsider” as he’s clearly been in politics for most of his career. Further, I question whether Gingrich is capable of beating Obama—nearly every Obama vs. Gingrich poll I’ve found indicates Obama leading by a huge margin. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_gingrich_vs_obama-1453.html)
Your thoughts on Newt Gingrich?
I have several more topics I want to address on Present Day Patriots—some political, and some not political in nature, so keep checking back for updates! Thanks for reading, have a nice weekend! ☺
http://www.newt.org/solutions/protecting-life-and-religious-liberty
http://www.salon.com/2007/11/10/gingrich_4/
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/12/gingrich-feels-heat-global-warming-ad-pelosi/
Friday, January 27, 2012
Thursday, January 12, 2012
The Facts on Mitt Romney
Mitt Romney stole the New Hampshire Primary victory by a mile with 39.3% of the vote—not surprising, since New England is his home turf and he dedicated a great deal of time to the state. Ron Paul was second with 22.9% of the vote (with 37,000 more votes than he had in 2008 in NH) and Jon Huntsman was third with 16.9%.
For this blog post I want to focus on Mitt Romney. Since even before the 2012 Presidential Race really began in earnest, Romney has led in the polls and has seemed the first choice of many Republicans. The man gives a good speech, and certainly looks like a President… and some of the things he says during debates have sounded promising, as if he really does represent Conservative ideals, contrary to the current administration. But does his past back up his claims of the present? Is he Conservative “enough”? Will Republicans “settle” for him because they think he is the only candidate capable of beating Barack Obama?
Romney is a businessman, and without a doubt he was successful in the private sector. He started Bain Capital in 1984, a private equity investment firm, and invested in or acquired companies like Sports Authority, Brookstone, and Domino’s Pizza. Bain & Company, the parent company from which Bain Capital was a spinoff, began to suffer financially and Romney became the CEO in 1991. Also of note: Romney and Bain Capital were given a $10 million bailout from the FDIC in 1993 when the company ran into financial trouble. Bain & Company’s finances were turned around and Romney was the CEO until 2002 when he became the President and CEO of the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympic Games Organizing Committee.
While at Bain, Romney says he created over 100,000 jobs in the companies he worked with (i.e Sports Authority, Staples, Domino’s). What his critics (Newt Gingrich!) are quick to point out: “But like Romney’s work on all the businesses Bain invested in, the primary goal with these companies wasn’t job creation but making them more profitable and valuable. This meant embracing aspects of capitalism that have unsettled some Americans: laying off workers when necessary, expanding overseas to chase profits and paying top executives significantly more than employees on lower rungs.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/mitt-romney-bain-capital-and-the-gospel-of-creative-destruction/2012/01/09/gIQAfRKEsP_story_1.html
Keep in mind that profits are the first concern in capitalism, not creating jobs. Though Romney created a lot of jobs, many employees in the companies he worked with were also laid off. Please don’t think I’m bashing capitalism—I’m definitely not! I’m probably one of its biggest advocates. I’m simply trying to bring to light that the fact that Romney did lay off employees could come back to haunt him in debates against Barack Obama if he becomes the nominee.
Before Romney took over, the Olympics were falling $379 million short on revenue. He reduced budgets and increased fundraising and oversaw a budget of $1.32 million. The games cleared a profit of $100 million.
Romney ran for Massachusetts senator in 1994 but lost, and later served as the governor of Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007, the only political position he’s held. When he took office, Massachusetts faced a deficit of $3 billion. While in office, he cut spending and balanced the state’s budget each year he was in office. He’s proud to say that he turned Massachusetts around fiscally without raising taxes. Romney raised government fees (marriage licenses, gun licenses, court filings, other state licenses, etc.) and imposed new ones (33 new, 57 increased). This brought in revenues of $240 million.
Massachusetts, under Romney’s leadership, also adopted universal health care for the state (“Romneycare”) in 2006. This mandated all citizens of Massachusetts to buy health insurance, or face a penalty. Here’s an excerpt from a Cato Institute article on Romney’s healthcare plan:
“Perhaps the most publicized aspect of the Massachusetts reform is its mandate that every resident have health insurance, whether provided by an employer or the government or purchased individually. "I like mandates," Romney said during a debate in New Hampshire. "The mandate works." But did it? …
Such a mandate was, of course, a significant infringement on individual choice and liberty. As the Congressional Budget Office noted, the mandate was "unprecedented," and represented the first time that a state has required that an individual, simply because they live in a state and for no other reason, must purchase a specific government- designated product. …
The subsidies may have increased the number of Massachusetts citizens with insurance, but as many as 400,000 Massachusetts residents by some estimates have failed to buy the required insurance. That includes the overwhelming majority of those with incomes too high to qualify for state subsidies. Fewer than 30,000 unsubsidized residents have signed up as a result of the mandate. And that is on top of the 60,000 of the state’s uninsured who were exempted from the mandate because buying insurance would be too much of a financial burden.
The Massachusetts plan might not have achieved universal coverage, but it has cost taxpayers a great deal of money. Originally, the plan was projected to cost $1.8 billion this year [2008]. Now it is expected to exceed those estimates by $150 million. Over the next 10 years, projections suggest that Romney- Care will cost about $2 billion more than was budgeted. And the cost to Massachusetts taxpayers could be even higher because new federal rules could deprive the state of $100 million per year in Medicaid money that the state planned to use to help finance the program.”
http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/v30n1/cpr30n1-1.html
Romney stands by his decision to enact universal healthcare in Massachusetts, saying: “…our plan was right for our state. …The plan is not perfect, there are things that I’d change in it, but I’ll stand by the things we’ve done.”
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/mitt-romney-defends-romneycare-will-do-what-i-think-is-right-for-the-people-i-represent/
In the past, Romney’s views on social issues have changed. He went from being pro-choice to pro-life, from being a supporter of gay marriage to an advocate for the traditional family. He embraces the fact that his opinions have changed over the years. Specifically on the issue of abortion: “He supported abortion rights when he ran for Senate in 1994 and for governor of Massachusetts in 2002. But when he was in office, Romney said, an embryonic stem cell research bill came to his desk that ‘would have created new life for the purposes of experimenting on it and then destroying it. I simply could not sign a bill that would take life,” Romney said. “I recognized that was a very different course than I’d expected.’”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/romney-says-changing-positions-can-be-a-good-thing/2011/12/22/gIQA9TeUBP_blog.html
Well, there you have it—the facts of Mitt Romney’s record (also, if you haven’t yet, check out my blog post about campaign contributors to GOP candidates—it’s the post below this one). Now to discuss the question, is he electable? I think Romney is the person the Republican establishment wants to elect to run against Obama, and he’s heavily attacked by only a few, mainly Newt Gingrich. He may look like the strongest candidate right now, but when standing next to Obama, will the left try to paint him as “disconnected with the average American” because of his corporate connections?
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/01/09/donna_brazile_lets_the_cat_out_of_the_bag_dems_want_to_run_against_romney
Here are Fox News’ Exit Polls from the New Hampshire Primary. Take a minute to scroll through the results. The wealthier voters seemed to favor Romney, and the Independent vote was split quite close between Mitt Romney and Ron Paul.
I hope this post gave you some insight into the record and past view points of Mitt Romney. What do you think? Is Mitt Romney “Conservative enough” for you? Will Romney connect with voters of all or of varying demographics? Can he beat Barack Obama?
http://biggovernment.com/awrhawkins/2012/01/10/sarah-palin-and-rush-limbaugh-agree-mitt-romney-is-obamas-candidate-of-choice/
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/58952.html
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2005/09/the-i-holy-cow-i-candidate/4196/3/
http://magazine.byu.edu/?act=view&a=843
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/fact-checker-biography-romneys-fiscal-policies-as-governor/2011/10/27/gIQAoJUmPM_blog.html
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1619536,00.html
For this blog post I want to focus on Mitt Romney. Since even before the 2012 Presidential Race really began in earnest, Romney has led in the polls and has seemed the first choice of many Republicans. The man gives a good speech, and certainly looks like a President… and some of the things he says during debates have sounded promising, as if he really does represent Conservative ideals, contrary to the current administration. But does his past back up his claims of the present? Is he Conservative “enough”? Will Republicans “settle” for him because they think he is the only candidate capable of beating Barack Obama?
Romney is a businessman, and without a doubt he was successful in the private sector. He started Bain Capital in 1984, a private equity investment firm, and invested in or acquired companies like Sports Authority, Brookstone, and Domino’s Pizza. Bain & Company, the parent company from which Bain Capital was a spinoff, began to suffer financially and Romney became the CEO in 1991. Also of note: Romney and Bain Capital were given a $10 million bailout from the FDIC in 1993 when the company ran into financial trouble. Bain & Company’s finances were turned around and Romney was the CEO until 2002 when he became the President and CEO of the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympic Games Organizing Committee.
While at Bain, Romney says he created over 100,000 jobs in the companies he worked with (i.e Sports Authority, Staples, Domino’s). What his critics (Newt Gingrich!) are quick to point out: “But like Romney’s work on all the businesses Bain invested in, the primary goal with these companies wasn’t job creation but making them more profitable and valuable. This meant embracing aspects of capitalism that have unsettled some Americans: laying off workers when necessary, expanding overseas to chase profits and paying top executives significantly more than employees on lower rungs.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/mitt-romney-bain-capital-and-the-gospel-of-creative-destruction/2012/01/09/gIQAfRKEsP_story_1.html
Keep in mind that profits are the first concern in capitalism, not creating jobs. Though Romney created a lot of jobs, many employees in the companies he worked with were also laid off. Please don’t think I’m bashing capitalism—I’m definitely not! I’m probably one of its biggest advocates. I’m simply trying to bring to light that the fact that Romney did lay off employees could come back to haunt him in debates against Barack Obama if he becomes the nominee.
Before Romney took over, the Olympics were falling $379 million short on revenue. He reduced budgets and increased fundraising and oversaw a budget of $1.32 million. The games cleared a profit of $100 million.
Romney ran for Massachusetts senator in 1994 but lost, and later served as the governor of Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007, the only political position he’s held. When he took office, Massachusetts faced a deficit of $3 billion. While in office, he cut spending and balanced the state’s budget each year he was in office. He’s proud to say that he turned Massachusetts around fiscally without raising taxes. Romney raised government fees (marriage licenses, gun licenses, court filings, other state licenses, etc.) and imposed new ones (33 new, 57 increased). This brought in revenues of $240 million.
Massachusetts, under Romney’s leadership, also adopted universal health care for the state (“Romneycare”) in 2006. This mandated all citizens of Massachusetts to buy health insurance, or face a penalty. Here’s an excerpt from a Cato Institute article on Romney’s healthcare plan:
“Perhaps the most publicized aspect of the Massachusetts reform is its mandate that every resident have health insurance, whether provided by an employer or the government or purchased individually. "I like mandates," Romney said during a debate in New Hampshire. "The mandate works." But did it? …
Such a mandate was, of course, a significant infringement on individual choice and liberty. As the Congressional Budget Office noted, the mandate was "unprecedented," and represented the first time that a state has required that an individual, simply because they live in a state and for no other reason, must purchase a specific government- designated product. …
The subsidies may have increased the number of Massachusetts citizens with insurance, but as many as 400,000 Massachusetts residents by some estimates have failed to buy the required insurance. That includes the overwhelming majority of those with incomes too high to qualify for state subsidies. Fewer than 30,000 unsubsidized residents have signed up as a result of the mandate. And that is on top of the 60,000 of the state’s uninsured who were exempted from the mandate because buying insurance would be too much of a financial burden.
The Massachusetts plan might not have achieved universal coverage, but it has cost taxpayers a great deal of money. Originally, the plan was projected to cost $1.8 billion this year [2008]. Now it is expected to exceed those estimates by $150 million. Over the next 10 years, projections suggest that Romney- Care will cost about $2 billion more than was budgeted. And the cost to Massachusetts taxpayers could be even higher because new federal rules could deprive the state of $100 million per year in Medicaid money that the state planned to use to help finance the program.”
http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/v30n1/cpr30n1-1.html
Romney stands by his decision to enact universal healthcare in Massachusetts, saying: “…our plan was right for our state. …The plan is not perfect, there are things that I’d change in it, but I’ll stand by the things we’ve done.”
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/mitt-romney-defends-romneycare-will-do-what-i-think-is-right-for-the-people-i-represent/
In the past, Romney’s views on social issues have changed. He went from being pro-choice to pro-life, from being a supporter of gay marriage to an advocate for the traditional family. He embraces the fact that his opinions have changed over the years. Specifically on the issue of abortion: “He supported abortion rights when he ran for Senate in 1994 and for governor of Massachusetts in 2002. But when he was in office, Romney said, an embryonic stem cell research bill came to his desk that ‘would have created new life for the purposes of experimenting on it and then destroying it. I simply could not sign a bill that would take life,” Romney said. “I recognized that was a very different course than I’d expected.’”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/romney-says-changing-positions-can-be-a-good-thing/2011/12/22/gIQA9TeUBP_blog.html
Well, there you have it—the facts of Mitt Romney’s record (also, if you haven’t yet, check out my blog post about campaign contributors to GOP candidates—it’s the post below this one). Now to discuss the question, is he electable? I think Romney is the person the Republican establishment wants to elect to run against Obama, and he’s heavily attacked by only a few, mainly Newt Gingrich. He may look like the strongest candidate right now, but when standing next to Obama, will the left try to paint him as “disconnected with the average American” because of his corporate connections?
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/01/09/donna_brazile_lets_the_cat_out_of_the_bag_dems_want_to_run_against_romney
Here are Fox News’ Exit Polls from the New Hampshire Primary. Take a minute to scroll through the results. The wealthier voters seemed to favor Romney, and the Independent vote was split quite close between Mitt Romney and Ron Paul.
I hope this post gave you some insight into the record and past view points of Mitt Romney. What do you think? Is Mitt Romney “Conservative enough” for you? Will Romney connect with voters of all or of varying demographics? Can he beat Barack Obama?
http://biggovernment.com/awrhawkins/2012/01/10/sarah-palin-and-rush-limbaugh-agree-mitt-romney-is-obamas-candidate-of-choice/
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/58952.html
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2005/09/the-i-holy-cow-i-candidate/4196/3/
http://magazine.byu.edu/?act=view&a=843
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/fact-checker-biography-romneys-fiscal-policies-as-governor/2011/10/27/gIQAoJUmPM_blog.html
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1619536,00.html
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Candidates Campaign Contributions
It’s New Hampshire Primary Day! Mitt Romney is maintaining his decent lead in the polls but it looks like Jon Huntsman, Rick Santorum and Ron Paul may be competing for second. I’ve been thinking about the GOP candidates, and in trying to discern who the best person is for the job, I wanted to know what kind of people are pouring money into the campaigns of frontrunners. In looking for the candidate’s most prominent donors, I found OpenSecret.org. This organization has detailed reports of each candidate’s campaign contributors with the campaign contributions broken up into demographic, industry, and location. You can tell a lot about a candidate by looking at their campaign contributors, so here is some of the info I found on Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, and Rick Santorum…
(*Note: In the “Top Contributors” section, as per the website: “The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organizations' PACs, their individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.”)
MITT ROMNEY:
Total $ Raised: $32,212,389
Debt: $0
Top Metro Areas that Contribute: New York ($2,634,763), Boston ($2,076,144), Washington, DC-MD-VA-WV ($1,345,000), Houston ($1,174,575), Los Angeles-Long Beach ($1,091,351).
Top Industries that Contribute: Securities and Investments, Retired, Real Estate, Lawyers/law firms, Miscellaneous Business
Top Contributors: Goldman Sachs ($367,200), Credit Suisse Group ($203,750), Morgan Stanley ($199,800), HIG Capital ($186,500), Barclays (157,750). (Others: Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase & Co, Wells Fargo, Citigroup)
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/candidate.php?id=N00000286
RON PAUL:
Total $ Raised: $12,623,422
Debt: $0
Top Metro Areas that Contribute: Houston ($169,111), Los Angeles-Long Beach ($163,910), New York ($151,387), Austin-San Marcos ($118,971), Washington, DC-MD-VA-WV ($107,843).
Top Industries that Contribute: Miscellaneous Business, Retired, Candidate Committees, Health Professionals, Computers/Internet.
Top Contributors: US Army, US Air Force, US Navy, Mason Capitol Management, Microsoft Corp. (Others: Boeing, US Government, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Department of Defense).
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/candidate.php?cycle=2012&id=N00005906
RICK SANTORUM:
Total $ Raised: $1,286,975
Debt: $71,866
Top Metro Areas that Contribute: Philadelphia, PA-NJ ($139,562), Washington, DC- MD-VA-WV ($78,450), Pittsburgh ($66,750), Sarasota-Bradenton ($44,300), Scranton-Wilkes-Barre-Hazleton ($36,900).
Top Industries that Contribute: Retired, Miscellaneous Business, Real Estate, Securities and Investment, Insurance.
Top Contributors: Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Universal Health Services, Kimber Manufacturing, El Dorado Holdings, Achristavest. (Others: Northwestern Mutual Life, CONSOL Energy, Diamond Manufacturing).
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/candidate.php?cycle=2012&id=N00001380
And just to compare, here are the same statistics on Barack Obama…
Total $ Raised: $86,215,580
Debt: $1,709, 300
Top Metro Areas that Contribute: New York ($4,522,865), Los Angeles-Long Beach ($3,330,018), Washington, DC-MD-VA-WV ($3,307,094), Chicago ($2,473,302), Boston, MA-NH ($2,425,617).
Top Industries that Contribute: Retired, Miscellaneous Business, Lawyers/Law firms, Education, Securities and Investment
Top Contributors: Microsoft Corp., Comcast Corp., University of California, Harvard University, Google. (Others: Goldman Sachs, Columbia University, Time Warner).
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/candidate.php?cycle=2012&id=N00009638
Well, what do you think of these numbers? Mitt Romney is leading the GOP in fundraising amounts but definitely has the support of banks and financial institutions. I found it interesting that Ron Paul’s top donors come from the military—no other candidate has as much support from the military as Ron Paul. Considering his stances on foreign policy, this is telling. It’s interesting to note that Santorum and Obama’s campaigns are in debt (as is Newt Gingrich), and that much of Obama’s campaign money comes from educational institutions.
Hopefully this post gave you some insight as to where the money is coming from in several of the candidate’s campaigns. I’ll be watching coverage of the New Hampshire Primary tonight and hopefully post again tomorrow. Have a great day, everyone! ☺
“Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.”
(*Note: In the “Top Contributors” section, as per the website: “The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organizations' PACs, their individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.”)
MITT ROMNEY:
Total $ Raised: $32,212,389
Debt: $0
Top Metro Areas that Contribute: New York ($2,634,763), Boston ($2,076,144), Washington, DC-MD-VA-WV ($1,345,000), Houston ($1,174,575), Los Angeles-Long Beach ($1,091,351).
Top Industries that Contribute: Securities and Investments, Retired, Real Estate, Lawyers/law firms, Miscellaneous Business
Top Contributors: Goldman Sachs ($367,200), Credit Suisse Group ($203,750), Morgan Stanley ($199,800), HIG Capital ($186,500), Barclays (157,750). (Others: Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase & Co, Wells Fargo, Citigroup)
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/candidate.php?id=N00000286
RON PAUL:
Total $ Raised: $12,623,422
Debt: $0
Top Metro Areas that Contribute: Houston ($169,111), Los Angeles-Long Beach ($163,910), New York ($151,387), Austin-San Marcos ($118,971), Washington, DC-MD-VA-WV ($107,843).
Top Industries that Contribute: Miscellaneous Business, Retired, Candidate Committees, Health Professionals, Computers/Internet.
Top Contributors: US Army, US Air Force, US Navy, Mason Capitol Management, Microsoft Corp. (Others: Boeing, US Government, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Department of Defense).
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/candidate.php?cycle=2012&id=N00005906
RICK SANTORUM:
Total $ Raised: $1,286,975
Debt: $71,866
Top Metro Areas that Contribute: Philadelphia, PA-NJ ($139,562), Washington, DC- MD-VA-WV ($78,450), Pittsburgh ($66,750), Sarasota-Bradenton ($44,300), Scranton-Wilkes-Barre-Hazleton ($36,900).
Top Industries that Contribute: Retired, Miscellaneous Business, Real Estate, Securities and Investment, Insurance.
Top Contributors: Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Universal Health Services, Kimber Manufacturing, El Dorado Holdings, Achristavest. (Others: Northwestern Mutual Life, CONSOL Energy, Diamond Manufacturing).
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/candidate.php?cycle=2012&id=N00001380
And just to compare, here are the same statistics on Barack Obama…
Total $ Raised: $86,215,580
Debt: $1,709, 300
Top Metro Areas that Contribute: New York ($4,522,865), Los Angeles-Long Beach ($3,330,018), Washington, DC-MD-VA-WV ($3,307,094), Chicago ($2,473,302), Boston, MA-NH ($2,425,617).
Top Industries that Contribute: Retired, Miscellaneous Business, Lawyers/Law firms, Education, Securities and Investment
Top Contributors: Microsoft Corp., Comcast Corp., University of California, Harvard University, Google. (Others: Goldman Sachs, Columbia University, Time Warner).
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/candidate.php?cycle=2012&id=N00009638
Well, what do you think of these numbers? Mitt Romney is leading the GOP in fundraising amounts but definitely has the support of banks and financial institutions. I found it interesting that Ron Paul’s top donors come from the military—no other candidate has as much support from the military as Ron Paul. Considering his stances on foreign policy, this is telling. It’s interesting to note that Santorum and Obama’s campaigns are in debt (as is Newt Gingrich), and that much of Obama’s campaign money comes from educational institutions.
Hopefully this post gave you some insight as to where the money is coming from in several of the candidate’s campaigns. I’ll be watching coverage of the New Hampshire Primary tonight and hopefully post again tomorrow. Have a great day, everyone! ☺
“Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.”
Saturday, January 7, 2012
Thoughts on Ron Paul
You’ve probably noticed I haven’t mentioned many of the GOP candidates specifically on my blog yet. And as I stated in my previous post, it’s because I’m simply undecided and, frankly, skeptical of each of the candidates for one reason or another. But there’s one particular candidate I’ve heard countless conflicting opinions about, and that’s Ron Paul.
Some folks call Ron Paul a nut, and others show a fierce devotion to his campaign. So I decided to do some research about just what makes this guy so despised and admired at the same time. Still, after reading about him and watching some video clips about him and his campaign platform, I don’t quite know what to think.
Here’s some of the info and opinions I found on Ron Paul. I haven’t made any decision or commitment to any GOP candidate yet, but wanted to share with you what I found as you may or may not have seen some of it before. I welcome your comments for or against Ron Paul, and any of the other candidates as well!
I’ll start with a little background info: Ron Paul went to Gettysburg College, and Duke University’s School of Medicine. He was formerly a gynecologist/obstetrician, and has reportedly delivered over 4,000 babies. He served in the United States Air Force as a flight surgeon, and later in the Texas Air National Guard. He serves as the representative from Texas’s 14th district. He is a Baptist, and his political leanings have been described as “conservative, Constitutionalist, and libertarian.”
From what I have read, Ron Paul bases much of his campaign on the Constitution. He seems to believe firmly in small government, and that states should decide on social issues not detailed within the Constitution. Something I have heard Dr. Paul say several times is, “Get government out of your life.” I think this sums up his political views—he is pro-life, opposes the War on Drugs, and believes the federal government should stay out of marriage, but believes the states should make decisions on these and other moral issues.
A concern among many voters with Paul is his views on foreign policy. I found this video (I believe it was put together by Veterans for Ron Paul) that really made me consider his ideas on foreign policy further than I had previously. It’s 13 minutes long, but please watch all of it. I’m still in the process of researching more about Ron Paul’s foreign policy stance, but I found the video pretty interesting.
Another issue people have with Ron Paul is his opinion that the United States should drastically cut foreign aid, even to Israel. I found a blog post by Rafi Farber, a member of Jews for Ron Paul, and blogger at Settlersofsamaria.org. It’s a long blog post, probably one of the better-written pieces I’ve read in a long time. But it’s worth your time to read all of it. Here’s the link: http://settlersofsamaria.org/vote-ron-paul-free-israel/ I know its one person’s opinion, but a fascinating perspective, nonetheless. (*Note: if the hyperlinks don't work, copy and paste the web address into another browser to get to the link!)
I also want to add that Ron Paul is known as “Dr. No” and, he “never vote[s] for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution." Also, Rick Santorum’s own nephew, John Garver, a 19-year-old student at the University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown, wrote about why he is supporting Ron Paul rather than his uncle. Here’s the link: http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/03/the-trouble-with-my-uncle-rick-santorum/
Thoughts and comments on Congressman Paul? To be honest, previously, I didn’t consider him a serious candidate with any chance of beating Barack Obama; after some research, I am beginning to think he is not only a person of principle, but also capable of beating Obama. Though I’m not completely sold, nor do I endorse Paul or any other candidate yet, I do appreciate his dedication to the Constitution. He respects America’s governing document unlike our current fearless leader, and arguably more than many of the GOP candidates.
Just thought I would share some different perspectives with you on one of the most-talked-about candidates in the 2012 presidential race. Comments are welcome; hope you all have a chance to watch the ABC Debate tonight!
Have a great evening! :)
Some folks call Ron Paul a nut, and others show a fierce devotion to his campaign. So I decided to do some research about just what makes this guy so despised and admired at the same time. Still, after reading about him and watching some video clips about him and his campaign platform, I don’t quite know what to think.
Here’s some of the info and opinions I found on Ron Paul. I haven’t made any decision or commitment to any GOP candidate yet, but wanted to share with you what I found as you may or may not have seen some of it before. I welcome your comments for or against Ron Paul, and any of the other candidates as well!
I’ll start with a little background info: Ron Paul went to Gettysburg College, and Duke University’s School of Medicine. He was formerly a gynecologist/obstetrician, and has reportedly delivered over 4,000 babies. He served in the United States Air Force as a flight surgeon, and later in the Texas Air National Guard. He serves as the representative from Texas’s 14th district. He is a Baptist, and his political leanings have been described as “conservative, Constitutionalist, and libertarian.”
From what I have read, Ron Paul bases much of his campaign on the Constitution. He seems to believe firmly in small government, and that states should decide on social issues not detailed within the Constitution. Something I have heard Dr. Paul say several times is, “Get government out of your life.” I think this sums up his political views—he is pro-life, opposes the War on Drugs, and believes the federal government should stay out of marriage, but believes the states should make decisions on these and other moral issues.
A concern among many voters with Paul is his views on foreign policy. I found this video (I believe it was put together by Veterans for Ron Paul) that really made me consider his ideas on foreign policy further than I had previously. It’s 13 minutes long, but please watch all of it. I’m still in the process of researching more about Ron Paul’s foreign policy stance, but I found the video pretty interesting.
Another issue people have with Ron Paul is his opinion that the United States should drastically cut foreign aid, even to Israel. I found a blog post by Rafi Farber, a member of Jews for Ron Paul, and blogger at Settlersofsamaria.org. It’s a long blog post, probably one of the better-written pieces I’ve read in a long time. But it’s worth your time to read all of it. Here’s the link: http://settlersofsamaria.org/vote-ron-paul-free-israel/ I know its one person’s opinion, but a fascinating perspective, nonetheless. (*Note: if the hyperlinks don't work, copy and paste the web address into another browser to get to the link!)
I also want to add that Ron Paul is known as “Dr. No” and, he “never vote[s] for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution." Also, Rick Santorum’s own nephew, John Garver, a 19-year-old student at the University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown, wrote about why he is supporting Ron Paul rather than his uncle. Here’s the link: http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/03/the-trouble-with-my-uncle-rick-santorum/
Thoughts and comments on Congressman Paul? To be honest, previously, I didn’t consider him a serious candidate with any chance of beating Barack Obama; after some research, I am beginning to think he is not only a person of principle, but also capable of beating Obama. Though I’m not completely sold, nor do I endorse Paul or any other candidate yet, I do appreciate his dedication to the Constitution. He respects America’s governing document unlike our current fearless leader, and arguably more than many of the GOP candidates.
Just thought I would share some different perspectives with you on one of the most-talked-about candidates in the 2012 presidential race. Comments are welcome; hope you all have a chance to watch the ABC Debate tonight!
Have a great evening! :)
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Intense Iowa Caucus
Happy New Year! I hope everyone had a wonderful Christmas and New Years. I did, and I’m enjoying two more weeks of winter break until I return to school. (Another plus for college!) The New Year is starting out to be an intense one with last night’s caucuses in Iowa. Mitt Romney pulled off a victory by a mere eight votes, and underdog Rick Santorum took the state of Iowa by storm. But I’m wondering if this Santorum surge will carry over to New Hampshire and South Carolina, and whether Huntsman’s decision to skip Iowa will help or hurt his campaign.
Mitt Romney: 24.6%
Rick Santorum: 24.5%
Ron Paul: 21.4%
Newt Gingrich: 13.3%
Rick Perry: 10.3%
Michele Bachmann: 5%
Jon Huntsman: 0.6%
The Iowa Caucus is something taken very seriously by candidates and voters of both parties. It seems to be glorified straw poll, inflated by a lot of media hype, but most candidates take advantage of this to interact with voters and gain exposure. Though the process really began in earnest in 1972 with candidate George McGovern, the influence of the Iowa Caucus was proven in 1976 with Jimmy Carter who went on to win the Democratic nomination and the presidency. Some interesting results from past caucuses:
-Bill Clinton, George H.W Bush and Ronald Reagan lost the Iowa Caucus (but, obviously, won party nominations and later, the presidency)
-In 2008, Mike Huckabee won, and John McCain (GOP nominee) was 3rd with 13% of the vote. (Newt Gingrich won 13.3% of the vote last night.)
-In 2000, George W. Bush won the Ames, Iowa Straw Poll, the Iowa Caucus (with 41% of the vote), and obviously, the party nomination and the presidency.
These past results just go to show that the Iowa Caucus does not necessarily predict a winner. There’s still a long, volatile road of campaigning to go before the GOP chooses a candidate to run against Obama!
You’ve probably noticed that I haven’t discussed my opinion on GOP candidates on this blog yet. Why? Because, to be honest, I am quite undecided at this point. (I know, hard to believe!) I like certain qualities of certain candidates, and can’t put my money on any one person yet.
What I do know is this… in this next election, we cannot be passive and apathetic as we were in 2008. America desperately needs a proven leader with the knowledge, experience, and resolve to turn the country away from the entitlement-obsessed and—dare I say it—socialist road that we’re traveling on right now. Sometimes, I am reminded of Benjamin Franklin’s quote to a bystander, who asked what kind of government the Founders had created after the ratification of the Constitution. Franklin’s answer: “A republic, if you can keep it.” I believe there are Americans out there who will devote every last ounce of their energy to work to keep our republic—I am one of them. But I don’t know if the republic can be kept, if America as we know it can survive another four years under the so-called leadership of the current administration. Call me pessimistic, but there is so much riding on this election. It’s an event we can’t take lightly.
On a lighter note… Obama has been taking some reelection advice from former (one term) President Jimmy Carter. Carter advised Obama to not “alienate voters with controversial positions.” I could rant a lot more about this, but I’ll just say that I hope Obama takes the advice of oh-so-successful Jimmy-Iranian-Hostage-Crisis-Carter. Because after one term of Carter, we got Ronald Reagan.
http://iowacaucus.com/2012/01/03/iowa-caucus-history-lesson/
http://www.uiowa.edu/election/history/index.html
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/winners-losers-iowa-caucus/story?id=15273630#.TwUV2s1siW1
Mitt Romney: 24.6%
Rick Santorum: 24.5%
Ron Paul: 21.4%
Newt Gingrich: 13.3%
Rick Perry: 10.3%
Michele Bachmann: 5%
Jon Huntsman: 0.6%
The Iowa Caucus is something taken very seriously by candidates and voters of both parties. It seems to be glorified straw poll, inflated by a lot of media hype, but most candidates take advantage of this to interact with voters and gain exposure. Though the process really began in earnest in 1972 with candidate George McGovern, the influence of the Iowa Caucus was proven in 1976 with Jimmy Carter who went on to win the Democratic nomination and the presidency. Some interesting results from past caucuses:
-Bill Clinton, George H.W Bush and Ronald Reagan lost the Iowa Caucus (but, obviously, won party nominations and later, the presidency)
-In 2008, Mike Huckabee won, and John McCain (GOP nominee) was 3rd with 13% of the vote. (Newt Gingrich won 13.3% of the vote last night.)
-In 2000, George W. Bush won the Ames, Iowa Straw Poll, the Iowa Caucus (with 41% of the vote), and obviously, the party nomination and the presidency.
These past results just go to show that the Iowa Caucus does not necessarily predict a winner. There’s still a long, volatile road of campaigning to go before the GOP chooses a candidate to run against Obama!
You’ve probably noticed that I haven’t discussed my opinion on GOP candidates on this blog yet. Why? Because, to be honest, I am quite undecided at this point. (I know, hard to believe!) I like certain qualities of certain candidates, and can’t put my money on any one person yet.
What I do know is this… in this next election, we cannot be passive and apathetic as we were in 2008. America desperately needs a proven leader with the knowledge, experience, and resolve to turn the country away from the entitlement-obsessed and—dare I say it—socialist road that we’re traveling on right now. Sometimes, I am reminded of Benjamin Franklin’s quote to a bystander, who asked what kind of government the Founders had created after the ratification of the Constitution. Franklin’s answer: “A republic, if you can keep it.” I believe there are Americans out there who will devote every last ounce of their energy to work to keep our republic—I am one of them. But I don’t know if the republic can be kept, if America as we know it can survive another four years under the so-called leadership of the current administration. Call me pessimistic, but there is so much riding on this election. It’s an event we can’t take lightly.
On a lighter note… Obama has been taking some reelection advice from former (one term) President Jimmy Carter. Carter advised Obama to not “alienate voters with controversial positions.” I could rant a lot more about this, but I’ll just say that I hope Obama takes the advice of oh-so-successful Jimmy-Iranian-Hostage-Crisis-Carter. Because after one term of Carter, we got Ronald Reagan.
http://iowacaucus.com/2012/01/03/iowa-caucus-history-lesson/
http://www.uiowa.edu/election/history/index.html
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/winners-losers-iowa-caucus/story?id=15273630#.TwUV2s1siW1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)