Ruh-Roh… Obama Gets Only 82% of Democrat Vote in New Hampshire – Running Unopposed

Rough night for Barack…
With 83% of votes counted, only 82% of Democrat voters chose Obama in New Hampshire even though he was running unopposed. 10% of democrats wrote in someone else. The total of all write-in votes was the second-most popular choice on the ballot.

Hat Tip Red

#1 January 10, 2012 at 10:28 pm
Patty commented:

“Closing Guantanamo Bay — he said he’d do it,” Fnajoy said. “I don’t think when he made that promise he anticipated the problems, the objections and the obstructions that he’d have to overcome to do it.”

In the meantime, Wasserman Schultz said she has been making the case for re-electing Obama.

“President Obama has made sure that 95 percent of Americans got a tax break and 17 different tax cuts for small businesses,” she said. “The Republicans, meanwhile — led by Mitt Romney — are fighting to extend the Bush tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires.”

Calling New Hampshire a “key battleground state,” Wasserman Schultz said Obama will make another trip to New Hampshire, but she couldn’t say when.

Obama easily won the Democratic primary in New Hampshire with about 82 percent of the vote. The total of all write-in votes was the second-most popular choice on the ballot.

Read more: http://www.wmur.com/new-hampshire-primary-extended-coverage/30180536/detail.html#ixzz1j7XQOXEN
#2 January 10, 2012 at 10:31 pm
gus commented:

Wasserman Schultz. Sounds like a disease.
#3 January 10, 2012 at 10:47 pm
Patty commented:

Poll: Romney, Paul Tie Obama

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, run neck-and-neck with President Obama in a general-election matchup, according to a new CBS News poll released late on Monday that shows the two front-runners in Tuesday’s New Hampshire GOP primary running stronger against the president than their fellow Republicans.

Romney posts a two-point lead over Obama, 47 percent to 45 percent, within the poll’s margin of error of plus or minus 2.8 percentage points. He leads Obama, 45 percent to 39 percent, among independent voters.

From National Journal:

PICTURES
Biggest Super PAC Donors

ANALYSIS
Bain, Schmain — A Business Background Doesn’t Matter

CAMPAIGN 2012
Meet the Billionaire Who Wants to Help Newt Gingrich Destroy Mitt Romney

Obama’s lead over Paul is just one point, 46 percent to 45 percent, as Paul leads among independents by 7 points.

(CAMPAIGN 2012: Poll: Romney, Paul Tie Obama)

The president posts more significant leads over the other GOP candidates, but against each he is below the critical 50-percent threshold: He leads former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, 49 percent to 41 percent; former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, 48 percent to 41 percent; Texas Gov. Rick Perry, 49 percent to 42 percent; and former Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., 47 percent to 43 percent.

Among all adults, just 45 percent of Americans approve of the job Obama is doing as president, slightly worse than the 47-percent approval rating he posted last month. Among independents, 38 percent approve of Obama’s job performance, while 49 percent disapprove.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/2012-presidential-campaign/poll-romney-paul-tie-obama-20120109

Read more @ link
#4 January 10, 2012 at 10:50 pm
Patty commented:

#3

Sorry for all the extras in that post.

The article is sickening. Obama will buy this election. 1 billion is his goal and will is going to up the aunty by saying what a great nation he is building and unemployment is lower and his plans for the economy are working.

Props
#5 January 10, 2012 at 10:57 pm
Patty commented:

OT

http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2012-01-10/article/39110?headline=MIC-CHECK-State-Run-Political-Campaigns—By-Thomas-Lord

Imagine opening up your copy of the Constitution one day and finding these words:

Federal, State and local government shall regulate, limit, or prohibit contributions and expenditures, including a candidate’s own contributions and expenditures, for the purpose of influencing in any way the election of any candidate for public office or any ballot measure.

Federal, State and local government shall require that any permissible contributions and expenditures be publicly disclosed.

On January 7th, Occupy Berkeley’s ruling authority, its General Assembly, somehow came to endorse an upcoming protest called “Occupy the Courts”. The protest is in response to the Citizens United decision which overturned federal limits on independent electioneering expenditures by corporations.

On January 20th, the Occupy the Courts organizers hope to “occupy” federal courthouses around the country.

Occupy Berkeley did not invent or plan this particular protest, they merely seem to endorse it, for some reason. The action at courthouses was masterminded by an organization calling itself Move to Amend.

According to their website, Move to Amend calls for a constitutional amendment that would give federal, state, and local governments authority to regulate, limit, or even prohibit any and all campaign contributions and expenditures. The amendment text above is part of their proposal.

While these powers are common features in repressive regimes around the world, here in the U.S. the Citizens United decision has only added to the many ways in which government cannot suppress political activity. Move to Amend’s proposed amendment apparently wants to close that gap and ensure that elected officials can fully control campaign spending.

Move to Amend is funded and backed by the Liberty Tree Foundation, a Wisconsin-based not-for-profit organization that, with no apparent ironic intent, describes itself as “building a foundation for a democratic revolution.”

The Liberty Tree Foundation was chartered in 2004. Their website cites no legislative or legal victories among their accomplishments but they have built a network of regional affiliates. They accept monetary donations at their web sites.
#6 January 10, 2012 at 10:57 pm
Rose commented:

WoW! Great going – OdramaDrip!
#7 January 10, 2012 at 11:29 pm
injunjoe commented:

#2 actually a wassermann test is a test for syphilis
#8 January 10, 2012 at 11:41 pm
S. Wolf commented:

So Hussein couldn’t beat himself.
#11 January 11, 2012 at 12:32 am
Opus#6@AmericanPerspective commented:

Mickey Mouse would make a better president. At least he doesn’t hate America.
#12 January 11, 2012 at 2:21 am
Molon Labe commented:

Actually most dhimmies were busyt voting for Hunstman, Ron Paul, and Romney. So I think Obama did very well.
#13 January 11, 2012 at 2:25 am
Molon Labe commented:

Most dhimmies were busyt voting for Hunstman, Ron Paul, and Romney. So I think Obama did very well. It also means the NH primary is a bad joke as are all otherrimaries that allow any voter other than registered Republicans to vote.
#15 January 11, 2012 at 5:28 am
Sickofobama commented:

Obama doesn’t need white New Hampshire citizens voting for him.

He is going to have all of Central American voting for him.

Wake up dummies.

Even you people who think Obama couldn’t win today.

Expect 4 more years of destruction and until there is nothing left.
#17 January 11, 2012 at 6:25 am
squeaky commented:

of the 83% votes – obama had 82%. probably just a slight misunderstanding. the state moto is live free or die not live for free or die. detail detail details. even the lemmings are breathing a sigh of relief although they don’t commit mass suicide as has been portrayed – just misunderstood creatures. so much for that superior creature humans try to claim.
#19 January 11, 2012 at 7:15 am
Dave Thomas commented:

How President Obama compares to other uncontested primaries in recent memory:

2004 New Hampshire primary:

“The Republican primary was uncontested. Even so, George Bush managed to receive only 77.9% of the vote. This compares with the 86.4% of the vote Ronald Reagan received in 1984, when Harold Stassen was on the ballot against him; and the 82.1% of the vote that the unopposed Bill Clinton received in 1996. The Democratic candidates for president received 11.9% of the Republican vote on write-ins.”

http://www.leinsdorf.com/NewHampshirePrimary2004.htm
#20 January 11, 2012 at 7:47 am
Sam Stone commented:

Saddam Hussein got more percentage of the vote than Barry Hussein did! chuckle…
#22 January 11, 2012 at 9:33 am
shibumi commented:

At this point, if Romney ran unopposed on a primary, how many votes would that deadly “write in” get?

Perhaps we can run “generic Republican” against Obama. I hear he’s hard to beat.
#23 January 11, 2012 at 10:55 am
DANEgerus commented:

NH primary, 240,251 Rs, 56,924 Ds, so tell me how many Ds voted in the Republican Primary? We are letting Ds elect Romney?
#24 January 11, 2012 at 11:07 am
valerie commented:

#23 January 11, 2012 at 10:55 am
DANEgerus commented:

They will be a factor. Romney will run on the platform “A whole lot like BO, only competent.”
#25 January 11, 2012 at 12:42 pm
Josephnet commented:

Ruh-roh

In 1984, Reagan got 86% in New Hampshire
In 1996 Clinton got 84% in New Hampshire
In 2004 Bush got 80% in New Hampshire

all running for re-election unopposed.

A few facts you left out…