I didn’t realize that we knew the size of the sample:

The point here is simply that the odds of including a half dozen or so active Romney supporters (and even a paid staffer or two) in a sample of 600 or so Iowa Republicans do not seem terribly long to me.

I am glad that we have a firm number on that Allah.

Ex-tex on November 21, 2007 at 6:42 PM

That particular number is what statisticians refer to as “completely made up.”

But regardless of the number of calls made, ONE paid staffer being included is always a possibility. But when you go to TWO paid Romney staffers who are also full-time residents of the state with hard home phone lines, versus TWO of them plus a state Representative Romney endorser – at that point the odds start to get a tiny bit astronomical, even if you do accept the extreme demographic limitations and wild-ass-guess sample size this guy used.

Of course if this were a widespread campaign aimed at affecting voter support, there would be no possible question about that. (I’m sorry but the statistical probability of the only other complaining “random” call recipients independently and anonymously going to – of all places – The Politico is just too out there to even take the tiniest bit seriously.)

Anyway, all that we KNOW for certain is that the only named people spreading this story are paid Romney campaigners and political endorsers. So that leaves only two credible possibilities, either:

A) The Romney campaign concocted this to gain publicity and public sympathy; or

B) Someone was specifically targeting Romney campaign workers just to play with their heads and make them look like over-reactive twits.

And either way; the calls have been a complete success.

The anonymous anti-Fred Thompson website PhoneyFred.org was traced to his consulting company.

He claimed that it was the act of an errant employee acting independently.”

November 22, 2007

Snarls, smears and innuendo as attack dogs get ready for the fray
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas /article2917646.ece

You are trying to deflect as militant shills do, any criticism by painting me and everyone who says something negative about Romney or even hints there might be something negative as bigots (I guess that includes Michelle eh?)

So when you have some rebuttable links and facts let us know.

EricPWJohnson on November 22, 2007 at 1:05 AM

You lie 4 times in 4 sentences here:

Its relevant – his personal income comes from mormons- mormons are funding this campaign – its totally 100% relevant

Mitt refuses to acknowledge that he is not just a mormon but a direct descendant of one of founders of that faith.

If the mormons hadn’t given him his 8 figure job and financed this campaign then you would be right

But the source of his wealth is his parents and exyended family and relatives personal wealth.

EricPWJohnson on November 15, 2007 at 10:18 PM

You are entitled to your opinions about Mitt’s policies. You are not entitled to your own facts.

Michelle Malkin does not peddle lies about Mitt’s financial status. She does not resent people because they are born into an accomplished family, nor does she refuse to recognize what people accomplish on their own through hard work and strength of character- whether it be while pursuing multiple college degrees, in the business world, or as a public servant.

She does not tie Mormonism into whatever disagreements she may have with Mitt’s policies.

Her head is not filled with crazy conspiracy theories.

She is not an ignorant, semi-literate boor.

I am also infinetly grateful to live in America! May she always stand strong against her enemies both foreign and domestic. God Bless America!

Folks- this is America and I WILL talk about it.

By the way, have there been any more than 7 people who said they were called? And what was the ‘Anti-Mormon’ part of the conversation? Was it the ‘baptism of the dead’ part? Is that TRUE or not? It’s only ‘anti-mormon’ bigotry if it’s NOT TRUE. Other than that I haven’t heard the other “UN-AMERICAN” stuff that Mitt was SO hyped up about. WHAT did they say? If it is so horrible then we best get to the bottom of this stuff NOW!

Peace and cheers.

EricPWJohnson on November 22, 2007 at 12:17 AM

You will have to explain what part of that first link was a problem.

Same with the second link.

I would like to hear Mitt’s explanation on the third link.

Its not Gibotry to attack his record or to mention mormonism in the same context as other candidates use christianity as their reasons for social issue stances.

Romney has said he’s at odds with his faith over abortion then flip flopped then flipped his stance so what are we to believe

This campaign is not about Utah, mormons, its about Romneys problems with truthfullness, his steadfastness is sticking to unpopular stances in times of stress

You are trying to deflect as militant shills do, any criticism by painting me and everyone who says something negative about Romney or even hints there might be something negative as bigots (I guess that includes Michelle eh?)

So when you have some rebuttable links and facts let us know

Or its as they call it hotair

Nitey nite.

The whispering campaign has started.
right2bright on November 21, 2007 at 10:57 PM

You are the whisperer. Everyone here is on to you, troll.

I agree that Mitts Mormonism is not an issue for me, but for many it is – regardless whether we both think otherwise.

However i posted on LST and Headshaker that nice little Romney talk in a back room about illegal immigration

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rr6-CcOJPw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bckSLaN49mo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQNEwf-y67w

Neocon Peg on November 21, 2007 at 10:21 PM

I totally agree Peg. No candidates religion is an issue for me. I say vet them on their past and leave it at that.

csdeven on November 21, 2007 at 10:06 PM

And that is just not fair nor is it equitable. His religion is his own and so long as his religion does not condone blowing up civiians with bombs or commiting other type violent crimes, it is okay with me.

It looks like it worked to a point. The goal is to get every single odd teaching of the LDS church into the public forum to create a huge divide between Mitt and evangelicals. This benefits ALL candidates except Mitt.

Huckabee has a motive and as a Baptist he will undoubtedly have his fair share of supporters who won’t vote for Mitt because he’s a Mormon. The more people are “informed” the better for him.

I can only pray that Huckabee is not the nominee and neither is Rudy. They are not only soft on illegals, but they welcome them wholeheartedly. At leastMitt has said he would do something about illegals – something Huckabee has totally failed to do. Rudy has used his 9/11 experience to indicate we can use that same expertise on the border, but he was a sanctuary city mayor of New York, so where does he stand. It just seems to me that if 80% of Americans are against illegal aliens, why are they aligning themselves with candidates who are not for addressing illegal immigrant problems? Huckabee wants to see more illegals – bring them on! So does Rudy! Why are they so high in the polls?

MB4 on November 21, 2007 at 9:27 PM

Too cool! and Tool True!

I didn’t know if it was day or night
I started kissin’ every illegal alien in sight
But when I kissed La Raza Gonzales down on Thirty-Fourth and
Vine
I broke my little bottle of CAPO Potion Number Nine
RINO Potion Number Nine
RINO Potion Number Nine
RINO Potion Number Nine

It’s Don Guiliani’s handiwork. Rudy stands the most to gain from this.

President Don Guiliani – Capone would be so proud.

ThackerAgency on November 21, 2007 at 8:59 PM

Look at the means which a man employs, consider his motives, observe his pleasures. A man simply cannot conceal himself!
- Confucius

This is the scorched earth policy from the Rudy camp. They didn’t understand how the primary process works. When they realized that ‘piddly little’ Iowa and New Hampshire might actually be important, they did this. . . and Rudy knew about it and approved it.

Who gains from something like this? Rudy.

They praise McCain so that it looks like him (they tried to frame McCain). They throw as much dirt as they can against their biggest threat. They made a mistake of calling Romney campaign staff, but they didn’t check the list to see if it was the campaign staff.

Now another Mafia tactic by Don Guiliani is in place where nobody talks. As long as nobody says anything, Rudy is safe. If someone in the Rudy camp says ‘yeah we did it’, he’s sunk. . . just like Gotti.

The pollster (one that Rudy uses) is not talking. I’m certain that Rudy pays them enough money to keep them quiet. Rudy is trying to make an offer that America can’t refuse. If there were push polls questioning Catholic dogma, you can bet the Catholic League would be all over it and not letting it die.

Actually I wonder, is it appropriate for the Pope to visit NYC during the presidential election season? He isn’t an American citizen – he doesn’t vote – so would it be appropriate for him to endorse a candidate? I wonder what kind of influence the Vatican would have on an Italian Catholic president. Maybe we should have a push poll about that. . . I wonder what people would think. . . since the Mormon bashing isn’t important. . . would people think Rudy did it to himself?

President Don Guiliani – Capone would be so proud.