<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"
>

<channel>
	<title>Race 4 2012</title>
	<atom:link href="http://race42012.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://race42012.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 10:00:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
<!-- podcast_generator="Blubrry PowerPress/4.0" -->
	<itunes:summary></itunes:summary>
	<itunes:author>Race 4 2012</itunes:author>
	<itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
	<itunes:image href="http://race42012.com/wp-content/plugins/powerpress/itunes_default.jpg" />
	<itunes:subtitle></itunes:subtitle>
	
		<item>
		<title>Is Obama in Danger of Losing the Arkansas Primary?</title>
		<link>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/is-obama-in-danger-in-the-arkansas-primary/</link>
		<comments>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/is-obama-in-danger-in-the-arkansas-primary/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 10:00:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kavon W. Nikrad</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://race42012.com/?p=53508</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Although it is unlikely that the President will lose the Arkansas Primary next Tuesday, a new poll shows that this incredible outcome may not be out of the realm of possibility: A week ago, a federal inmate and Democratic Presidential candidate Keith Judd pulled 42% of the West Virginia primary vote against incumbent Barack Obama. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Although it is unlikely that the President will lose the Arkansas Primary next Tuesday, a new poll shows that this incredible outcome may not be out of the realm of possibility:</p>
<blockquote><p>A week ago, a federal inmate and Democratic Presidential candidate Keith Judd pulled 42% of the West Virginia primary vote against incumbent Barack Obama.</p>
<p>The President’s 57% tally in a state that will be non-competitive in the fall was a signal of disillusionment among conservative Democratic voters who dominate West Virginia’s party politics.</p>
<p>Obama is likely to experience a similar wave of discontent from Fourth District Democratic voters in Arkansas.</p>
<p>In our latest Talk Business-Hendrix College Poll, conducted last Thursday, May 10, 2012, 38% of Democratic primary voters in the Fourth say they’re casting ballots for John Wolfe, a Tennessee attorney who filed paperwork to qualify for the Arkansas Democratic primary.</p>
<p>Less than half — just 45% — say they presently support Obama.</p>
<p><strong>45% – Barack Obama</strong><br />
<strong>38% – John Wolfe</strong><br />
<strong>17% – Undecided</strong></p>
<p>The poll was taken just one day after President Obama made public his support of gay marriage; however, Obama has never performed extraordinarily well among voters in rural Arkansas.</p>
<p>Three weeks ago, a Talk Business-Hendrix College Poll showed Obama performing better in the culturally conservative First Congressional District of Arkansas. In that poll, Obama received 65% of the vote compared to Wolfe’s 24%.</p></blockquote>
<p>Full story <a href="http://talkbusiness.net/2012/05/obama-in-for-a-battle-in-the-fourth-romney-on-cruise-control/">here</a>.</p>
<p><strong>[Update]:</strong> More over at <a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/05/what-to-do-if-you-live-in-arkansas.php">Powerline</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/is-obama-in-danger-in-the-arkansas-primary/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Romney in Florida: &#8220;I Will Stop this Spending and Borrowing Inferno&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/romney-in-florida-i-will-stop-this-spending-and-borrowing-inferno/</link>
		<comments>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/romney-in-florida-i-will-stop-this-spending-and-borrowing-inferno/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 09:00:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kavon W. Nikrad</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Mitt Romney]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://race42012.com/?p=53505</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Gov. Romney pledged leadership and fiscal responsibility in a campaign stop in Florida:]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gov. Romney pledged leadership and fiscal responsibility in a campaign stop in Florida:<br />
<span></span><br />
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/dhUw-zXJ2fY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe><br />
<span></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/romney-in-florida-i-will-stop-this-spending-and-borrowing-inferno/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Poll Watch: Fox News Survey on Same-Sex Marriage</title>
		<link>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/poll-watch-fox-news-survey-on-same-sex-marriage/</link>
		<comments>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/poll-watch-fox-news-survey-on-same-sex-marriage/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 08:00:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kavon W. Nikrad</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Poll Watch]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://race42012.com/?p=53503</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Fox News Poll on Gay Marriage Would you favor or oppose amending the U.S. Constitution to define marriage as being between a man and a woman? Is that strongly or just somewhat? Strongly favor 29% Somewhat favor 9% Somewhat oppose 13% Strongly oppose 40% Among Democrats Strongly favor 17% Somewhat favor 9% Somewhat oppose 9% [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p><strong><a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2012/05/poll-watch-fox-news-survey-on-same-sex.html">Fox News Poll on Gay Marriage</a></strong></p>
<p><strong>Would you favor or oppose amending the U.S. Constitution to define marriage as being between a man and a woman? Is that strongly or just somewhat?</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Strongly favor 29%</li>
<li>Somewhat favor 9%</li>
<li><strong>Somewhat oppose 13%</strong></li>
<li><strong>Strongly oppose 40%</strong></li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Democrats</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Strongly favor 17%</li>
<li>Somewhat favor 9%</li>
<li><strong>Somewhat oppose 9%</strong></li>
<li><strong>Strongly oppose 56%</strong></li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Republicans</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Strongly favor 45%</strong></li>
<li><strong>Somewhat favor 9%</strong></li>
<li>Somewhat oppose 14%</li>
<li>Strongly oppose 23%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Independents</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Strongly favor 30%</li>
<li>Somewhat favor 8%</li>
<li><strong>Somewhat oppose 16%</strong></li>
<li><strong>Strongly oppose 37%</strong></li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<p><span id="more-53503"></span></p>
<blockquote><p><strong>Do you believe gays and lesbians should be: 1. Allowed to get legally married, 2. Allowed a legal partnership similar to but not called marriage, or 3. Should there be no legal recognition given to gay and lesbian relationships? </strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Allowed to get legally married 37%</strong></li>
<li>Allowed a legal partnership similar to but not called marriage 33%</li>
<li>No legal recognition given to gay and lesbian relationships 25%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Democrats</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Allowed to get legally married 57%</strong></li>
<li>Allowed a legal partnership similar to but not called marriage 25%</li>
<li>No legal recognition given to gay and lesbian relationships 15%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Republicans</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Allowed to get legally married 13%</li>
<li><strong>Allowed a legal partnership similar to but not called marriage 44%</strong></li>
<li>No legal recognition given to gay and lesbian relationships 38%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Independents</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Allowed to get legally married 34%</strong></li>
<li><strong>Allowed a legal partnership similar to but not called marriage 34%</strong></li>
<li>No legal recognition given to gay and lesbian relationships 25%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Men</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Allowed to get legally married 34%</strong></li>
<li>Allowed a legal partnership similar to but not called marriage 29%</li>
<li>No legal recognition given to gay and lesbian relationships 31%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Women</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Allowed to get legally married 39%</strong></li>
<li>Allowed a legal partnership similar to but not called marriage 37%</li>
<li>No legal recognition given to gay and lesbian relationships 19%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>As you may have heard, Barack Obama recently changed his position and now supports same-sex marriage. Which of the following do you think is the more likely reason Obama announced this now?</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>He decided same-sex marriage should be allowed and wanted to tell the American people 27%</li>
<li><strong>He was pressured by same-sex marriage proponents and needed their campaign donations and support 62%</strong></li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Democrats</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>He decided same-sex marriage should be allowed and wanted to tell the American people 46%</strong></li>
<li>He was pressured by same-sex marriage proponents and needed their campaign donations and support 38%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Republicans</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>He decided same-sex marriage should be allowed and wanted to tell the American people 7%</li>
<li><strong>He was pressured by same-sex marriage proponents and needed their campaign donations and support 88%</strong></li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Independents</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>He decided same-sex marriage should be allowed and wanted to tell the American people 21%</li>
<li><strong>He was pressured by same-sex marriage proponents and needed their campaign donations and support 71%</strong></li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Twenty years from now, do you think same-sex couples will be able to marry in every state, most states, only a few states, or will they not be able to marry in any state?</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Every state 26%</li>
<li><strong>Most states 38%</strong></li>
<li>Only a few states 22%</li>
<li>No states at all 8%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Democrats</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Every state 39%</strong></li>
<li>Most states 36%</li>
<li>Only a few states 18%</li>
<li>No states at all 5%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Republicans</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Every state 14%</li>
<li><strong>Most states 36%</strong></li>
<li>Only a few states 31%</li>
<li>No states at all 11%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Independents</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Every state 21%</li>
<li><strong>Most states 44%</strong></li>
<li>Only a few states 18%</li>
<li>No states at all 5%</li>
</ul>
<p><em>Survey of 913 registered voters was conducted by Anderson Robbins Research (D)/Shaw &amp; Company Research (R) May 13-15, 2012. The margin of error is ± 3 percentage points.  </em><em>Party ID: 42% Democrat; 34% Republican; 20% Independent.</em></p></blockquote>
<p>-<strong><em>Data compilation and analysis courtesy of <a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/" target="_self">The Argo Journal</a></em></strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/poll-watch-fox-news-survey-on-same-sex-marriage/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Tea Party Has Slumbered, But It Did Not Sleep</title>
		<link>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/the-tea-party-has-slumbered-but-it-did-not-sleep/</link>
		<comments>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/the-tea-party-has-slumbered-but-it-did-not-sleep/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 07:59:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Barry Casselman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[2012 Misc.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Primary Calendar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Conservatism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://race42012.com/?p=53318</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The upset victory of Deb Fischer in the Nebraska Republican U.S. senate primary, following so closely Richard Mourdock&#8217;s upset victory in the Indiana Republican U.S. senate primary (over 6-term incumbent Richard Lugar), indicates that the phenomenon of the 2010 elections, the Tea Party, has not been entirely sleeping in the 2012 cycle. The Tea Party [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The upset victory of Deb Fischer in the Nebraska Republican U.S. senate primary, following so closely Richard Mourdock&#8217;s upset victory in the Indiana Republican U.S. senate primary (over 6-term incumbent Richard Lugar), indicates that the phenomenon of the 2010 elections, the Tea Party, has not been entirely sleeping in the 2012 cycle.</p>
<p>The Tea Party is not a centrally controlled, nor easily defined, grass roots movement. I&#8217;ve heard it said that 47 different organizations are considered part of the Tea Party. It has no official leaders or spokespersons. After its huge influence in the 2010 elections, it was expected to play a major role in 2012, especially in the GOP presidential contest. However, the Tea Party, as such, was overshadowed in 2011-12 by the libertarian Ron Paul candidacy, Newt Gingrich&#8217;s resurgency, and finally, the emergence in the later primaries of GOP social conservatives. The eventual presumptive nominee, Mitt Romney, was not a Tea party figure. There was much talk that the Tea Party, a conservative grass roots economic movement, had evaporated or been put to sleep. Two prominent Tea party figures, Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann, had either not entered the presidential contest, or soon failed in it.</p>
<p>A left wing grass roots movement, Occupy Wall Street, had arisen after 2010, and enjoyed a brief notoriety, When the Occupy movement tried to revive itself in early May, its efforts fizzled. So, too, thought many was the fate of the Tea Party.</p>
<p>The big difference between the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street (and its various &#8216;Occupy&#8221; progeny) is that the former is a popular voter movement, and less an ideological phenomenon than a response to real economic conditions in the nation, while the latter is a radical ideological movement of activists who have no real voter base.</p>
<p>There has been much hand-wringing over the defeat of long-time U.S. Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana. Mr. Lugar had many years of<br />
distinguished service in the senate, including his time as chairman of the powerful foreign relations committee, but at 80 years of age, and holding some foreign policy views no longer in the conservative mainstream, it was time for him to retire. A seat in the U.S. senate is not a dukedom, nor is this institution similar to the British house of lords. Each election is intended to be a renewal of the right to hold office. Mr. Lugar overstayed his welcome in his own party. He will be replaced by an experienced political figure who holds views much closer to the emerging new conservative legislative philosophy.</p>
<p>The same seems to be true of  Nebraska state legislator Deb Fischer who came suddenly from behind to defeat frontrunner state Attorney General Jon Bruning, the candidate of the old conservative establishment.</p>
<p>In Utah, long-time Senator Orrin Hatch has, for now, avoided a similar fate by paying attention to Utah Tea Party issues, but he still faces a primary and a Tea Party-backed opponent.</p>
<p>In Wisconsin, GOP icon Tommy Thompson, long-time governor, failed to win party endorsement recently, and he now faces a primary challenge from a Tea Party favorite.</p>
<p>I have suggested for almost a year now that the Republicans are almost certain to win back control of the U.S. senate from the Democrats in 2012. This was based on the fact that twice as many Democrats are up for election this year, and that many of them are vulnerable. Since that time, a few surprises (such as the unexpected retirement of Maine&#8217;s Olympia Snowe) have occurred, but the basic circumstance is mostly unchanged. In fact, as of late, there seems to be even more a voter trend to the Republicans.</p>
<p>The four U.S. senate races previously mentioned, even if all the incumbents and GOP establishment figures are defeated by Tea Party challengers, should be in Republican hands in January, 2013. But the philosophy of the new and GOP-controlled senate would be quite different. This is what Tea Party voters are fighting for, a renewed set of conservative operating principles.</p>
<p>The national elections of 2010 brought the legislative momentum of the Obama administration to a halt, but it did not replace the radical Obama agenda with a conservative one. That requires both the presidency and control of both houses of Congress. The focus for Tea Party activists in 2012 is the campaign for control of the U.S. senate.</p>
<p>That is why, from seeming to slumber, the Tea Party grass roots movement has now reawakened.</p>
<p>Has this movement found in their senate candidates of 2012 more consistently appealing figures than in 2010 (when several eccentric Tea Party senate candidates lost)? Can the Tea party movement muster a strong enough subset of the GOP senate to assert their economic views during the next administration?</p>
<p>The answers to these questions will come from remaining primaries and the autumn election contests. It is one of the most intriguing aspects of the 2012 campaign season, hitherto preoccupied with the GOP presidential nomination, which will play itself out to an historic and momentous election day.</p>
<p>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;<br />
Copyright (c) 2012 by Barry Casselman. All rights reserved.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/the-tea-party-has-slumbered-but-it-did-not-sleep/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Poll Watch: PPP (D) New Hampshire Survey on Same-Sex Marriage</title>
		<link>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/poll-watch-ppp-d-new-hampshire-survey-on-same-sex-marriage/</link>
		<comments>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/poll-watch-ppp-d-new-hampshire-survey-on-same-sex-marriage/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 07:00:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kavon W. Nikrad</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Poll Watch]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://race42012.com/?p=53500</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[PPP (D) New Hampshire Poll on Gay Marriage Do you think same-sex marriage should be legal or illegal? Legal 57% {51%} Illegal 35% {38%} Among Democrats Legal 85% {77%} Illegal 8% {16%} Among Republicans Legal 21% {24%} Illegal 69% {63%} Among Independents Legal 61% {51%} Illegal 31% {36%} Among Men Legal 52% {42%} Illegal 43% {45%} [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p><a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2012/05/poll-watch-ppp-d-new-hampshire-survey.html"><strong>PPP (D) New Hampshire Poll on Gay Marriage</strong><br />
</a><br />
<strong>Do you think same-sex marriage should be legal or illegal?</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Legal 57% {51%}</strong></li>
<li>Illegal 35% {38%}</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Democrats</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Legal 85% {77%}</strong></li>
<li>Illegal 8% {16%}</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Republicans</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Legal 21% {24%}</li>
<li><strong>Illegal 69% {63%}</strong></li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Independents</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Legal 61% {51%}</strong></li>
<li>Illegal 31% {36%}</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<p><span id="more-53500"></span></p>
<blockquote><p><strong>Among Men</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Legal 52%</strong> {42%}<strong><br />
</strong></li>
<li>Illegal 43% {<strong>45%</strong>}</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Women</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Legal 62% {59%}</strong></li>
<li>Illegal 28% {32%}</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Which of the following best describes your opinion on gay marriage?  Gay couples should be allowed to legally marry; or, gay couples should be allowed to form civil unions but not legally marry; or, there should be no legal recognition of a gay couple&#8217;s relationship.</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Gay couples should be allowed to legally marry 54% {45%} [44%]</strong></li>
<li>Gay couples should be allowed to form civil unions but not legally marry 31% {35%} [35%]</li>
<li>There should be no legal recognition of a gay couple&#8217;s relationship 13% {19%} [19%]</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Democrats</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Gay couples should be allowed to legally marry 85% {73%} [67%]</strong></li>
<li>Gay couples should be allowed to form civil unions but not legally marry 10% {18%} [25%]</li>
<li>There should be no legal recognition of a gay couple&#8217;s relationship 4% {8%} [8%]</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Republicans</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Gay couples should be allowed to legally marry 19% {17%} [14%]</li>
<li><strong>Gay couples should be allowed to form civil unions but not legally marry 50% {50%} [47%]</strong></li>
<li>There should be no legal recognition of a gay couple&#8217;s relationship 28% {32%} [38%]</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Independents</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Gay couples should be allowed to legally marry 56% {44%} [47%]</strong></li>
<li>Gay couples should be allowed to form civil unions but not legally marry 33% {38%} [36%]</li>
<li>There should be no legal recognition of a gay couple&#8217;s relationship 9% {18%} [13%]</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Men</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Gay couples should be allowed to legally marry 47% {39%}</strong>[<strong>39%</strong>]<strong><br />
</strong></li>
<li>Gay couples should be allowed to form civil unions but not legally marry 35% {37%} [<strong>39%</strong>]</li>
<li>There should be no legal recognition of a gay couple&#8217;s relationship 16% {23%} [21%]</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Women</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Gay couples should be allowed to legally marry 61% {51%} [49%]</strong></li>
<li>Gay couples should be allowed to form civil unions but not legally marry 26% {33%} [32%]</li>
<li>There should be no legal recognition of a gay couple&#8217;s relationship 11% {16%} [17%]</li>
</ul>
<p><em>Survey of 1,163 New Hampshire voters was conducted May 10-13, 2012. The margin of error is +/- 2.9 percentage points. Party ID: 34% {34%} [35%] Democrat; 31% {32%} [29%] Republican; 35% {33%} [36%] Independent/Other. Political ideology: 31% {26%} [32%] Moderate; 24% {21%} [23%] Somewhat conservative; 23% {20%} [21%] Somewhat liberal; 12% {19%} [15%] Very conservative; 10% {14%} [9%] Very liberal. </em><em>Results from the poll conducted <a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2011/07/poll-watch-ppp-d-new-hampshire.html" target="_blank"><strong>June 30 &#8211; July 5, 2011</strong></a> are in curly brackets.  </em><em>Results from the poll conducted<strong><a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2011/04/poll-watch-ppp-d-new-hampshire.html">March 31 &#8211; April 3, 2011</a></strong> are in square brackets.</em></p></blockquote>
<p>-<strong><em>Data compilation and analysis courtesy of <a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/" target="_self">The Argo Journal</a></em></strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/poll-watch-ppp-d-new-hampshire-survey-on-same-sex-marriage/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Poll Watch: Quinnipiac New Jersey 2012 Senatorial Survey</title>
		<link>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/poll-watch-quinnipiac-new-jersey-2012-senatorial-survey/</link>
		<comments>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/poll-watch-quinnipiac-new-jersey-2012-senatorial-survey/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 06:00:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kavon W. Nikrad</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Poll Watch]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://race42012.com/?p=53498</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Quinnipiac New Jersey 2012 Senate Poll Robert Menendez (D) 45% {44%} [49%] Joe Kyrillos (R) 35% {35%} [34%] Favorable / Unfavorable {Net} Robert Menendez 37% {35%} [38%] / 26% {27%} [24%] {+11%} Joe Kyrillos 17% {14%} [11%] / 7% {6%} [6%] {+10%} Do you approve or disapprove of the way Robert Menendez is handling his [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p><strong><a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2012/05/poll-watch-quinnipiac-new-jersey-2012_16.html">Quinnipiac New Jersey 2012 Senate Poll</a></strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Robert Menendez (D) 45% {44%} [49%]</strong></li>
<li>Joe Kyrillos (R) 35% {35%} [34%]</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Robert Menendez 37% {35%} [38%] / 26% {27%} [24%] {+11%}</strong></li>
<li>Joe Kyrillos 17% {14%} [11%] / 7% {6%} [6%] {+10%}</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Do you approve or disapprove of the way Robert Menendez is handling his job as United States Senator? </strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Approve 44% {45%} [48%]</strong></li>
<li>Disapprove 30% {31%} [31%]</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Do you feel that Robert Menendez deserves to be reelected, or do you feel that he does not deserve to be reelected?</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Yes/Deserves 42% {43%} [48%]</strong></li>
<li>No/Does not 33% {34%} [34%]</li>
</ul>
<p><em>Survey of 1,582 registered voters was conducted May 9-14, 2012. The margin of error is +/- 2.5 percentage points.  </em><em>Party ID: 34% {34%} [33%] Democrat; 25% {25%} [27%] Republican; 36% {34%} [35%] Independent.  </em><em>Results from the poll conducted <strong><a href="http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/new-jersey/release-detail?ReleaseID=1736" target="_blank">April 3-9, 2012</a> </strong>are in curly brackets. </em><em>Results from the poll conducted <strong><a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2012/02/poll-watch-quinnipiac-new-jersey-survey.html" target="_blank">February 21-27, 2012</a></strong>are in square brackets.</em></p></blockquote>
<p>&#8211;<strong><em>Data compilation and analysis courtesy of <a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/" target="_self">The Argo Journal</a></em></strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/poll-watch-quinnipiac-new-jersey-2012-senatorial-survey/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>First Rule of Organizations Proven Again</title>
		<link>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/first-rule-of-organizations-proven-again/</link>
		<comments>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/first-rule-of-organizations-proven-again/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 05:32:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mark B. Lowe</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Misc.]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://race42012.com/?p=53506</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A spokesman for Romney, Ryan Williams, was invited by VP Joe Biden to sit at his table at a restaurant for a few minutes. ABCNews picks up the story: Williams said he asked the vice president why he was in coal country, challenging him on his support of the coal industry. According to Williams, Biden refused [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A spokesman for Romney, Ryan Williams, was invited by VP Joe Biden to sit at his table at a restaurant for a few minutes. <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/05/dinner-for-2-romney-spox-throws-a-question-at-biden-at-dinner-run-in/">ABCNews picks up the story</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>Williams said he asked the vice president why he was in coal country, challenging him on his support of the coal industry. According to Williams, Biden refused to answer when he asked the vice president why he believes coal is more dangerous than terrorism.</p>
<p>“He disagreed with that and didn’t want to answer my questions,” said Williams&#8230;</p></blockquote>
<p>What did Williams think of the encounter and the VP? <em>&#8220;Biden was &#8216;very cordial&#8217; and &#8216;seems like a nice man.&#8217;&#8221;</em></p>
<p>What did Biden think of the encounter? His press secretary tweeted, <em>&#8220;So nice of @RyanGOP to join us for dinner at Naples Spaghetti House in Steubenville <a href="http://pic.twitter.com/6UxchYIX">http://pic.twitter.com/6UxchYIX</a>.&#8221;</em></p>
<p>What did Ted Strickland, the Democratic Governor of Ohio have to say about it? <em>“The vice president did not seem to be the least bothered by it. &#8230; I wasn’t bothered by it, I didn’t perceive it being out of line in any way or inappropriate in any way. I think politics can be fun and enjoyable. They can be a little spicy at times.”</em></p>
<p>And finally, what did the Obama Campaign press secretary have to say about it? She tweeted, <em>&#8220;Staffer apparently doesn’t believe the press is capable of asking questions, shouts his own at the candidate. #classy.&#8221;</em></p>
<p>Biden enjoyed the exchange. Williams enjoyed the exchange. Strickland enjoyed the exchange. The Obama Campaign staffer throws a snit.</p>
<p>Mitt Romney&#8217;s staffer proved to be unafraid of taking the fight to opposition but does so in a cordial manner. Barack Obama&#8217;s staffer proved to be prickly, thin-skinned, and unconcerned about accuracy of details.</p>
<p>The first rule of organizations: any organization tends to take on the characteristics of its leader.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/first-rule-of-organizations-proven-again/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Poll Watch: PPP/Daily Kos (D) Wisconsin 2012 Senatorial Survey</title>
		<link>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/poll-watch-pppdaily-kos-d-wisconsin-2012-senatorial-survey-2/</link>
		<comments>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/poll-watch-pppdaily-kos-d-wisconsin-2012-senatorial-survey-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 05:00:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kavon W. Nikrad</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Poll Watch]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://race42012.com/?p=53496</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[PPP/Daily Kos (D) Wisconsin 2012 Senate Poll Tommy Thompson (R) 47% {47%} [45%] (46%) {50%} [45%] Tammy Baldwin (D) 42% {45%} [46%] (44%) {42%} [44%] Mark Neumann (R) 46% {45%} [41%] (43%) {44%} [41%] Tammy Baldwin (D) 42% {46%} [47%] (44%) {40%} [46%] Eric Hovde (R) 45% Tammy Baldwin (D) 41% Survey of 851 likely voters was conducted May 11-13, 2012. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p><strong><a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2012/05/poll-watch-pppdaily-kos-d-wisconsin_15.html">PPP/Daily Kos (D) Wisconsin 2012 Senate Poll</a></strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Tommy Thompson (R) 47%</strong> {<strong>47%</strong>}<strong> </strong>[45%]<strong> (46%) {50%} [45%]</strong></li>
<li>Tammy Baldwin (D) 42% {45%} [<strong>46%</strong>] (44%) {42%} [44%]<strong></strong></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><strong>Mark Neumann (R) 46%</strong> {45%} [41%] (43%) {<strong>44%</strong>} [41%]<strong></strong></li>
<li>Tammy Baldwin (D) 42%<strong> {46%} [47%] (</strong><strong>44%)</strong> {40%} [<strong>46%</strong>]</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><strong>Eric Hovde (R) 45%</strong></li>
<li>Tammy Baldwin (D) 41%<strong><br />
</strong></li>
</ul>
<p><em>Survey of 851 likely voters was conducted May 11-13, 2012. The margin of error is +/- 3.4 percentage points. Party ID: </em><em>35% {32%} [31%] (31%) {34%} [32%] (32%) Republican; 28% {31%} </em><em>[33%] (37%) {37%} [37%] (33%) Democrat; 37% {37%} [36%] (32%) {29%} [31%] (35%) Independent/Other.</em><em> Ideology: 41% Moderate; 41% Conservative; 17% Liberal. </em><em>Results from the poll conducted <a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2012/04/poll-watch-pppdaily-kos-d-wisconsin_16.html" target="_blank"><strong>April 13-15, 2012</strong></a> are in curly brackets.</em>  <em>Results from the poll conducted<a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2012/02/poll-watch-ppp-d-wisconsin-2012.html" target="_blank"><strong>February 23-26, 2012</strong></a> are in square brackets.</em><em>  </em><em>Results from the poll conducted <strong><a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2011/10/poll-watch-ppp-d-wisconsin-2012_27.html">October 20-23, 2011</a></strong> are in parentheses.</em><em>  Results from the poll conducted <strong><a href="http://publicpolicypolling.typepad.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_WI_0818424.pdf">August 12-14, 2011</a> </strong>are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted <strong><a href="http://publicpolicypolling.typepad.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_WI_0524930.pdf">May 19-22, 2011</a> </strong>are in square brackets.</em></p></blockquote>
<p>-<strong><em>Data compilation and analysis courtesy of <a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/" target="_self">The Argo Journal</a></em></strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://race42012.com/2012/05/17/poll-watch-pppdaily-kos-d-wisconsin-2012-senatorial-survey-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Poll Watch: Fox News 2012 Presidential Survey</title>
		<link>http://race42012.com/2012/05/16/poll-watch-fox-news-2012-presidential-survey-11/</link>
		<comments>http://race42012.com/2012/05/16/poll-watch-fox-news-2012-presidential-survey-11/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 00:10:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kavon W. Nikrad</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Poll Watch]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://race42012.com/?p=53494</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Fox News 2012 Presidential Poll Barack Obama 46% [46%] {44%} (46%) [47%] {46%} (44%) [42%] {45%} (47%) [48%] {48%}  Mitt Romney 39% [46%] {46%} (42%) [42%] {45%} {42%} [44%] {42%} (41%) [41%] {41%} Among Men Mitt Romney 46% [49%] {52%} [47%] Barack Obama 37% [45%] {38%} [42%] Among Women Barack Obama 55% [47%] {49%} [50%] Mitt Romney 33% [42%] [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p><strong><a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2012/05/poll-watch-fox-news-2012-presidential.html">Fox News 2012 Presidential Poll</a></strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Barack Obama 46%</strong> [<strong>46%</strong>] {44%}<strong> (46%) [47%] {46%} (</strong><strong>44%)</strong> [42%] <strong>{45%} (47%) [48%] {48%} </strong><strong></strong></li>
<li>Mitt Romney 39% [<strong>46%</strong>] {<strong>46%</strong>} (42%) [42%] {45%} {42%} [<strong>44%</strong>] {42%} (41%) [41%] {41%}</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Men</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Mitt Romney 46% [49%] {52%} [47%]</strong></li>
<li>Barack Obama 37% [45%] {38%} [42%]<strong></strong></li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Among Women</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Barack Obama 55% [47%] {49%} [50%]</strong></li>
<li>Mitt Romney 33% [42%] {41%} [38%]</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<p><span id="more-53494"></span></p>
<blockquote><p><strong>Which of the following better describes your view of this year’s presidential election? </strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>It’s a choice between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney 52%</strong></li>
<li>It’s a choice between giving Barack Obama a second term or not 40%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Are you satisfied with the presidential candidate choices, or do you think the presidential election ballot in November should include a “none of the above” option? </strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Satisfied with choices 60%</strong></li>
<li>“None of the above” should be on the ballot 33%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>If Barack Obama and Mitt Romney were investment advisors, which one would you rather have managing your personal money? </strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Mitt Romney 47%</strong></li>
<li>Barack Obama 34%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>If you were hiring a life coach, who would you hire? </strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Barack Obama 47%</strong></li>
<li>Mitt Romney 33%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>If you were starting a small business, who would you rather have as your business partner? </strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Mitt Romney 48%</strong></li>
<li>Barack Obama 39%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Who do you think would do a better job creating new jobs? </strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Mitt Romney 43%</strong></li>
<li>Barack Obama 41%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Who do you want to nominate the next Supreme Court Justice?</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Barack Obama 46%</strong></li>
<li>Mitt Romney 38%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>All in all, would you rather have bigger government that provides more services or smaller government that provides fewer services?</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Smaller government, fewer services 53%</strong></li>
<li>Bigger government, more services 37%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Do you approve or disapprove of the job Barack Obama is doing as president?</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Approve 49% </strong>[45%] {42%}<strong> </strong>(<strong>47%</strong>) [<strong>48%</strong>] {45%} (44%) [42%]<strong></strong>{43%}<strong> </strong>(45%)<strong> </strong>[<strong>48%</strong>] {<strong>51%</strong>}<strong><br />
</strong></li>
<li>Disapprove 47% [<strong>51%</strong>] {<strong>51%</strong>} (45%) [45%]<strong> {47%} (</strong><strong>51%) [48%] {51%} (46%) </strong>[43%] {43%}</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Do you approve or disapprove of the job Barack Obama is doing on the following issues?</strong></p>
<p><strong>Afghanistan</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Approve 53%</strong><strong> (47%)<br />
</strong></li>
<li>Disapprove 39% (45%)</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Iran</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Approve 48%</strong><strong> (46%)<br />
</strong></li>
<li>Disapprove 40% (43%)</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Job Creation</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Approve 45%<strong><br />
</strong></li>
<li><strong>Disapprove 51%</strong></li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Health Care</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Approve 44%<strong> </strong>(43%)<strong><br />
</strong></li>
<li><strong>Disapprove 51% (52%)</strong></li>
</ul>
<p><strong>The Economy</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Approve 43% (42%)<strong><br />
</strong></li>
<li><strong>Disapprove 53% (54%)</strong></li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Immigration</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Approve 38%<strong><br />
</strong></li>
<li><strong>Disapprove 49%</strong></li>
</ul>
<p><strong>The Federal Deficit</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Approve 36% (35%)<strong><br />
</strong></li>
<li><strong>Disapprove 59% (56%)</strong></li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Regardless of how you might vote, do you think the press is being too easy, too tough, or about right in its coverage of Mitt Romney? </strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Too easy 18%</li>
<li>Too tough 18%</li>
<li><strong>About right 55%</strong></li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Regardless of how you might vote, do you think the press is being too easy, too tough, or about right in its coverage of Barack Obama?</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Too easy 35%</li>
<li>Too tough 15%</li>
<li><strong>About right 44%</strong></li>
</ul>
<p><strong>If Barack Obama is re-elected as president, which of the following best describes your feelings? </strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>The country’s improving every day and I look forward to another four years 45%</strong></li>
<li>The country’s going down the drain and I am dreading what is going to happen in the next four years 43%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>How do you feel about Mitt Romney’s success in business and the wealth he’s achieved? </strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Admire his success 38%</li>
<li>Resent it 9%</li>
<li><strong>Feel indifferent to it 48%</strong></li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Do you think Barack Obama supports larger government or smaller government? </strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Larger 72%</strong></li>
<li>Smaller 16%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Do you think Mitt Romney supports larger government or smaller government? </strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Larger 23%</li>
<li><strong>Smaller 58%</strong></li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Given the intelligence information that was known, do you think almost anyone who was president would have made the decision to send in U.S. forces to get Usama bin Laden, or was the decision to order the raid so gutsy that only certain presidents would have made that same call? </strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Almost anyone would have made the same decision 59%</strong></li>
<li>Only certain presidents would have made that decision 35%</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>If Mitt Romney were president a year ago, do you think he would have sent in U.S. forces to get Usama bin Laden, or not? </strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Yes, he would have 62%</strong></li>
<li>No, he wouldn’t 24%</li>
</ul>
<div><strong>Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}</strong></div>
<ul>
<li><strong>Barack Obama 52% [50%] (50%) {51%} / 44% [48%] (47%) {46%} {+8%}</strong><strong></strong></li>
<li>Mitt Romney 45% [42%] (39%) {45%} / 43% [45%] (49%) {38%} {+2%<strong></strong>}</li>
<li>Joe Biden 41% / 44% {<strong>-3%</strong>}</li>
</ul>
<p><em>Survey of 913 registered voters was conducted by Anderson Robbins Research (D)/Shaw &amp; Company Research (R) May 13-15, 2012. The margin of error is ± 3 percentage points.  </em><em>Party ID: 42% [43%] {40%} (40%) [44%] {41%} Democrat; 34% [37%] {39%} (37%) [36%] {39%} Republican; 20% [17%] {19%} (21%) [16%] {19%} Independent.  Results from the poll conducted <a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2012/04/poll-watch-fox-news-r-2012-presidential.html" target="_blank"><strong>April 22-24, 2012</strong></a> are in square brackets.  </em><em>Results from the poll conducted <a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2012/04/poll-watch-fox-news-2012-presidential.html" target="_blank"><strong>April 9-11, 2012</strong></a> are in curly brackets.  </em><em>Results from the poll conducted <a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2012/03/poll-watch-fox-news-2012-presidential.html" target="_blank"><strong>March 10-12, 2012</strong></a> are in parentheses.  </em><em>Results from the poll conducted <a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2012/02/poll-watch-fox-news-2012-presidential.html" target="_blank"><strong>February 6-9, 2012</strong></a> are in square brackets.  </em><em>Results from the poll conducted <a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2012/01/poll-watch-fox-news-2012-presidential.html" target="_blank"><strong>January 12-14, 2012</strong></a>are in curly brackets.  </em><em>Results from the poll conducted <strong><a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2011/12/poll-watch-fox-news-2012-presidential.html" target="_blank">December 5-7, 2011</a></strong> are in parentheses.  Results from the poll conducted <a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2011/11/poll-watch-fox-news-2012-presidential.html" target="_blank"><strong>November 13-15, 2011</strong></a> are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted <a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2011/09/poll-watch-fox-news-2012-presidential.html" target="_blank"><strong>September 25-27, 2011</strong></a> are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted <strong><a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2011/07/poll-watch-fox-news-2012-presidential.html">July 17-19, 2011</a></strong> are in parentheses.  Results from the poll conducted <a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2011/06/poll-watch-fox-news-2012-presidential.html"><strong>June 5-7, 2011</strong></a> are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted <a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2011/02/poll-watch-fox-news-2012-presidential.html"><strong>February 7-9, 2011</strong></a> are in curly brackets.</em></p></blockquote>
<p>-<strong><em>Data compilation and analysis courtesy of <a href="http://argojournal.blogspot.com/" target="_self">The Argo Journal</a></em></strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://race42012.com/2012/05/16/poll-watch-fox-news-2012-presidential-survey-11/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>34</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New Susan B. Anthony List Ad: &#8220;Welcome to the Bureau of Womanhood Conformity&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://race42012.com/2012/05/16/new-susan-b-anthony-list-ad-welcome-to-the-bureau-of-womanhood-conformity/</link>
		<comments>http://race42012.com/2012/05/16/new-susan-b-anthony-list-ad-welcome-to-the-bureau-of-womanhood-conformity/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 23:31:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kavon W. Nikrad</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Campaign Advertisements]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://race42012.com/?p=53492</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span></span><br />
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/CbeZFDyHC30" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe><br />
<span></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://race42012.com/2012/05/16/new-susan-b-anthony-list-ad-welcome-to-the-bureau-of-womanhood-conformity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

