[Common Tator]

Two things to understand about media stories. When they quote polls or indepth studies of voters the “conclusions” the story expects you to draw MIGHT be correct.But when a reporter just talks to people at an event and then reports “what they told the Repoter about what others may do” you can bet the farm that the concusions you are supposed to draw are Bull Crap.

I read no farther than the person saying I am likely to vote for Romney but my friends and fellow church mambers are not likely to do so is a manufactured response.

Bet the farm that the question was asked several times in several different ways until the Reporter got the answer the reporter was looking for.

[delacoert]

I read no farther than the person saying I am likely to vote for Romney but my friends and fellow church members are not likely to do so is a manufactured response.

I paused at about the same place you say that you did. IMO, after reading the whole article, the title did seem like the point of the article.

There were some pretty unvarnished caucuser comments/quotations in the article. E.g.,

Awaiting a similar event in Council Bluffs in an aircraft repair hangar at the local airport, Bryan Shea, a building contractor, complained about competing for jobs against unscrupulous competitors who cut costs by hiring illegal immigrants. A GOP precinct chairman in Crescent, Shea said his vote would go to the candidate with the toughest and most persuasive platform for solving the problem.