Iowa caucas

[Token]

Looking official for Cruz. By nearly 4%.

Trump will say something incredible tonight or tomorrow.

[GH2001]

The Toupee underperformed. And they will spin it as much as they can that "he didn't want it anyway". He had led Iowa in the polls 90% of the time the last 6 months. So yeah, this was big. And it wasn't even close.

Problems now? 1. He has lost momentum, 2. it shows his last stunt and round of behavoir did indeed hurt him, and 3. now he has Rubio on his bumper to worry about.

I wish Rubio and Cruz would shake on a gentlemen's agreement to knock this boob out of the way, then let the better man win once he's gone.


TRUMP

                 




TRUMP    <== 




Hey TRUMP,

 

[Kaos]

Rick Santorum won the Iowa Caucus in 2012.  Huckabee won by a large margin in 2008.

/ end premature ejubilation.

[GH2001]

Rick Santorum won the Iowa Caucus in 2012.  Huckabee won by a large margin in 2008.

/ end premature ejubilation.

And they are the only 2 in recent memory to not get the Presidential nomination while wining Iowa. Santorum also beat Romney by like 6 votes. Not exactly a rousing victory, more or less a tie. Brother Huck was a joke and was never gonna win anything other than Iowa.

Its just fun watching the self proclaimed arrogant ass "winner" Trump go 0-fer after his first attempt at this game. Guess he's not a "winner" huh? 

He will probably win NH since it neighbors New York and he will just buy it. But just to see him fall flat out of the gate is glorious. Nice to see a jerk eat crow.

[Kaos]

And they are the only 2 in recent memory to not get the Presidential nomination while wining Iowa. Santorum also beat Romney by like 6 votes. Not exactly a rousing victory, more or less a tie. Brother Huck was a joke and was never gonna win anything other than Iowa.

Its just fun watching the self proclaimed arrogant ass "winner" Trump go 0-fer after his first attempt at this game. Guess he's not a "winner" huh? 

He will probably win NH since it neighbors New York and he will just buy it. But just to see him fall flat out of the gate is glorious. Nice to see a jerk eat crow.

I'm telling you this means nothing. 

And you're wrong about Iowa. 

Reagan finished second there in 1980
No caucus in 1984
Dole barely held off Pat Robertson in 1988.  Bush finished a distant third. Who won that year?
No caucus in 92
Dole barely edged Pat Robertson in 1996
Yeah GW won in 2000 by a decent margin over Forbes.

But 2000 was the ONLY time some whackadoo wasn't on top or second in their little cock-ass.  Fart in a whirlwind.

[djsimp]

And they are the only 2 in recent memory to not get the Presidential nomination while wining Iowa. Santorum also beat Romney by like 6 votes. Not exactly a rousing victory, more or less a tie. Brother Huck was a joke and was never gonna win anything other than Iowa.

Its just fun watching the self proclaimed arrogant ass "winner" Trump go 0-fer after his first attempt at this game. Guess he's not a "winner" huh? 

He will probably win NH since it neighbors New York and he will just buy it. But just to see him fall flat out of the gate is glorious. Nice to see a jerk eat crow.

I tend to think you are right. I've been saying it for a while that Trump will dig his hole too deep to climb out and the shovel is his mouth. Now that Trump floundered out of the gate, stay tuned for a possible Trump knee jerk meltdown. He would be smart to let the smoke clear but something tells me he won't do that.

[The Six]

Meanwhile, 84%–of 17-29 year olds supported Bernie Sanders.

84%

Let that soak in a bit.

84%

What the hell is the wold coming to?

[Saniflush]

Meanwhile, 84%–of 17-29 year olds supported Bernie Sanders.

84%

Let that soak in a bit.

84%

What the hell is the wold coming to?

http://m.newsok.com/article/5475578?utm_source=MobileNewsOK.com&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=ShareBar-Facebook

It's disheartening that an avowed socialist is a viable candidate for president of the United States. Socialism is a dead end. For hundreds of years, it has failed everywhere it's been adopted. The enthusiasm of our youth for the candidacy of Bernie Sanders is a symptom of our failure to educate them, not only in history, government and economics, but also basic morality.

What about so-called “crony capitalism”? This is nothing more than socialism that benefits the wealthy and influential. It's just as wrong as any other form of socialism. The cure is to limit government power. Human nature is corruptible. If government has the power to redistribute wealth, it will always act in the interests of the powerful segments of society. What made America great is not progressive government, but the genius and industry of a people freed from arbitrary power by the chains placed upon government by our Constitution.

Socialism isn't so much a legitimate economic system as it is a moral failing. It will always exist because ignorant people will always want something for nothing. If we want to retain our freedom and prosperity, then we must educate our children that the purpose of government is to secure liberty, not provide free lunches.

Deming (ddenimg@ou.edu) is a professor of arts and sciences at the University of Oklahoma.

[GH2001]

I'm telling you this means nothing. 

And you're wrong about Iowa. 

Reagan finished second there in 1980
No caucus in 1984
Dole barely held off Pat Robertson in 1988.  Bush finished a distant third. Who won that year?
No caucus in 92
Dole barely edged Pat Robertson in 1996
Yeah GW won in 2000 by a decent margin over Forbes.

But 2000 was the ONLY time some whackadoo wasn't on top or second in their little cock-ass.  Fart in a whirlwind.

Reagan never went to Iowa. Never tried. There was no attempt.

Dole beat Buchanan in 96 not Robertson. He beat Robertson in 88. Neither were close like you stated. Dole is also from Kansas so I don't think him winning in 88 in a landslide (double digits) was a surprise.

At worst - half the time depending on if you count Reagan abandoning in 1980 - the Iowa winner is the nominee. Even giving you 50/50 here that's hardly meaningless. You also left out ford in 1976. M


Anyone with half a political brain knows that the duo of Rubio and Cruz are not Santorum or huckabee. They have much more gravitas. Much more money and robust ground games.

[AUChizad]

K is right that the Iowa caucus means fuck-all.

This time feels different though. Not necessarily that Cruz won, but that Trump didn't.

A lot of his "appeal" is the self fulfilling prophecy that "he's a winner" and 90% of his rhetoric is his braggadocia that he's been leading in the polls all along. This feels like a genuine turning point because A) The people who just want to "bet on the winning horse" are going to back off, B) He can no longer rely on that rhetoric, and C) It is going to piss him off and will start throwing fits that will make him even more unappealing. (Not sure about that last part, because again, the more of an idiot he appears the more people somehow like him).

Rand placed 5th. I would have liked to have seen better, but hopefully others will start withdrawing soon and maybe the next debate can be just the top 5 candidates. I gotta believe once that happens, Trump & Carson will eventually drop off for not being able to offer any substantiate debate.

Meanwhile on the Dem side, A LITERAL COIN FLIP determined the winner. Six of them actually. And Hillary won 6 of 6. There is a 1/64 or 1.56% chance of that happening (for real, my maths haz been checked).

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/02/02/clinton-wins-at-least-six-iowa-precincts-by-coin-flip/

Seems legit.

[The Six]

What Iowa means on the GOP side:

Evangelical Christians are as easy to organize as a square dance. Cruz knows that and played it. Trump ignored it and that was a misfire.

What Iowa means on the DNC side:

The schools in that part of the country completely failed to teach children anything about history or civics.

What Iowa means in the College Football Playoffs:

Not a damn thing.

[Kaos]

Reagan never went to Iowa. Never tried. There was no attempt.

Dole beat Buchanan in 96 not Robertson. He beat Robertson in 88. Neither were close like you stated. Dole is also from Kansas so I don't think him winning in 88 in a landslide (double digits) was a surprise.

At worst - half the time depending on if you count Reagan abandoning in 1980 - the Iowa winner is the nominee. Even giving you 50/50 here that's hardly meaningless. You also left out ford in 1976. M


Anyone with half a political brain knows that the duo of Rubio and Cruz are not Santorum or huckabee. They have much more gravitas. Much more money and robust ground games.

http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/caucus-history-past-years-results/

You're right.  Buchanan instead of Robertson.

1996

Bob Dole           25,378   26%
Pat Buchanan   22,512   23%

But "not close?"  Horseshit.    Less than 3000 votes difference. 

Dole led Robertson in 1988.  Where Bush was a distant third.  Who got the nomination?

Robert Dole   40,661   37.4%
Pat Robertson   26,761   24.6%
George Bush   20,194   18.6%

[The Prowler]

Ummm, yeah...I've never been the POTUS but I'm pretty sure it's harder than the Iowa Caucuses. Also, Toupee has only funded his campaign a little over $100,000...but it has brought in $3.8 Million extra from donors.
http://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/forms/C00580100/1029398/

[The Prowler]

[GH2001]

I don't consider 3000+ votes, when only 40k are cast, very close. Bush/Gore in Florida or Santorum/Romney in Iowa - those were close.

Regardless, I'm not arguing that Iowa means everything.  I'm saying it's not meaningless. Half the time it predicts right. Half the time it doesn't. But hardly meaningless. Cruz and Rubio have Obama-like ground games and are built for the long haul. Most that have won Iowa and failed to do anything beyond it have had awful long term paths.

[Kaos]

I don't consider 3000+ votes, when only 40k are cast, very close. Bush/Gore in Florida or Santorum/Romney in Iowa - those were close.

Regardless, I'm not arguing that Iowa means everything.  I'm saying it's not meaningless. Half the time it predicts right. Half the time it doesn't. But hardly meaningless. Cruz and Rubio have Obama-like ground games and are built for the long haul. Most that have won Iowa and failed to do anything beyond it have had awful long term paths.

And I don't think Crubio or Rubiuz have a long-term path either. 

Neither can drum up enough fire to burn out Hildebeast or Cryptkeeper Bernie F. Engels. 

[Snaggletiger]

The field narrows again.  Paul exits stage left.

[djsimp]

So, with these nominees dropping, where do their votes go? I personally don't think they transfer over to Trump.

[Snaggletiger]

So, with these nominees dropping, where do their votes go? I personally don't think they transfer over to Trump.

Hoping they flock to Cruz and get this guy way out front. 

[The Six]

So, with these nominees dropping, where do their votes go? I personally don't think they transfer over to Trump.

I would think Rand's go to Cruz (outsider, wildcard to outsider, wildcard). Bet Rubio is gonna make a play for those though.

Where will Ben Carson's go? (He has to be dropping soon, right?)

I figure Jeb's will go to Marco.