Who Wins In Iowa?

[McGyver]

Care to share who YOU think will win on Jan. 3rd in Iowa? Right now it looks to me like it will be Huckabee and Obama....However, I have heard many rumblings about McCain and Edwards sneaking in the back door????

[Old Round Guy]

Of all the declared candidates, both Democrat and Republican, and mention of possibility of 3rd party candidates my choice remains . . . .

someone else.

[McGyver]

I have heard that depending on WHO gets the Republican Nod, will decide whether or not Bloomberg will run as an Independent....possibly with Joe Biden.

That would be a Ticket I would certainly consider, depending on their platform. But, I would have to believe they could be serious contenders before I would vote for them.

[Drivesme]

Myself I would say that Obama will not only win in Iowa but he will win the White House as well.

Who wins on the right?
Who cares, it doesn't matter.

[Old Round Guy]

IMHO Biden's too much of a Washington insider. I don't know all that much about Bloomberg.

CNN's been saying that Edwards for the Dems and McCain for the Republicans might be the ones to watch now.

[Drivesme]

IMHO Biden's too much of a Washington insider. I don't know all that much about Bloomberg.

CNN's been saying that Edwards for the Dems and McCain for the Republicans might be the ones to watch now.

Edwards might be able to do something but that hinges on what Clinton and Obamba do.
They both are going to have to.....screw up(?) pretty bad in oder for Edwards to get a better foot hold.


McCain doesn't have a chance, he sold his sole to the GOP and everyone knows it.
His only chance was back when he was his own man, that is why the GOP killed him.

[JIMV]

Care to share who YOU think will win on Jan. 3rd in Iowa? Right now it looks to me like it will be Huckabee and Obama....However, I have heard many rumblings about McCain and Edwards sneaking in the back door????

Too volitile and too easy to rig...a caucus is all about simply getting folk to the room. It is like a town council budget meeting when the school budget is the issue. The schools pack the room with a few hundred folk who dominate the discussion wile the tens of thousands of other taxpayers not there are ignored.

You simply cannot call an election this close.

We'll know by next week. As a guess, I'd say Obama/Romney

[JIMV]

I have heard that depending on WHO gets the Republican Nod, will decide whether or not Bloomberg will run as an Independent....possibly with Joe Biden.

That would be a Ticket I would certainly consider, depending on their platform. But, I would have to believe they could be serious contenders before I would vote for them.

Leads to the next question....who would such a ticket hurt? I do not see a lot of republicans voting for Bloomberg and Babling Biden is a giant only in his own mind.

[Drivesme]

Leads to the next question....who would such a ticket hurt? I do not see a lot of republicans voting for Bloomberg and Babling Biden is a giant only in his own mind.
Historically the indy takes votes from the incumbent party.
That would be the republicans and given that they are universally hated right now I would say that is where he would get his votes.

[JIMV]

Historically the indy takes votes from the incumbent party.
That would be the republicans and given that they are universally hated right now I would say that is where he would get his votes.

The Congress belongs to the dems, hated far more than the republicans were in the last election. No, the problem is not one of party but of incumbents. Citizens hate the buggers from both parties.

[lenny]

Iowa:

D. Edwards
R. Romney

New Hampshire:

D. Obama
R. Paul

Oh yeah, Paul is gonna take New Hampshire. :)

[McGyver]

Pretty Close Lenny:

IOWA:

D. Edwards

R. Romney


NEW HAMPSHIRE:

D. Clinton

R. Paul

[JIMV]

Paul could win in a caucus where one can rig a room with supporters but NH is a primary and Paul won't gret to double digits in that system.

[lenny]

Paul could win in a caucus where one can rig a room with supporters but NH is a primary and Paul won't gret to double digits in that system.


Just curious what you base this opinion on? I realize that the T.V. and other mainstream news outlets are all unanimous in their opinion that his candidacy is hopeless and irrelevant (as well as in their efforts to sweep it under the rug), but as one who doesn't pay any attention to corporate news, I'm really wondering how much support he (Ron Paul) actually has.

It actually seems that he has a significant level of real support. I see signs and bumper stickers all over the place, yet see none for many of the other "major" candidates. In other words, it's visible. He's raised almost $20,000,000 from...actual people making small contributions -- they bought him a freaking blimp.

Basically, all this support has to amount to something, and I highly doubt that it's going to be single digits in a state like New Hampshire -- Live Free or Die and all. Seems like "the polls" consist of people who are willing to answer a land-line and participate in a phone poll, which to me translates into the kind of individuals who are highly medicated and allow themselves to be programmed by the T.V. everyday. I'm just reluctant right now to trust "the polls" and the T.V. etc., but it could just be my instinct to reject their attempts to manipulate me into voting for one of the few candidates they've preselected.

The good thing is that we'll find out the answer to this very soon.

[McGyver]

WOW.....Huckabee appears to have won the Iowa Caucus by a rather large margin..... I LOVE this! I love the idea that the Guy who spent the least amount of money in Iowa Won the most votes! Says much about our maturity as voters, IMHO! THIS is the type of change I have been looking for.

I believe the amount of money spent to elect One Freakin President of The United States of America is obscene....and needs to stop NOW! It could exceed $1 BILLION DOLLARS this year, and THAT is Criminal! Whoever gets elected MUST do something about Public Financing for Presidential Elections. That is the ONLY way we can ensure we get the "BEST" and not just the one with the Most Money!

Democrats are in a Three Way Dead Heat between Obama, Edwards and Clinton.....Very, very interesting.

[JIMV]

I am confused. I am watching CNN and Fox and they are reporting 69% of the democrat vote has been reported and the total number of votes is about 1,500.

The Republicans are reporting under 50% of their precincts and also over 50,000 votes....

Why is anyone paying attention to a democrat voting base 20 times smaller than the republicans? I have been in high school elections with more votes than the dems are reporting.

[McGyver]

WOW....what a story. So far it is 35% for Obama, and both Clinton and Edwards at 31%. Pretty darn close!

[JIMV]

35% of what...under 2000 votes....who cares?

[JIMV]

I agree but...look at the number of raw votes. CNN lists them often and Fox now and again. There are over 50,000 republicans who are listed as having voted and only a bit more than 2000 dems...I do not question the percents but the total number of voters. If only 3 or 4 thousand dems showed up and voted, why should anyone pay any attention to their numbers? If more are voting, why are the news networks not reporting the real numbers for them??

[McGyver]

I agree but...look at the number of raw votes. CNN lists them often and Fox now and again. There are over 50,000 republicans who are listed as having voted and only a bit more than 2000 dems...I do not question the percents but the total number of voters. If only 3 or 4 thousand dems showed up and voted, why should anyone pay any attention to their numbers? If more are voting, why are the news networks not reporting the real numbers for them??

I heard from a few people that turnout for both Parties was a record. But I have not heard how Big a record???

[JIMV]

I suspect the networks are misreporting the raw numbers and we will have to wait for tomorrow for real numbers.

The republican turnout makes sense but the democrat? I cannot believe so few folk voted.

[McGyver]

From MSNBC's David Shuster
165,000 in so far. Based on precincts still to report (urban areas), the total will be 185,000 to 200,000.... A tidal wave on Dem side compared with 125,000 from 2004.

*** UPDATE *** From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
The Iowa Democratic party says, "With 93.5 percent of the precincts reporting we are seeing record turnout with 218,000 caucus attendees."

[McGyver]

I suspect the networks are misreporting the raw numbers and we will have to wait for tomorrow for real numbers.

The republican turnout makes sense but the democrat? I cannot believe so few folk voted.

What WAS the Republican Turnout? I couldn't find it? And what are you questioning about the Democratic turnout? It was Great!

[Old Round Guy]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/03/iowa.caucuses/index.html

Excerpt

With such a close race on both sides, voter turnout was key. The Iowa Democratic Party reported seeing record turnout. The party said there were 218,000 caucus attendees with 93.5 percent of the precincts reporting.

The Iowa Democratic Party said 124,000 people participated in the 2004 caucuses, while the Republican Party of Iowa estimated that 87,000 people took part in the 2000 caucuses. (President Bush ran unchallenged for a second term in 2004.)

End excerpt

[JIMV]

What WAS the Republican Turnout? I couldn't find it? And what are you questioning about the Democratic turnout? It was Great!

No, my question came from teh numbers reported by the networks. They reported 20 times more votes by the republicans than the dems. That did not make any sense.

I figure the final totals will not be in till tomorrow.

[McGyver]

No, my question came from teh numbers reported by the networks. They reported 20 times more votes by the republicans than the dems. That did not make any sense.

I figure the final totals will not be in till tomorrow.

No, that would make no sense. I never heard that, but then I was watching MSNBC. I just heard Chris Matthews say that Democrats turned out more than double what Republicans did in Iowa! Now THAT would make sense to me. We'll have to see how that holds up tomorrow.

[lenny]

Wow, looks like Obama pulled it off. Good for him. He's my favorite mainstream candidate. The main problem I've had with him has been that he's seemed to want to "play the game" or whatever. I always like the ones who go against the grain and stand up to the system, but I suppose that if I were running his campaign he'd be in about 4th or 5th place right now. :o

Here's (http://www.liberalsmustdie.com/2007/12/17/Mike+Huckabee+Perfect+Family.aspx) a great picture of the Huckabee family. :eek: Maybe y'all can put that on your Christmas cards next year.

[Erika]

He's got the 18 to 29 year old votes, and the women. This country wants peace and unity.

I fear for his life. I saw JFK, RFK, MLK all shot down when they spoke up and acted for civil rights.

[JIMV]

I read on another forum that the numbers CNN and Fox used reflected different things for the two parties, which they did not bother to explain. The republican number was a listing of raw votes received. The democrat listing was a listing of delegates their candidates received, not votes cast.

While demonstrating a certain ineptness on the part of the news services, not unexpected, this explanation does fit with the numbers reported.

Here is a link to CNN that explains the differences

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#IA

[Notus Lotus]

Obama's win is really significant IMO because of the demographics of Iowa.
94% caucasion. Could it be we really have advanced enough to elect a black man to be President?

I'd like to think so, but people are always calling me a dreamer.

[lenny]

...but you're not the only one.

[McGyver]

What great lyrics for a song......;)

[JIMV]

Obama's win is really significant IMO because of the demographics of Iowa.
94% caucasion. Could it be we really have advanced enough to elect a black man to be President?

I'd like to think so, but people are always calling me a dreamer.

Depends on the black man...Powell would ha e won easilly. Al Sharpton is a perpetual loser. Character and programs do count, even for black folk.

[McGyver]

Depends on the black man...Powell would ha e won easilly. Al Sharpton is a perpetual loser. Character and programs do count, even for black folk.

"Black Folk????" Hmmmm....Then why not Barack Obama? He's bright, articulate....is of great character, and I'm sure has all kinds of ideas about "programs," and he's certainly "black folk!"

[JIMV]

"Black Folk????" Hmmmm....Then why not Barack Obama? He's bright, articulate....is of great character, and I'm sure has all kinds of ideas about "programs," and he's certainly "black folk!"

Even for black folk in that simply being the first black is not enough..there has to be more there. Maybe Obama is the one. Don't know. At least he is not anywhere as crooked as a Clinton.

[McGyver]

Even for black folk in that simply being the first black is not enough..there has to be more there. Maybe Obama is the one. Don't know. At least he is not anywhere as crooked as a Clinton.

Or as DUMB as a Bush! :D

[Erika]

His mom was a blonde from Kansas. Jim's attempts to smear Hillary are laughable. The millions of dollars spent to invstigate her turned up nothing.

[McGyver]

Even for black folk in that simply being the first black is not enough..there has to be more there. Maybe Obama is the one. Don't know. At least he is not anywhere as crooked as a Clinton.

Jim, You keep insinuating that Senator Clinton is "corrupt." First of all, just what are you accusing her of??? And Second, do you have any proof of your accusations?? Or, are you just reacting to your extreme case of CDS?

And Last, Do YOU have anymore Proof of Senator Clinton's corruption than you complain Senator Kucinich has regarding Bush's Impeachment? (I didn't think so!)


************************************************** ***********************************

[Drivesme]

Even for black folk in that simply being the first black is not enough..there has to be more there. Maybe Obama is the one. Don't know. At least he is not anywhere as crooked as a Clinton.

I see by your posts that racism is still alive and well in the republican party as well as the Clinton obsession.

Everything is a Clinton's fault, right?

[Notus Lotus]

Depends on the black man...Character and programs do count, even for black folk.

Now there's a news flash!
Next you'll be telling me you eat at Sylvia's, where the "black folk" actually use silverware, and napkins, and you don't hear one person shouting for some motherfucking iced tea.

[McGyver]

Now there's a news flash!
Next you'll be telling me you eat at Sylvia's, where the "black folk" actually use silverware, and napkins, and you don't hear one person shouting for some motherfucking iced tea.

Now "that" was funny! :D Maybe we do have Blowhard O'Reilly on this forum afterall. :D



************************************************** ******