Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Caucus Discussion in General

J

Jaeger

New Member
Ask and you shall recieve.

www.iowacacusresults.com

Senator Barack Obama : 37.58%
Senator John Edwards : 29.75%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 29.47%
Governor Bill Richardson : 2.11%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.93%
Uncommitted : 0.14%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.02%
Precincts Reporting: 1781 of 1781

(Percentages are State Delegate Equivalents.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa_caucus

Mike Huckabee (34%),
Mitt Romney (25%),
Fred Thompson (13% <15,904 votes>),
John McCain (13% <15,559 votes>),
Ron Paul (10%),
Rudy Giuliani (4%),
Duncan Hunter (1%)
*98% of precincts reporting

Thoughts?



With Iowa come and gone and people still interested in lively discusion I changed the title to cacus discussion in general.
 
Last edited:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21229206
Paul got fifth but beat my least favorite candidate, Giuliani.

We're gonna win New Hampshire! Byaaaaaaaah!

Does anyone thinks it's strange that the anti-war candidate (the one who, when asked how to end the Iraq war said, "Get 'em on planes.") Gravel got NO VOTES!??? He also seems to be the candidate who's been running the longest. Look at the democrat vote totals. Their winner is being decided by less than 3000 people!:confused:
 
Last edited:
Winners and losers:

~Winners (the obvious)~

-Obama: people who have been keeping up with the Caucus would not be too surprised by the win, so much as by how wide the margin was. It seemed the celebrity endorsement/caucus training worked, because Barack Obama creamed his competition.
-Huckabee: going from zero to hero is one impressive feat, and Huckabee did it. He definitely needed this to stay competitive in New Hampshire.

~Winners (the not-so obvious)~

-Edwards: outplacing Hillary is nice for him...Might just be the momentum he needs to steal away some percentage on national polls!
-Thompson, McCain, and Paul: these numbers all proved that their candidacies are NOT dead. This suggests that every Republican candidate might win a state this primary, bar Hunter.

~Losers (the obvious)~

-Clinton: from projected frontrunner of the world to projected second, Hillary suffered a crushing defeat, and everyone knows it. when I watched her "celebration" speech, it was reminiscent of Howard Dean's inevitable fall to John Kerry, bar the "HEEEYAH!!!" scream.
-Dodd and Biden: Iowa is the end of the line for them both.
-Giuliani: everyone expected him to do poorly in Iowa, but he wasn't competitive in the _least_. To only outrank Duncan Hunter is a massive failure, even in a backwards state that doesn't appreciate Rudy's socially liberal policies.

~Losers (the not-so obvious)~

-Paul: placing fifth in Iowa wasn't really the "upset" momentum that he needed. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but this means that he also won't be able to participate in the ABC debate this weekend.
-Romney: he should've kept it a bit closer than 9%.
 
Last edited:
ninetales1234 said:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21229206
Paul got fifth but beat my least favorite candidate, Giuliani.

We're gonna win New Hampshire! Byaaaaaaaah!

Does anyone thinks it's strange that the anti-war candidate (the one who, when asked how to end the Iraq war said, "Get 'em on planes.") Gravel got NO VOTES!??? He also seems to be the candidate who's been running the longest. Look at the democrat vote totals. Their winner is being decided by less than 3000 people!:confused:
Click to expand...

They vote in caucuses where you need 15% of people to vote for you to count as 1 vote, so there were 3000 groups of usually 50-100, so they had a good turnout too. I hate caucus voting, just another reason why I'm a republican.
 
Which party was most impacted by the Iowa Caucuses?

Answer: the Democrats, by a wide margin. After Huckabee "boomed," he became more and more inevitable in a state that seemed favorable to him. I expect the next few primaries to really determine the Repubs. The left, however, has been really shaken by yesterday. Obama flat-out dominated, and Dodd/Biden are now gone. As the three-way race narrows down, I see the once-invincible Hillary lose more of her lead to Obama and Edwards.
 
Cyrus... I would go far as to say that this is a (not so obvious) win for Guilianni because it takes alot of the wind out of the sails of Romney for some of the upcoming states. A big win for Huckabee in Iowa = good for Guilianni.
 
Cyrus said:
Winners and losers:
-Huckabee: going from zero to hero is one impressive feat, and Huckabee did it. He definitely needed this to stay competitive in New Hampshire.
Click to expand...


The only reason reason he got such numbers is because he got Evangelical Christians voting for him. Anyway Huckabee's an ok guy. I don't like the fact he doesn't want to put his foot down on illegal immigration though. As a LEGAL immigrant myself, it's kinda like yeah we wairted in line, but Mexico gets some special treatment? riiiggght...
 
Lakak said:
learn2 spell?
Click to expand...

Who are you? Yea I was in a hurry and had like 5 min to get online and since I live in Iowa I thought I would post the results since some people on here do care. So next time why don't you go back and keep pwning "noobs" and let the adults talk.
 
Jaeger said:
Who are you? Yea I was in a hurry and had like 5 min to get online and since I live in Iowa I thought I would post the results since some people on here do care. So next time why don't you go back and keep pwning "noobs" and let the adults talk.
Click to expand...

Not like I don't care who our new president is. I care about this too, but it's easier to make sense of when I can read it.

And I hate pokemon now, so I don't pawn nubs anymore.
 
Cyrus said:
-Paul: placing fifth in Iowa wasn't really the "upset" momentum that he needed. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but this means that he also won't be able to participate in the ABC debate this weekend.
Click to expand...

Wait, so this means Giuliani will be excluded, too? How exactly does that work? I think he's being excluded from the Fox debate?
 
How the heck did Huckabee become a frontrunner?
The Chuck Norris commercial couldn't have done it alone. Chuck Norris is good for a good 10% raise in the polls, but shouldn't be enough to rocket you into first place...

When do the real primaries start, anyways?
 
49% of Evangelicals voted for Huckabee.

Maybe I missed something, but doesn't that mean that 51% of us "Evangelicals" voted for someone else? I know I didn't vote for him. In our district, Huckabee did win, but only by about 20 votes. Thompson, who has done next to no campaigning in Iowa, took second. Then came Romney with about 10 less votes in third. Now, I was in Rural District 1 of the 50036 area code. So we are talking about 130 people voting. Huckabee had 50 something, Thompson got 30 something, and Romney 20 something. For some reason, I can remember exactly that McCain got 9, Rudy got 2 (actually something of a surprise), Hunter (not sure of the name off the top of my head) got 1 and Cox got 0. Of course, Rudy doesn't exactly have much standing here, given that several of his issue stances are ones that even Democrats share with Republicans in this state. These numbers, of course, are different from the end results: Any district that didn't have Huckabee as the top spot had Romney.

So, since I rambled a bit as is my way, let me emphasize this:

Many "Evangelicals" voted for Huckabee, but more voted against him than for him. Number wise, he had to get a lot of non-Evangelical votes too.

As for me, I disagree with him on a few key issues. You'd be surprised how many Iowans are concerned about border security/illegal immigration as well as economics/taxes. Someone who can't understand supply-side economics is not my idea of a good candidate.
 
PuRpLe said:
That's exactly how Bush got elected... -_-
Click to expand...

And Bush opened a pandora's box as he went with Rove's election strategy of getting the Evangelicals more politically involved.

The strongest group of voters right now in the U.S. is the evangelical vote right now if you ask me and the crazy thing is their block of voters is looking like it'll get stronger with every election.

When I heard huckabee getting evangelical support, I wanted to go to Vegas right then and drop my cash on Huckabee to win Iowa.
 
What is crazy is how long it took to motivate this particular voter block. Those confused by it need to understand something: there are a lot of "us" out here. "We" Evangelicals have been around for years. Decades. We've been more recognized lately, but the reason elections are seeing more and more impact by Evangelicals is that information distribution is getting better. Welcome to the Information Age. Religious leaders had to worry about losing tax exempt status if they pointed out obvious things like "this candidate is openly hostile, except when campaigning around us, to every belief we hold sacred". Naturally, the most informed were those in position of authority, but by tying their hands their actions were stifled. Now, thanks to the Internet, affordable printing, etc. even the layman in the church can get the word out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top