Official Iowa Caucus Thread

[Hababi]

Huckabee wins Huckabee wins Huckabee wins!

[Iskandar]

Better than Romney.

[Hababi]

Better than Romney.

Chuck Norris doesn't make predictions, he just tells America how it's going to be.

Except McCain, Huckabee trumps the field

And it looks like Obama's going to win, too.

[Iskandar]

Chuck Norris doesn't make predictions, he just tells America how it's going to be.

Except McCain, Huckabee trumps the field

And it looks like Obama's going to win, too.Obama is leading with Edwards and Hilary tied for second.

McCain couldn't have won, he isn't Republican enough to win.

[Hababi]

But now McCain is going to trounce Romney in New Hampshire.

[Der Übermensch]

CNN was predicting Edwards a little earlier, which was quite surprising. Money is on Obama regardless though.

[Iskandar]

But now McCain is going to trounce Romney in New Hampshire.I'm all for Romney getting trounced.

[Akira]

Better than Romney.

It's close. I think Romney would be easier for the Dems to beat.

[Avalanche.]

Obama wins for Dems

[Mr. Ron]

the caucus is retarded and should be eliminated.

[Avalanche.]

What is the significance of the caucus?

[Akira]

the caucus is retarded and should be eliminated.

123456789

[djs]

It was chaos. Obama won though, so I'm happy.

[Mr. Ron]

I haven't been paying attention, unfortunately.

[rsb1094]

I'm not really sure how I feel about this whole Caucus thing. I mean, come on, a state as small as Iowa being the first way to narrow down candidates? By the time super Tuesday comes on Feb. 5, where most of the states hold their primaries, the candidates will already be pretty much decided.

[J Rad]

I'm glad Obama won.

[Against Miik!]

People overestimate the importance of Iowa. 3 of our last 4 presidents did not win Iowa. Clinton got 3% in Iowa, and didn't win New Hampshire either. So I don't really see this as that big a deal, especially on the Republican side. The real loser is Mitt Romney. He won't win New Hampshire either. Since most of his support comes from evangelicals, as well as his home around the northeast, that won't be good. If he doesn't win NH, i expect it to be the beginning of the end.

Also, I honestly don't see Huckabee's support translating to more intelligent parts of the country. Iowa was a great victory, but will ultimately be meaningless. And Fred Thompson, well, I honestly don't know how he got 13%, but I don't really think it matters. I expect him to drop out after a poor showing in NH. That leaves us with essentially a 3 man race, between McCain, Giuliani, and Paul. I think Giulianis strategy of putting all his eggs in the super Tuesday basket will pay off. If i'm not mistaken, he is still polling very well nationally. McCain is a toss up, but after his NH win, he will have a lot of momentum. As for Paul, I don't expect him to win the nomination. He will do very well in some states. Hell, 10% isn't all that bad, and I think he will do better in the very freedom oriented northeast. Regardless, I think he will make decent showings for the rest of the race, and will not drop out until the primaries are over, but will be setting himself up for an independent third party run.

The only way I see the election even being close is if Hillary wins the nomination. She's polarizing enough to make independents go towards Giuliani or Paul. I don't think she will win if she gets the nomination, but its very possible she will. Kind of odd. I think Edwards is out unless he surprises everybody in NH, finishing first or second, and then wins SC.

Again, I really think the importance of these early primary states is overhyped, but they are still hyped, and public perception will force a lot of candidates out early.

[Hababi]

People overestimate the importance of Iowa. 3 of our last 4 presidents did not win Iowa. Clinton got 3% in Iowa, and didn't win New Hampshire either.


Clinton didn't compete in Iowa, as Harkin was the presumptive winner. Romney pumped $7 million into Iowa and lost. That's the big difference.

If he doesn't win NH, i expect it to be the beginning of the end.


One can only hope.

But I think that's correct. Romney is beginning to fade, and I don't think he can turn it around.



Also, I honestly don't see Huckabee's support translating to more intelligent parts of the country. Iowa was a great victory, but will ultimately be meaningless.


He leads in South Carolina (and that lead should increase now), and is competing in Florida. He should get an influx of money and the coming nationally televised debates will only help him.

That being said, he's basically competing for third in New Hampshire.



And Fred Thompson, well, I honestly don't know how he got 13%, but I don't really think it matters. I expect him to drop out after a poor showing in NH.


I think he'll wait till after SC. But yeah then he's done.



That leaves us with essentially a 3 man race, between McCain, Giuliani, and Paul.

Ron Paul is not a serious candidate. I know you want him to be, but he's not. He has a very low ceiling, because only so many people are going to be swayed by talk of ending the federal reserve and the majority of federal programs.


I think Giulianis strategy of putting all his eggs in the super Tuesday basket will pay off. If i'm not mistaken, he is still polling very well nationally.


In national polls, he's fallen behind McCain and will probably drop below Huckabee now. Huckabee has gained on him in California and elsewhere. The negative press on Giuliani is overwhelming.


McCain is a toss up, but after his NH win, he will have a lot of momentum.


Indeed, and he'll take all of Giuliani's voters.


Regardless, I think he will make decent showings for the rest of the race, and will not drop out until the primaries are over, but will be setting himself up for an independent third party run.


I think you're right in terms of decent showings--in virtually every state, there's going to be 8-15% that will vote for him. But that's it. And I think he'll be the last to drop out.



I think Edwards is out unless he surprises everybody in NH, finishing first or second, and then wins SC.


I agree, and I think that Edwards is indeed toast. NH isn't going for him, nor is SC. And his withdrawal secures things for Obama.

I like Obama. I could vote for him against Romney or Thompson or Giuliani.

http://vodkapundit.com/archives/009372.php
Ugly GOP elitism, ewwww.

[Danish]

Mark my words. If Mike Huckabee doesn't secure the nomination or, for some other reason, doesn't run to the end, he will be the Republicans nominee in the next election and he will win. Mark those words. Huckabee scares the hell out of me. He's the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan.

As for the Democratic side, I guess I hope Edwards wins as he is the most pro-labour candidate and the most "left-sounding" Democrat. I watched a lot of news about this last night, so I think I have a rudimentary understanding of the process.

[Against Miik!]

True about Clinton not campaigning in Iowa, but point is it isn't nearly the indicator that peopel think it is.

Huckabee...we'll find out. I still don't like him, but I guess a lot of people do. He lets off this real friendly persona, but I think there is more to him that people won't really like.

As for Paul, I meant it is a three man race in that they will be the last three competing, and Paul will be setting himself up for a third party, even though he said he won't which is smart.

Giuliani is kind of an oddball because you won't see his support anywhere until Florida.

These early primary states kind of throw everybody for a loop, because national polls differ greatly from state polls. I mean, they are sorta similar, but obviously Giuliani isn't polling at 4% nationwide, and I think Clinton is still higher than 29%.

Other than that, I think we might agree for once.

[Hababi]

Mark my words. If Mike Huckabee doesn't secure the nomination or, for some other reason, doesn't run to the end, he will be the Republicans nominee in the next election and he will win. Mark those words. Huckabee scares the hell out of me. He's the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan.


Dude if he were the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan then the National Review and many other arch GOP voices wouldn't be relentlessly savaging he and his followers.

I suggest reading this about Huckabee (and Obama): http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/04/opinion/04brooks.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Huckabee may be what the Republican party becomes in the long run. And that's not what Ronald Reagan was.

[Against Miik!]

Ronald Reagan was overrated.

Guess I can't register as a republican now

[Hababi]

Ronald Reagan was overrated.

Guess I can't register as a republican now

I agree that Reagan was overrated. His foreign policy was unenlightened and shortsighted. Much of what is revered about him is image-based, not substance-based.

[Danish]

Dude if he were the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan then the National Review and many other arch GOP voices wouldn't be relentlessly savaging he and his followers.

I suggest reading this about Huckabee (and Obama): http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/04/opinion/04brooks.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Huckabee may be what the Republican party becomes in the long run. And that's not what Ronald Reagan was.

No no, I don't mean his politics are the reincarnation, I mean he is. He is easily the most charismatic and "electable" of all GOP candidates. He's a preacher, he's down-to-earth, and he has a certain charm. But he's unpolished. He doesn't have a lot of experience, and occasionally makes mistakes. Iron out those flaws and, in my opinion, he's unstoppable in an election campaign run and controlled by "good" public relations people.

The National Review just can't see the forest for the trees. Yet. It might not happen this year, but that will just make Huckabee a stronger force next time, more polished and experienced.

[Hababi]

Ah, ok, I see what you're saying now. And for once, I actually agree with you. Coming fresh on the heels of agreeing with PB on something (admittedly, non-political), this is quite notable.

[Against Miik!]

There’s no shortage of angles to the results out of Iowa, but let’s briefly go one at a time, taking a look at Spin vs. Reality. Starting with the Dems:

Barack Obama — What Obama fans are saying: Iowa is the spark that will propel Obama to the Democratic nomination. What Obama critics are saying: Iowa’s just one state.

Who’s right? It certainly looks like the fans are, doesn’t it? There’s a lot of campaigning yet to be done, but an amazing eight-point victory — exceeding all expectations — with broad support from every constituency not only makes Obama the frontrunner, it will likely give him a big boost in New Hampshire and South Carolina. And if he wins all three, the race is over. On the flip side, Obama, not Clinton, will now quickly become the center of attacks from all sides. We’ll see if he can handle the heat, though my hunch is he can.

John Edwards — What Edwards fans are saying: We beat Clinton and are alive to fight another day. What Edwards critics are saying: He needed to win Iowa to stay competitive.

Who’s right? A little bit of both, actually. Edwards’ strong second-place showing certainly won’t force him from the race, but it’s going to be difficult to boost fundraising and poll numbers in light of Obama’s big win.

Hillary Clinton — What Clinton fans are saying: It’s only the first round of a multi-round fight. What Clinton critics are saying: Say goodbye to “inevitability.”

Who’s right? Again, both. Clinton isn’t going anywhere; she has the resources to keep the fight going over the long haul, and has solid support in Feb. 5 states. But now, she’s the underdog, and has no obvious avenues to retaking the lead.

Bill Richardson — What Richardson fans are saying: We came in first … among second-tier candidates. What Richardson critics are saying: Dude, you got 2%.

Who’s right? Critics are. If there’s a scenario by which Richardson makes a comeback, I don’t see it.

And then, the Republicans:

Mike Huckabee — What Huckabee fans are saying: Onward and upward, Christian soldiers! What Huckabee critics are saying: Iowa, Schmiowa, he still doesn’t have the resources to compete long-term.

Who’s right? Critics are.

Mitt Romney — What Romney fans are saying: Silver medal! What Romney critics are saying: Didn’t you have a huge lead in Iowa just a few weeks ago?

Who’s right? Critics are, and unless he can eke out a victory in New Hampshire, Romney’s in serious trouble.

Fred Thompson — What Thompson fans are saying: Third place ain’t bad for a guy who doesn’t campaign. What Thompson critics are saying: It’s only a matter of time before Thompson realizes he has to go.

Who’s right? Actually, both. It was a weak third-place showing, which won’t come close to giving him a boost anywhere. But the results probably won’t force him from the race. Yet.

John McCain — What McCain fans are saying: With a weakened Romney, McCain is suddenly the odds-on GOP nominee. What McCain critics are saying: Dude, you came in fourth, losing to a guy who was barely awake the last several months.

Who’s right? Regrettably, the fans are, thanks in large part to an adoring media which can barely contain its pro-McCain glee.

Ron Paul — What Paul fans are saying (probably in all-caps): We tripled Giuliani! What Paul critics are saying: Paul still isn’t going to win anywhere.

Who’s right? Once again, both.

Rudy Giuliani — What Giuliani fans are saying: 9/11! 9/11! 9/11! What Giuliani critics are saying: “Frontrunners” don’t come in a humiliating sixth place, with one-third the support of a libertarian gadfly, in a state where he was once in the lead.

Who’s right? Take a wild guess.


Heres a nice little concise evaluation of post-Iowa

[Hababi]

Heres a nice little concise evaluation of post-Iowa

Hehe, not bad.

I'm a bit divided about Huckabee. The lack of money and infrastructure is a major issue. But money should come in now that he won in Iowa, and with money comes infrastructure.

Huckabee's political senses are unmatched. The Leno appearance worked wonderfully for him, and had to boost his numbers. The more debates there are, the more it helps Huckabee. It's free press, basically.

If Huckabee wins a few more early states, then he can win the nomination. If he doesn't, expect him to withdraw and endorse McCain.

I think I already said most of this, but :o

[Against Miik!]

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/uc/20080103/ltr080103.gif


Made me lol

how the f do I embed images into a post instead of just posting a link?

[Danish]

Ah, ok, I see what you're saying now. And for once, I actually agree with you. Coming fresh on the heels of agreeing with PB on something (admittedly, non-political), this is quite notable.

His politics are decidedly different than Reagan's. But we are in a totally different place then than we are now. The GOP has to strategize. So-called "evangelicals" make up some 25% of the electorate now. The Republicans know this well, and they know it's the key to their electoral success. Remember where the GOP was after Nixon? They needed a rebirth, in a sense. In a lot of ways, the Party is in the same position they were at that time.

I'm thinking purely strategically here. In reality, I don't think Huckabee's policies would be any different than Reagan's: privatize, cut taxes, further entrench neoliberalism, terrible foreign policy, etc. Elections in the US (in Canada too, don't get me wrong) are a farce, just for show.

[ringworm]

I thought Edwards losing speech was utterly baffling, did anyone see this? I have more distaste for this "How does my hair and makeup look" guy than Hilary :)

Obama surprised me.
Huckabee even more.
I am glad Rudy failed very badly
Hilary's losing speech was admittedly good and positive, not just for her, but it seemed a geniune speech about the steps the US needs to take, it was a nice approach that I thought was just the right thing to do.

But without Ron Paul in the mix, its just rinse and repeat tbo :)

[Hababi]

Edwards' rhetoric is just too angry. And his campaign is now hopeless.

[Reaganista]

Also, I honestly don't see Huckabee's support translating to more intelligent parts of the country. Iowa was a great victory, but will ultimately be meaningless. And Fred Thompson, well, I honestly don't know how he got 13%, but I don't really think it matters. I expect him to drop out after a poor showing in NH. That leaves us with essentially a 3 man race, between McCain, Giuliani, and Paul.
i liked how you just assumed away the evangelicals to boil it down to a fascist a democrat or a libertarian getting the nomination from the evangelical party

also elections dont matter etc

[ringworm]

Edwards' rhetoric is just too angry. And his campaign is now hopeless.
i cant stand him, I'd rather vote for McCain or Hilary than Edwards, and thats saying something :)

[Against Miik!]

i liked how you just assumed away the evangelicals to boil it down to a fascist a democrat or a libertarian getting the nomination from the evangelical party

also elections dont matter etc

Do you really like that? Or is that sarcasm. I thought it was pretty clever.

[Hababi]

i cant stand him, I'd rather vote for McCain or Hilary than Edwards, and thats saying something :)

I think that I dislike Hillary as much as Edwards. I have some sympathy for Edwards, at least.

Do you really like that? Or is that sarcasm. I thought it was pretty clever.

Tway is 99% sarcasm

But I never know when that 1% shows up.

[Against Miik!]

You just have to check sometimes.

[Akira]

The fact that Ron Paul, the supposed internet celebrity with no support in the real world tripled Rudy makes me laugh.

[Hababi]

The fact that Ron Paul, the supposed internet celebrity with no support in the real world tripled Rudy makes me laugh.

I'd love to see a Rudy vs Ron Paul debate, because Giuliani would get really mad and blow his top.

[Cain]

Yay for Obama's win.

[DBoons Ghost]

Yay for Obama's win.

He will be the next President. I can feel it.

[BridgeToSolace]

If Ron Paul will pick up steam ANYWHERE, it'll be in New Hampshire. Fairly libertarian, that state.

I think Paul is going to suffer from the "Snakes On A Plane" Syndrome. (internet hype that leads to little of significance in the real world).

McCain has a good history in New Hampshire, and really seems to be the most genuine and liked of all the candidates. I think he'll take it. Huckabee still has that 2nd tier feeling about him. He wont go anywhere. Solid bassist though. New Hampshire saw what Romney did in MA, so I don't think he'll win. He'll do well, though.

Gulialini? Well, this is part of his plan. It's not a blow. But his plan depends on divisions within the beginning states. If the same person wins SC and NH, then he wont be able to overtake their momentum. If those states are split between Romney and McCain, he could very well take it.

I'm predicting McCain, though. Out of sheer hope.

On the democratic side:

It's good for Obama, but it's not perfect. Hilldog's strategy is similar to Guliani's in that she's counting on super Tuesday, but if Obama takes the first states, he'll be unstoppable. New Hampshire loves the Clintons, so it's very possible that she could take it. It's up in the air if the Iowa Victory can propel Obama to the top.

A lot of it might bank on Edwards. There's no way he wins NH, and he's definitely out of the race, but it depends on who he throws his supporters at when he drops out. It could be make or break for Obama or Hilldog.

I'm predicting Obama *fingers crossed*

Oh, and Richardson will be his running mate :p

And might I just say, Obama's speech was excellent.

[Hababi]

He will be the next President. I can feel it.

If McCain gets the nomination, it'll be close. If there's any type of national security incident or concern, McCain would win. Otherwise, Obama would be in a very good situation. I like him.

If Ron Paul will pick up steam ANYWHERE, it'll be in New Hampshire. Fairly libertarian, that state.



Wyoming.

[Reaganista]

if there's a national security incident people will vote for guiliani
Do you really like that? Or is that sarcasm. I thought it was pretty clever.
ummmm
well i think you're wrong
but idk if i liked it or not i guess i liked it it piqued my interest enough to post about it

[Hababi]

if there's a national security incident people will vote for guiliani

Not if the primary is over and McCain is the nominee:smash::smash::smash:

[DBoons Ghost]

There will not be a republican in the white house. Least of all McCain. He looks like a crazy old man.

[Hababi]

There will not be a republican in the white house. Least of all McCain. He looks like a crazy old man.

That's what the American Spectator says.

People turn to the Republicans when security is the number one concern. And McCain, even more than Giuliani, expresses strength and competence in dealing with security issues.

[DBoons Ghost]

That's what the American Spectator says.

People turn to the Republicans when security is the number one concern. And McCain, even more than Giuliani, expresses strength and competence in dealing with security issues.

My mom is voting for Rudy because he's a nice Italian boy from Brooklyn and "if he can fix NY then he can fix the country". She isn't talking to me because I'm voting for "the colored".

Old school wop racists for the win!

[Hababi]

My mom is voting for Rudy because he's a nice Italian boy from Brooklyn and "if he can fix NY then he can fix the country". She isn't talking to me because I'm voting for "the colored".

Old school wop racists for the win!

:lol: Ouch.

I thought Italians of all would appreciate racial tolerance, being that the darker skinned ones have faced discrimination in the past.

[DBoons Ghost]

:lol: Ouch.

I thought Italians of all would appreciate racial tolerance, being that the darker skinned ones have faced discrimination in the past.

Maybe. My mom views it as "we've been here longer and struggled just as much so we should be first to President" As far as she's concerned Italians have no care for slavery since we came here in the early 1900s.

She still calls them coloreds but she's not really a racist. She's a roman catholic psycho though so she has no tolerance for the gay.

[Reaganista]

lol ur mom isnt talking to you because of an election i hope that's a joke

[DBoons Ghost]

lol ur mom isnt talking to you because of an election i hope that's a joke

Yeah it's a joke. But she breaks my chops about it every time we talk. It's just some fun nonsense. She's 70 and we've run out of stuff to break each other's chops about.

[BridgeToSolace]

Just saying that you've changed your mind and that you'll vote for someone else.

You know...and then don't. She wont know.

[DBoons Ghost]

Just saying that you've changed your mind and that you'll vote for someone else.

You know...and then don't. She wont know.

Yeah I just might for reals though. If I was to throw a vote to the demons I once affiliated myself with it would be to Rudy.

My wife will vote for whoever her father tells her too. I want to beat her with a rubber hose.

[Knifeboy]

I want to beat her with a rubber hose.

So why don't you?.. She is your wife after all

[DBoons Ghost]

So why don't you?.. She is your wife after all

I don't wanna go to jail, silly. The rule of thumb was cast out with the ownership of humans. Stupid Abe Lincoln. I'd accept slavery if I could just beat that bitch once in a while. Then she'd kill me in my sleep and win a landmark case and be free, while I'd be eaten by worms.

I've thought it through pretty good.

[Knifeboy]

Pff, you americans and your silly laws preventing you from subduing your wife

[DBoons Ghost]

Pff, you americans and your silly laws preventing you from subduing your wife

I agree. It's horrible the conditions we are forced to live under. If I ever meet Uncle Sam I intend to kick him square in the nuts. I bet he beats his wife. Hypocrit.

[Knifeboy]

yeah, and she probably deserved it too!

[Reaganista]

Yeah it's a joke. But she breaks my chops about it every time we talk. It's just some fun nonsense. She's 70 and we've run out of stuff to break each other's chops about.

ya i get it

[Against Miik!]

What I want to know is where these candidates think they get experience in dealing with issues of national security. I mean, unless you serve in the senate foreign relations committee or you were an ambassador or something like that. But seriously, we had the largest national security blunder of all time, on Rudy's watch. That should be a negative, not a positive. And McCain fought a war 45 years ago. Wow, thanks and everything, but its not really the same anymore. And I'm sure there are a lot of terrorists in Arizona. The only candidates who have actual foreign relations experience, that I am aware of, are Biden and Richardson, and one of them dropped out and the other one is mexican.

[Futue te Ipsum]

I think i voted huckabee in that thread thing

I know nothing about his policies but I'm glad I backed somebody who's getting results

[BridgeToSolace]

The only candidates who have actual foreign relations experience, that I am aware of, are Biden and Richardson, and one of them dropped out and the other one is mexican.

I wonder which one makes it more difficult to get elected.

[Flynn]

Chuck Norris doesn't make predictions, he just tells America how it's going to be.
.

Yeah I saw him, he was 2 blocks away from where I live, lots of people were there. Some moron parked in my driveway with "Hillary" bumper stickers, ... so I thought about breaking one of the tail lights and sticking the wires in the gas tank and tape it when they step on the breaks, but I'm not Rob Lowe so I didn't bother.

[Invicta_Veritas]

I think i voted huckabee in that thread thing

I know nothing about his policies but I'm glad I backed somebody who's getting results

Why would you back someone you know nothing about policy-wise?

[Reaganista]

whywould you back someone you know everything about policy-wise

[okay]

OMFG IM SO GLAD OBAMA WON