Who Do You Think Will Win Iowa?

[SilthDraeth]

I was just thinking. All the people that don't like the status quo actually listened to the mainstream media, the established Republicans and Democrats, they would vote Ron Paul just to put them in their place.

If the establishment you want to get rid of doesn't like the guy, then I at least assume that would mean he is dangerous to the establishment, and therefor an asset to getting something truly changed.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Maybe the better question is to ask is why does it matter who wins Iowa? In terms of predictive value, there is no reason to say, as Iowa goes so goes the nation. Nor is New Hampshire that much better.

Both are early primary States, the winner does not matter in an a over bloated field. But like a similar horse race, woe be the horses that runs out of the money and fails to win, place, or show.

Once all the weak horses are eliminated and the field is trimmed to 2,3, or 4 horses, then and only then do subsequent primaries that matter become more telling. Because in a large field one can win out right with only 15% of the vote, but when the field shrinks, winning may mean 50% of primary voters in subsequent states.

Yes it does matter. It culls those weak horses as you call them. It may not pick the winner every time but it's not supposed to.

 

[werepossum]

With the organization that Paul has he seems to be the best bet. I voted for Santorum just for kicks.

LOL I wondered who the hell voted for Santorum.

I voted Romney; although I think Paul has at least as good a chance, I think Romney's going going to pull it out.

 

[Bowfinger]

Spate of new polls today. Romney and Paul are roughly tied, both in the low 20's, while Santorum was usually third, a few points above Gingrich. Pundits seem to agree that Gingrich is still falling and Santorum still rising, so it's likely it will be Romney, Paul, and Santorum with the three tickets out of Iowa.

 

[soundforbjt]

What? no Palin option? There are ads running in IA, for a write-in campaign.

 

[irishScott]

You're probably right. Support from the Base will be kinda... underwhelming, don't you think?

In the face of an Obama reelection, Mitt will have no trouble getting support from the GOP base.

 

[TalonStrike]

Santorum is surging in Iowa. Santorum will win.

 

[Fern]

Polls I saw yesterday indicate about half of IA voters don't even know yet who they will support come Tuesday.

I don't think anybody can know until after the vote is over.

Fern

 

[senseamp]

Your so foolish . Do you actually believe Us country folk eat the crops we spray . NOt! That for you city folks. We eat organic food only we sell the high yield shit to the Big canners. We may not live in the BIG Cities doesn't mean we will eat the crap we grow thats for you city dwellers.

Riiight.

 

[Bowfinger]

Polls I saw yesterday indicate about half of IA voters don't even know yet who they will support come Tuesday.

I don't think anybody can know until after the vote is over.

Fern

Yes, that's typically the case as I remember it. A significant block of caucus goers remain undecided until the actual caucus meeting.

 

[TalonStrike]

Riiight.

That map doesn't really disprove what he was saying. Iowa looks relatively healthy compared to a lot of other states.

 

[Anarchist420]

I was just thinking. All the people that don't like the status quo actually listened to the mainstream media, the established Republicans and Democrats, they would vote Ron Paul just to put them in their place.

If the establishment you want to get rid of doesn't like the guy, then I at least assume that would mean he is dangerous to the establishment, and therefor an asset to getting something truly changed.

Exactly. They've become desparate, calling him a homosexual-loving homophobe, an anti-feminist abortionist, and all sorts of other BS. Faux News even said that Iowa voters will lose credibility if they vote for him.

They know damn well that if he becomes President they'll go out of business because under a Paul Admin all the lies they've spread to keep the status quo and the state alive will be exposed. They can't handle the truth.

The state serves the MSM and the MSM serves the state. Those people aren't capable of making an honest living, so they'll go out of business in a free market because it will hold them accountable for their dishonesty.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

I'll bet anyone on the ron paul winning, i'll go upt to a 2-1 guarantee on this.


Anything above 20k

 

[jackstar7]

Democrats.

 

[lothar]

Polls I saw yesterday indicate about half of IA voters don't even know yet who they will support come Tuesday.

I don't think anybody can know until after the vote is over.

Fern

Yes, that's typically the case as I remember it. A significant block of caucus goers remain undecided until the actual caucus meeting.

How will this work though?
In a primary, what both of you are saying make sense regarding "undecided" voters.

However this is a caucus, not a primary.
I don't know much "undecided" voters that would sit at a caucus meeting for hours on end listening to speeches from the different campaign reps before voting(This is essentially what CNN described as the Iowa "caucus" system yesterday night).
How does Iowa manage to do this? Do they give all their residents off on caucus day or something?

Chances are most of those undecided are not even going to vote rather than sitting in a room for hours.

 

[lothar]

I'll bet anyone on the ron paul winning, i'll go upt to a 2-1 guarantee on this.


Anything above 20k

Did Spidey hijack your account?

 

[Bowfinger]

How will this work though?
In a primary, what both of you are saying make sense regarding "undecided" voters.

However this is a caucus, not a primary.
I don't know much "undecided" voters that would sit at a caucus meeting for hours on end listening to speeches from the different campaign reps before voting(This is essentially what CNN described as the Iowa "caucus" system yesterday night).
How does Iowa manage to do this? Do they give all their residents off on caucus day or something?

Chances are most of those undecided are not even going to vote rather than sitting in a room for hours.

First, it depends on the specific poll. Some survey all Iowans, some survey only registered voters, and some narrow that further to people who say they are likely to attend a caucus.

But yes, many who attend a caucus are still undecided when they enter, they do spend a couple of hours listening to speeches, and ultimately, when it's time to "vote", they pick a candidate and go to his group. This can then be followed by negotiations among groups, trying to convince people supporting weak candidates (i.e., small groups) to join them with more popular candidates.

Yes, the caucus system requires a notable time commitment. You plan to spend your evening at your caucus site. This is one of the legitimate complaints about the caucus process. It excludes people who have to work or who simply can't commit an entire evening. It is also seen as one of the pluses of a caucus, that rather than anonymous and often uninformed primary voting, caucuses are interactive. You get to hear direct messages from candidate representatives, and you get to discuss them with your neighbors.

 

[Chainspell]

With the organization that Paul has he seems to be the best bet. I voted for Santorum just for kicks.

We give away your freedom just for kicks

-Sent from my phone.

 

[Chainspell]

Mitt Romney. I am not mormon, but I think that he is the one with economic experience. And he is not stupid as others.

So stupid versus a lying flip flopping piece of shit? I'll take mr stupid instead.

You know mitt opposed everything he was for 4 years ago when he ran? There's a difference between flexible and unprincipled.

You think he should protect the bill of rights NO MATTER WHAT? Or he should be flexible and adapt to the changing times?

-Sent from my phone.

 

[nageov3t]

I never understood why changing positions is such a bad thing.... does it really matter what a guy believes in his heart of hearts if he works to represent the beliefs of the people who elected him?

I'll go with conventional wisdom and say Santorum, Mitt, and Paul, in that order.

hopefully Bachmann will drop out tonight, Newt after losing South Carolina, and Perry after losing Florida.

Santorum's only chance -- and it's a slim one at best -- is that Bachmann and Perry drop out early and their religious right voters fall in line behind Santorum.

 

[sm625]

Romney ran as a democrat so I find it hard to believe that they would actually elect an "admitted democrat". I think he will win simply because he is the best choice for the top 1%, who just happen to control the media. He will bring them the most bacon. Ron Paul is obviously the one who should win because he is Mr Veto, and Mr Veto is what we need to help corral this out of control unaccountable congress.

 

[nageov3t]

Romney ran as a democrat so I find it hard to believe that they would actually elect an "admitted democrat".

I think you're confusing Mitt Romney and Rick Perry.

Romney has never ran for office as a Democrat to the best of my knowledge.

 

[Anarchist420]

I think you're confusing Mitt Romney and Rick Perry.

Romney has never ran for office as a Democrat to the best of my knowledge.

Actually, Romney did run under Democratic Party Principles. He raised taxes.

If elected, he will be the shittiest President after Lincoln and Wilson and if he manages to end the Republic, then he'll be even shittier than they are.

He has no business running because he has the fucking policies as Obama (actually, they'll be even worse). How can that be so hard for so many to understand?

That asshole Willard is pro-inflation (said Bernanke did a good job and is worried that China's currency is weaker than ours), pro-tax, pro-spend, anti-free market health care, pro-managed trade, pro-protectionism, pro-war, violently Zionist, etc. It's questionable as to whether he's Christian, yet he's pandering to the Christian Wrong. Willard Romney is a phony and a pile of flaming dogshit!

It pisses me off to no end!

 

[airdata]

Doesn't matter. Mitt will get the nomination.

Well, Alot of people want to keep the circus act of american politics alive. They want to legitimize Iowa if anybody but Ron Paul wins...

 

[woolfe9999]

Santorum has peaked too late, not enough to take Iowa IMO. It's between Romney and Paul. I actually voted for Paul in this poll because he purportedly has the best ground game in Iowa. I don't think he can win the nom, but I put his chances slightly better than even to win Iowa.

Gingrich is finished IMO. Romney's super-PAC negative ads pretty much did him in.