2016 US Presidential Race - Mod Warning in OP

Magnate · 02-02-2016 7:46am

I thought the 15 percent was just for each individual precinct and used for determining candidate viability?

Black Swan · 02-02-2016 7:54am

If the 8 are O'Malley and they were received at one precinct, per se, and at that precinct the 8 constituted 15%, methinks the 8 would then stand. Then again, there is an opportunity for re-alignment after the first vote, and I am uncertain if the 8 can then be moved to one or both of the remaining candidates. Not sure.

Overheal · 02-02-2016 7:54am

thats what I thought also, that it was >15% in the room had to blob with another candidates blob. blobbing it up in blibbity blobbity land.

alright I've stopped using english, I'm going to bed.

edit: of the primary delegates, Clinton has 22, Sanders 21. iirc, there is only 1 delegate left, making the final result (the last .06% to report) either a complete split, or 23 to 21. O'Malley earned no delegates.

Fr Tod Umptious · 02-02-2016 8:32am

Very interesting GOP result.

I think its bad news for Trump, not only did he not win but Rubio was right behind him.

As others have noted winners of Iowa have not necessarily gone on to keep winning but for a populist like Trump this is where he should be winning.

Its very good for Rubio on the other hand.

BoJack Horseman · 02-02-2016 8:59am

jeez, I don't think so at all.

Cruz was always the favourite here, he threw the kitchen sink at Iowa.

The narrative will be of a Trump loss, but it was always likely.
Next time Trump will win well in NH & the media spin changes again....

Rjd2 · 02-02-2016 9:36am

Agreed.

I see Trump is now 11/4 to win the republican nomination, when last night he was around 1/1, I don't want the guy anywhere near presidency but that seems an absurd over reaction, not suggesting he wins, but have had much worse bets than that.

Not sure I share the same enthusiasm about Sanders pushing Clinton as others do, Iowa was a state that I think he needed to win. I think he is still in it, but Hillary shouldn't be as worried as some are suggesting.

Akrasia · 02-02-2016 9:46am

Yeah. Trump was always up against it in Iowa because the evangelicals are so dominant for the republican side.

One interesting element of the trump campaign is that he hasn't really chased the evangelicals as much as he could have. He did get Jerry Falwell to endorse him but he has already been labelled as non religious by the most evangelical voters.

I'm not giving Trump credit for not pandering to the religious, he tried, he's gone through the motions but he's not disciplined enough to keep on message and hide his true feelings on religion.

And this is another reason why I think this talk about Trump being a shrewd politician and an 'extremely intelligent man' is BS. Trump is dishonest enough about everything else in his campaign to lie through his teeth, but he can't pretend to believe strongly in god. He doesn't have enough self control. He's too arrogant and too smug and bombastic to control the things he says other than in those rare moments when he tries to be magnanimous for the cameras 'I'm honoured to come second in Iowa' (yeah right, if someone else said that he'd call them a loser')

PopePalpatine · 02-02-2016 9:46am

Three county delegates (as distinct from the 44 state delegates up for grabs) in the Iowa Democratic caucuses were decided by coin toss, and Hillary won all three. She still leads 22-21 with one delegate yet to be assigned.

BoJack Horseman · 02-02-2016 9:48am

Anyone know who took the 'corn pledge' (remembering a West Wing episode).

is that still s thing in Iowa?

Permabear · 02-02-2016 10:01am

This post has been deleted.

Rjd2 · 02-02-2016 10:04am

Not going to pretend to be some political genius, but would Iowa not be a state that Bernie needed to win? Very very liberal.

BoJack Horseman · 02-02-2016 10:10am

Indeed, but the converse is also true.

If Trump wins NH & then 2 weeks later, the winner-takes-all state of South Carolina (as he is expected to) he will end the month with a handsome delegate lead & all the momentum.

ancapailldorcha · 02-02-2016 10:21am

I have to say that I quite like Rand Paul. Unusually, he seems quite willing to call out the GOP as well as the Democrats for hampering the economy and civil liberties. He also has no issue with government protecting sites such as the Everglades and national parks while recognising climate change.

Permabear · 02-02-2016 10:21am

This post has been deleted.

Permabear · 02-02-2016 10:32am

This post has been deleted.

Akrasia · 02-02-2016 10:38am

Sanders polled very strong with young voters, the indications I have seen are that the new voter registrations were relatively low, so this indicates that Sanders tied with Clinton without having to rely on a huge number of first time voters

Sanders still doesn't have anywhere near the name recognition that Clinton has. Clinton is relying on 'the name you know' which worked for Eddie Murphy, but might not work so well in this election. This is a two horse race now. Clinton will need to win votes based on her, personality, her policies and her track record, and
1. A lot of people simply don't trust her or like her
2. Her policies have been shifting, she's looking like she's a 'flip flopper'
3, Her track record is pretty weak. She has voted against many of the things she's campaigning for now.

I think she's still the favourite to win but the main reason for this is fear. Clinton will go on all out attack and declare that Sanders' economic policies will cost American jobs.
Sanders will retort that Clinton's is a puppet for wall street but a lot of ordinary people will vote for Clinton out of fear of change.

The Obama Campaign was dominated by hope. The Clinton campaign will be dominated by fear. She couldn't use fear against Obama because she would have appeared intolerant and racist, but Socialism is a dirty word in America, so she's got free reign to attack Sanders using the most powerful tool in the political arsenal.

oscarBravo · 02-02-2016 10:58am

/shudder

I didn't think I'd ever see a day when I'd be rooting for Marco Rubio.

I read on a BBC report that the Democratic caucus had involved five coin tosses, all of which Hillary won - only about a 3% chance of that, by my reckoning.

PopePalpatine · 02-02-2016 11:02am

An update on the coin toss story, it was used in six districts in the Democrat caucuses, and Clinton won each of them.

Permabear · 02-02-2016 11:06am

This post has been deleted.

oscarBravo · 02-02-2016 11:12am

Neither is the abolition of the IRS. Should candidates who promise to do this be dismissed out of hand?

Permabear · 02-02-2016 11:20am

This post has been deleted.

oscarBravo · 02-02-2016 11:29am

I guess in the same way that a promise to abolish the IRS translates into a plan to change the tax code to massively benefit the better off, it's equally fair to see a promise to introduce universal healthcare as ultimately meaning a way to get rid of the ridiculous situation that most personal bankruptcies in the US are as a result of medical expenses.

Permabear · 02-02-2016 11:36am

This post has been deleted.

Permabear · 02-02-2016 11:48am

This post has been deleted.

ancapailldorcha · 02-02-2016 12:02pm

A shame. I'd not thought a republican could be so reasonable.

Permabear · 02-02-2016 12:11pm

This post has been deleted.

oscarBravo · 02-02-2016 12:13pm

...while the GOP holds Congress. Shameless gerrymandering notwithstanding, do you think that's going to be a permanent state of affairs?

It's a start. Have medical expense bankruptcies gone away?

The Randy Riverbeast · 02-02-2016 12:51pm

Unfortunately the crazy ones seem to be the most popular.

Permabear · 02-02-2016 12:59pm

This post has been deleted.

Skylinehead · 02-02-2016 1:06pm

Isn't there Congress elections this year as well as the presidental one? Given that their approval rating is at a pretty disastrous 11%, the situation could well change there.

2016 US Presidential Race - Mod Warning in OP

Comments