• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Iowa Caucus

Including Gilmore, who got 12 votes! In the whole fucking state! And Bush, who got 10% of what Cruz got. And others who got less. Paul got a delegate. Carson got three, but quit anyway.

Huckabee and Carson(?) dropping out is more good news for Cruz. Won't give him New Hampshire, but at least he has no more competition for his base going into the south.

Oh, I guess I was wrong about Carson dropping out. The stupid news site I was looking at had a headline that said "The Herd Thins...Carson goes home." Which were actually two different headlines. Not cool, Huff post. Hire a fucking professional to do your headlines. Though I agree that it looks likely that he is not being serious, and will probably see his support dissolve. Frankly, I never understood who would prefer him even to the other muppets running for Republican nom. I'd rather vote for the cookie monster.
 
What amazed me about this whole Iowa shit storm is how old timey this shit is. Here we have Republicans casting "secret ballots": little folded up scraps of paper tossed into an old, beat up ass U.S. MAIL basket, which is then dipped into like some kind of ghetto raffle, read aloud, while another campaign worker tallies up the results by making tic marks on a piece of college ruled 8 1/2" by 11" notebook paper.

The Democrats, meanwhile, play fucking "Red Rover" in gymnasiums across the state while campaign workers try to keep track of head counts, and once overwhelmed, start tossing coins in the air to distribute delegates - which is even less of a basis for government that watery tarts distributing swords.

It's 2016, and this is the best we've got?
 
Sarpedon, I couldn't find anything on Ben Carson dropping out. He seems to still be in the race.

So it's only O'Malley and Huckabee who have dropped out.
 
braces_for_impact said:
What amazed me about this whole Iowa shit storm is how old timey this shit is. Here we have Republicans casting "secret ballots": little folded up scraps of paper tossed into an old, beat up ass U.S. MAIL basket, which is then dipped into like some kind of ghetto raffle, read aloud, while another campaign worker tallies up the results by making tic marks on a piece of college ruled 8 1/2" by 11" notebook paper.

The Democrats, meanwhile, play fucking "Red Rover" in gymnasiums across the state while campaign workers try to keep track of head counts, and once overwhelmed, start tossing coins in the air to distribute delegates - which is even less of a basis for government that watery tarts distributing swords.

It's 2016, and this is the best we've got?
Click to expand...

It's a caucus to chose a party nominee not an election. Tradition means a lot.
 
Trausti said:
braces_for_impact said:
What amazed me about this whole Iowa shit storm is how old timey this shit is. Here we have Republicans casting "secret ballots": little folded up scraps of paper tossed into an old, beat up ass U.S. MAIL basket, which is then dipped into like some kind of ghetto raffle, read aloud, while another campaign worker tallies up the results by making tic marks on a piece of college ruled 8 1/2" by 11" notebook paper.

The Democrats, meanwhile, play fucking "Red Rover" in gymnasiums across the state while campaign workers try to keep track of head counts, and once overwhelmed, start tossing coins in the air to distribute delegates - which is even less of a basis for government that watery tarts distributing swords.

It's 2016, and this is the best we've got?
Click to expand...

It's a caucus to chose a party nominee not an election. Tradition means a lot.
Click to expand...

I'd also add that parties should be treated as private clubs with no support from the state.

This is not to say that private clubs couldn't come up with a decent way of voting.
 
Trausti said:
braces_for_impact said:
What amazed me about this whole Iowa shit storm is how old timey this shit is. Here we have Republicans casting "secret ballots": little folded up scraps of paper tossed into an old, beat up ass U.S. MAIL basket, which is then dipped into like some kind of ghetto raffle, read aloud, while another campaign worker tallies up the results by making tic marks on a piece of college ruled 8 1/2" by 11" notebook paper.

The Democrats, meanwhile, play fucking "Red Rover" in gymnasiums across the state while campaign workers try to keep track of head counts, and once overwhelmed, start tossing coins in the air to distribute delegates - which is even less of a basis for government that watery tarts distributing swords.

It's 2016, and this is the best we've got?
Click to expand...

It's a caucus to chose a party nominee not an election. Tradition means a lot.
Click to expand...

They are soviets. And act thusly.
 
These are just mechanisms to control the process and remove the decision from the undesirables.

All State primaries should be popular vote.

The same with the presidential election.
 
untermensche said:
These are just mechanisms to control the process and remove the decision from the undesirables.

All State primaries should be popular vote.

The same with the presidential election.
Click to expand...

Well, there were three undesirables in the race, as the term is defined by the people who control the process. They were Trump, Cruz and Sanders. Two of them won the GOP race and one of them essentially tied the Dem race.

It looks like these mechanisms to control the process which you're so worried about aren't really all that effective as mechanisms.
 
Tom Sawyer said:
untermensche said:
These are just mechanisms to control the process and remove the decision from the undesirables.

All State primaries should be popular vote.

The same with the presidential election.
Click to expand...

Well, there were three undesirables in the race, as the term is defined by the people who control the process. They were Trump, Cruz and Sanders. Two of them won the GOP race and one of them essentially tied the Dem race.

It looks like these mechanisms to control the process which you're so worried about aren't really all that effective as mechanisms.
Click to expand...

Who knows what the effect was.

The biggest problem really is the money.

Billionaires backed winners. They will eventually want something for that.
 
Billionaire Super Pacs Are Big Losers in Iowa

Voters in Iowa gave a resounding thumbs down to Jeb Bush and his massive Super Pac spending, giving him an embarrassingly low 2.8 percent of the Republican vote. According to data made available by BloombergBusiness (see chart below), Bush’s campaign spent $9.8 million in the final three months of last year while his Super Pac spent an astounding $54.3 million in the final six months of 2015.

Also embarrassing for the billionaires giving to Hillary Clinton’s Super Pac, Priorities USA, was her tiny margin of victory over Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who has no aligned Super Pac of billionaires and millionaires, but has instead received hundreds of thousands of small checks from average people across America according to Federal Election Commission records. With 99 percent of the vote counted in Iowa caucuses, Hillary logged in with 49.9 percent of the Democratic vote versus Sanders’ 49.6 percent. Former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley drew 0.6 percent of the vote and announced he is suspending his campaign.
Click to expand...

http://wallstreetonparade.com/2016/02/billionaire-super-pacs-are-big-losers-in-iowa/
 
Jason Harvestdancer said:
Terrell said:
Literal coin flips in some places.
Click to expand...

Interesting how Hillary won 6 out of 6 coin flips.
Click to expand...

No it isn't. You are not from a (WJB) populist mob rule soviet caucus state I take it? A caucus decide however the hell it wants as the "basic unit of democracy" how to select a delegate. This is why my state sends delegates to conventions to vote for UFO theorists....
 
Horatio Parker said:
Billionaire Super Pacs Are Big Losers in Iowa

Voters in Iowa gave a resounding thumbs down to Jeb Bush and his massive Super Pac spending, giving him an embarrassingly low 2.8 percent of the Republican vote. According to data made available by BloombergBusiness (see chart below), Bush’s campaign spent $9.8 million in the final three months of last year while his Super Pac spent an astounding $54.3 million in the final six months of 2015.

Also embarrassing for the billionaires giving to Hillary Clinton’s Super Pac, Priorities USA, was her tiny margin of victory over Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who has no aligned Super Pac of billionaires and millionaires, but has instead received hundreds of thousands of small checks from average people across America according to Federal Election Commission records. With 99 percent of the vote counted in Iowa caucuses, Hillary logged in with 49.9 percent of the Democratic vote versus Sanders’ 49.6 percent. Former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley drew 0.6 percent of the vote and announced he is suspending his campaign.
Click to expand...

http://wallstreetonparade.com/2016/02/billionaire-super-pacs-are-big-losers-in-iowa/
Click to expand...

Nice spin.

Nobody says the billionaires always win, only that you need a billionaire to even be in the race.

Cruz and Rubio are heavily backed by billionaires.

Hillary too.

The only ray of sunshine in the whole damn process in Bernie.
 
And yet, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio's super pacs disagree.
Horatio Parker said:
Billionaire Super Pacs Are Big Losers in Iowa

Voters in Iowa gave a resounding thumbs down to Jeb Bush and his massive Super Pac spending, giving him an embarrassingly low 2.8 percent of the Republican vote. According to data made available by BloombergBusiness (see chart below), Bush’s campaign spent $9.8 million in the final three months of last year while his Super Pac spent an astounding $54.3 million in the final six months of 2015.

Also embarrassing for the billionaires giving to Hillary Clinton’s Super Pac, Priorities USA, was her tiny margin of victory over Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who has no aligned Super Pac of billionaires and millionaires, but has instead received hundreds of thousands of small checks from average people across America according to Federal Election Commission records. With 99 percent of the vote counted in Iowa caucuses, Hillary logged in with 49.9 percent of the Democratic vote versus Sanders’ 49.6 percent. Former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley drew 0.6 percent of the vote and announced he is suspending his campaign.
Click to expand...

http://wallstreetonparade.com/2016/02/billionaire-super-pacs-are-big-losers-in-iowa/
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom