Derec
Contributor
I hope Sanders wins because it'll be holy hell from Sanders supporters in social media otherwise.
They are already calling Buttigieg "Mayor Cheat" because he hinted that he won.
I hope Sanders wins because it'll be holy hell from Sanders supporters in social media otherwise.
Obviously we can't be sure with counterfactuals, but we know Hillary missed the open goal in 2016. What makes you think she'd have won against McCain?The Dums could have put up any idiot, buffoon, or blowhard, say like a Dotard...and still won against the Republican (McCain) nominee in 2008.
Without caucuses, Hillary would have lost to McCain in 2008.[/B]
That doesn't even make sense.
It's not about being more or less democratic. It's a different system, where participation takes more effort. It focuses on depth rather than breadth.And how can caucuses be more democratic than an actual vote when so many are unable to participate in the caucus when they could participate in a vote?
I disagree caucuses are outdated. They reward giving a damn enough to participate for a couple of hours.This just proves how insane it is to continue to use an extremely outdated method of voting.
What's wrong with being white? Most of the country is white.Only a tiny number of people actually showed up for the caucus vote and most of them were white.
I hope you are wrong, but that is exactly the kind of overreaction I expect from the DNC.I hope that Iowa comes into the 21st Century and votes like normal people do. I also hope this will be the last year that Iowa goes first.
Tom Harkin was the governor of Iowa, so in that year the caucuses were not contested. But in every Democratic caucus since then, almost 30 years worth, the Iowa winner went on to snag the nomination.And, not everyone who has won in Iowa went on to win the nomination. Tom Harkin had 76% of the delegates when he was running for president. Tom who?
The advantage of having a couple of smaller states go first is the money. You need relatively little money to compete in Iowa. It's all about retail politics, and the media markets are not terribly expensive. Having a large state run first, or even worse have a national primary, would make it prohibitively expensive for most candidates to compete from the get-go. So Iowa, New Hampshire do early sorting on the cheap, followed by Nevada and South Carolina more expensively, but still manageable compared to Super Tuesday. The idea being that an initially lesser known, lesser funded candidate can catch fire and get enough donors to successfully compete in much more expensive contests.Iowa should be considered irrelevant. Why not have a large, diverse state go first or have all the states vote on or near Super Tuesday. Less money would be wasted and no small state would have an outsized influence in the race.
The conspiracy theories are nuts as to what happened in Iowa. They simply had a very bad plan, and it was known very early on Monday morning that there were major problems with the App. Hey Iowa! You fucked up royally.
First it was largely a joke. But...a tanking economy and markets after 8 years of the Shrub is a pretty good clue. Then, there wasn't any Fake Benghazi issue with years of hearings. There wasn't any self-created private email fiasco to dwell on. The military occupations would continue to be ignored in the campaigns. So yeah, I'd say odds are that HRC would have won, but maybe not with Obama's big win.Obviously we can't be sure with counterfactuals, but we know Hillary missed the open goal in 2016. What makes you think she'd have won against McCain?The Dums could have put up any idiot, buffoon, or blowhard, say like a Dotard...and still won against the Republican (McCain) nominee in 2008.
But even for closed primaries you don't have to be a "member of the club". Certainly not a dues-paying, card-carrying member. All it takes is checking the right box on your voter registration. And there is nothing preventing people from registering strategically.But I will say this also. I'm against open primaries. Why should people who are not members of the club get a say in who runs the club?
Good!First it was largely a joke.
I remember the Great Recession, yes. However, odds were that HRC would easily win against Trump as well, and yet here we are.But...a tanking economy and markets after 8 years of the Shrub is a pretty good clue. Then, there wasn't any Fake Benghazi issue with years of hearings. There wasn't any self-created private email fiasco to dwell on. The military occupations would continue to be ignored in the campaigns. So yeah, I'd say odds are that HRC would have won, but maybe not with Obama's big win.
That well may end up being Biden's spin. But Biden was never a great candidate, he just seemed to be a lot of people's 'safe' choice. He has a lot of political history, some good, some not so good. He has ran twice before and got nowhere. He verbally stumbles a lot. I've heard that Biden knew Jackson's grandmaBig loser appears to be Biden who has been hurt by Trump's bullshit (and maybe people noticing that Biden is the only Candidate alive when Andrew Jackson was born).
Buttigieg in 1st, Sanders in 2nd. Warren and Biden 3rd and 4th. 61% precincts reporting. This is a remarkable win for candidates that will emphasize the results (Buttigieg and Sanders), and not the end of the world for candidates that wish to deemphasize Iowa and note that the delegate haul will be close for the top four anyway (Warren and Biden).
She is not just in trouble, she is most likely done. There are a maximum of 4 tickets out of Iowa (plus Bloomberg, who is not contesting Iowa), but Amy really needs a 3rd or better finish since she is the favorite daughter adjacent. If she can't have a competitive performance here, she can't pull it off in the remaining early states either. She needs to do really well in the outstanding 38% of precincts to crawl her way past Joe and Liz.Klobuchar is in trouble, not that she had much hope to begin with.
Yes. Even a strong second would give him a big chunk of momentum for NH. He is definitely still in the game.Buttigieg is obviously a big winner here
It's really too bad we can't come up with a better system than 1,700 separate meetings in different cafeterias where people who like the same candidate stand in close proximity to one another
First it was largely a joke. But...a tanking economy and markets after 8 years of the Shrub is a pretty good clue. Then, there wasn't any Fake Benghazi issue with years of hearings. There wasn't any self-created private email fiasco to dwell on. The military occupations would continue to be ignored in the campaigns. So yeah, I'd say odds are that HRC would have won, but maybe not with Obama's big win.Obviously we can't be sure with counterfactuals, but we know Hillary missed the open goal in 2016. What makes you think she'd have won against McCain?The Dums could have put up any idiot, buffoon, or blowhard, say like a Dotard...and still won against the Republican (McCain) nominee in 2008.
This just proves how insane it is to continue to use an extremely outdated method of voting. Only a tiny number of people actually showed up for the caucus vote and most of them were white. I hope that Iowa comes into the 21st Century and votes like normal people do. I also hope this will be the last year that Iowa goes first. And, not everyone who has won in Iowa went on to win the nomination. Tom Harkin had 76% of the delegates when he was running for president. Tom who? Iowa should be considered irrelevant. Why not have a large, diverse state go first or have all the states vote on or near Super Tuesday. Less money would be wasted and no small state would have an outsized influence in the race.
The conspiracy theories are nuts as to what happened in Iowa. They simply had a very bad plan, and it was known very early on Monday morning that there were major problems with the App. Hey Iowa! You fucked up royally.
And why would it take so long to fake the results?I don't get how the app conspiracy theory is supposed to work since the app failed anyway. And when all the results are in, any precinct can check to see if it's what they reported.
When things don't go your way. An Act in two parts.