Armed Polite Society

Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: MillCreek on January 03, 2012, 09:08:51 PM

Title: Iowa results
Post by: MillCreek on January 03, 2012, 09:08:51 PM
As of 1803 hours, the LA Times reports on the Iowa caucuses:

Paul  24.2%
Santorum  23.0%
Romney 22.9%
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: RevDisk on January 03, 2012, 09:11:18 PM
As of 1803 hours, the LA Times reports on the Iowa caucuses:

Paul  24.2%
Santorum  23.0%
Romney 22.9%

Bwahahahaha
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: roo_ster on January 03, 2012, 09:36:56 PM
They keep trading leads.

All sort of close in chilly Iowa.

Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: seeker_two on January 03, 2012, 09:42:47 PM
23% each for the top three.....Perry barely in double-digits.....Huntsman just needs to go away.....  ;/
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: RevDisk on January 03, 2012, 09:46:24 PM

How did Santorum do so well?  He is not liked in his home state.  Old school Palace Guard GOP
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: longeyes on January 03, 2012, 09:53:56 PM
Santorum and Paul are obviously symptomatic of the deep disquiet in the American polity right now.  People are feeling about for a way out and not finding it with the Establishment poster-boys.  It's not just Anyone But Obama, it's Anyone But The GOP Chosen One too.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: Ron on January 03, 2012, 10:01:49 PM
I work with a lot of "well educated" folks.

The incredible lack of economic and political knowledge and faith in government (if it is just done correctly) is staggering.

I'm downsizing, conserving ammo, working towards being debt free and looking to relocate to a freer state than the current failed eurowannabee state in which I reside.

Sorry guys, but right now I see little hope for this country. The question isn't if it will fall apart but how fast will it fall apart. My bet is it will be slow and painful, like a gut shot.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: SADShooter on January 03, 2012, 10:08:12 PM
I work with a lot of "well educated" folks.

The incredible lack of economic and political knowledge and faith in government (if it is just done correctly) is staggering.

I'm downsizing, conserving ammo, working towards being debt free and looking to relocate to a freer state than the current failed eurowannabee state in which I reside.

Sorry guys, but right now I see little hope for this country. The question isn't if it will fall apart but how fast will it fall apart. My bet is it will be slow and painful, like a gut shot.

Home sick with a lovely sinus infection, I watched Mark Steyn shilling for his book "After America" on CSPAN yesterday. I agree with his prediction and your sentiment. Regretfully, but I don't see either the common will or the leadership to reverse our decline. A short, bright arc, but not a lasting one.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: MillCreek on January 03, 2012, 11:24:21 PM
As of 2018 hours, with 91.8% of the precincts reporting in, the LA Times says

Romney 24.7%
Santorum 24.7%
Paul 21.1%
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: Boomhauer on January 03, 2012, 11:27:32 PM
Quote
Huntsman just needs to go away

Him and Bachmann...I don't know why they are even bothering to stay in the race...cuz they might be in the race, but I see no evidence of them actually making much effort...
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: charby on January 03, 2012, 11:33:50 PM
http://iowagop.org/

They are lagging a bit on results, I'm entering results for Story County but it is only showing 7% reported.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: grampster on January 03, 2012, 11:39:24 PM
The amazing thing to me is just how much the media and most everyone is missing the point during this primary season.  The message being missed is that Ron Paul hasn't any more support now than he ever did.  He has his hard core Wookies.  The message is that ordinary Americans are speaking to the fact that they are sick of the status quo and Ron Paul is merely the tool that is being used by those Americans to put forth that message, but it's being totally missed.  Paul is a symbol, not a valid candidate.  Santorum is a secondary symbol.  If only Romney were bright enough to recognize the message, he might even make a good president.  I have always liked Newt, but he is so full of himself he could never be Everyman, even though he has the best intellect and knowledge to be a firm leader.  Maybe he's actually the best choice amongst the field.

Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 03, 2012, 11:52:45 PM
You did it now, grampster.  :laugh:   [popcorn]
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: Northwoods on January 04, 2012, 12:14:49 AM
97% reporting.  Santorum up by 37 votes.  Out of more than 100,000.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: Northwoods on January 04, 2012, 12:22:19 AM
98%.  Romney surging to a 62 vote lead.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: Zardozimo Oprah Bannedalas on January 04, 2012, 12:31:51 AM
98%.  Romney surging to a 62 vote lead.
Still 98%, Santorum leading with 5 votes.

Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: Northwoods on January 04, 2012, 02:22:01 AM
Mittens takes it by 14 votes over Santorum.  Margin of victory 0.01%.  Wookie came in third.  She turned me into a Newt 4th, Gov. Good Hair 5th (and going back to TX to "reasses" his path to the nomination).  Bachmann 6th and vowing to fight on. 

Cain beat Roemer.  Both got beaten by "No Preference", and "Other". 
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: RoadKingLarry on January 04, 2012, 04:02:25 AM
So, this is basically a purely symbolic victory with the results being nonbinding on the electoral delegates.

I'm still predicting (not hoping) that Romney will be the (pre-determined) GOP nominee.

We are so screwed, we either get 4 more years of Obama or 4 years of Obama light (Romney).
Heck, if we're real lucky we'll get some more spineless "tea party pandering" legislators and end up with a republican majority in both house and senate. Won't that be grand.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: seeker_two on January 04, 2012, 05:48:31 AM
Gov. Good Hair 5th (and going back to TX to "reasses" his path to the nomination). 

....but we don't want him back....  :facepalm:
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: RevDisk on January 04, 2012, 06:39:00 AM
....but we don't want him back....  :facepalm:

Hey, if we have to acknowledge Santorum, who we defeated by the largest margin ever for an incumbent Republican Senator in Pennsylvania, you have to take Perry
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: wmenorr67 on January 04, 2012, 07:25:44 AM
I know it is too late and he won't do it but too bad someone couldn't talk Thompson into running.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 04, 2012, 07:36:43 AM
Huntsman?


How did Santorum do so well?  He is not liked in his home state.  Old school Palace Guard GOP

Santorum did so well because he is viewed as being very conservative. That's as much as Iowa voters know about him.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: Jamie B on January 04, 2012, 07:38:38 AM
Michelle needs to go.
Huntsman needs to go.
Perry needs to go.
Paul needs to go.
Newtie needs to go.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: MicroBalrog on January 04, 2012, 07:53:06 AM
The amazing thing to me is just how much the media and most everyone is missing the point during this primary season.  The message being missed is that Ron Paul hasn't any more support now than he ever did.  He has his hard core Wookies.  The message is that ordinary Americans are speaking to the fact that they are sick of the status quo and Ron Paul is merely the tool that is being used by those Americans to put forth that message, but it's being totally missed.  Paul is a symbol, not a valid candidate.  Santorum is a secondary symbol.  If only Romney were bright enough to recognize the message, he might even make a good president.  I have always liked Newt, but he is so full of himself he could never be Everyman, even though he has the best intellect and knowledge to be a firm leader.  Maybe he's actually the best choice amongst the field.


I disagree entirely. It's important that their protest against the status-quo goes to a more right-wing direction than the status quo.

The thing is, today libertarianism is far more acceptable than it was 4, or even 20 years ago. Today, 22% of Iowa voters are willing to vote for a libertarian candidate in some disposition (rather than viewing this as unacceptable), even as over 50% of voters supported a status-quo candidate of some kind.

This is an improvement - but sadly I can see no way to make use of it.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: MicroBalrog on January 04, 2012, 08:34:26 AM
Michelle needs to go.
Huntsman needs to go.
Perry needs to go.
Paul needs to go.
Newtie needs to go.

Why do you want to remove the entire field?


(Ron Paul, Romney, and Santorum now have six delegates each)
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: charby on January 04, 2012, 08:50:09 AM
Why do you want to remove the entire field?


(Ron Paul, Romney, and Santorum now have six delegates each)

Iowa doesn't work that way. National Delegates will be picked at the GOP State Convention and they can vote any way they want to.

We are not a primary state so delegates are not assigned according to candidates.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: erictank on January 04, 2012, 09:08:59 AM
Michelle needs to go.
Huntsman needs to go.
Perry needs to go.
Paul needs to go.
Newtie needs to go.

You can't honestly be saying that ROMNEY is the best candidate?!? [barf] Why not just be honest and vote for freakin' Obama?

Look, I get that not everyone likes Ron Paul, who despite the deliberate ignorance by the Mass Media (except for spouting off about the same crap they spouted - and which Paul refuted - during Election Season 2008) turned in a very close third to the Republican Anointed One and the come-from-behind Acceptable Establishment Alternative in Iowa's Caucus. His results seem to me to be rather promising, actually, and I look forward to seeing the results from other states' primaries.  When an openly-libertarian candidate, someone who actually respects the Constitution (rather than merely giving lip-service), can garner 22% of the vote in a Republican caucus that actually inspires some HOPE in me.

And I don't regard the 26,219 people who voted for Paul as being all that much less significant a group than the 30,015 who voted for Romney. There's not *THAT* big a difference in the vote totals there... or Iowa's got an awful lot of "hardcore Wookiees"  ;/ as compared to stalwart, stand-up, righteous, regular-old Republican voters.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: geronimotwo on January 04, 2012, 09:26:11 AM
^^^  what he said

How did Santorum do so well?  He is not liked in his home state.  Old school Palace Guard GOP

if campaign money spent in iowa matters, ron paul is by far the winner

santorum perry spent 2.5m  edited to correct

romnet spent 1.5m

paul spent 900k!

Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: MicroBalrog on January 04, 2012, 09:38:51 AM
^^^  what he said

if campaign money spent in iowa matters, ron paul is by far the winner

santorum spent 2.5m

romnet spent 1.5m

paul spent 900k!


So where did the millions he raised go?
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: makattak on January 04, 2012, 09:39:28 AM
^^^  what he said

if campaign money spent in iowa matters, ron paul is by far the winner

santorum spent 2.5m

romnet spent 1.5m

paul spent 900k!

...what?

Santorum doesn't even HAVE $2.5M. I believe on the radio, I heard that Romney spent $10M and Santorum spent $500K.

So who's the winner in efficiency?

Oh, and, from 12/27:

http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/12/27/gop-candidates-super-pacs-have-spent-10-million-on-tv-radio-pitches-in-december/

Quote
Paul’s campaign falls next in line at $1.37 million
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: geronimotwo on January 04, 2012, 10:11:53 AM
i am looking for a link, oops, perry spent the 2.5 not santorum.

http://www.wqad.com/news/kstu-iowa-ad-spending-down-but-negative-ads-up-20120102,0,1079582.story
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: TommyGunn on January 04, 2012, 11:30:31 AM
Mittens takes it by 14 votes over Santorum.  Margin of victory 0.01%.  Wookie came in third.  She turned me into a Newt 4th, Gov. Good Hair 5th (and going back to TX to "reasses" his path to the nomination).  Bachmann 6th and vowing to fight on. 

Cain beat Roemer.  Both got beaten by "No Preference", and "Other". 

I keep hearing on the news it was 8 votes ......  ???
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: agricola on January 04, 2012, 11:50:24 AM
Bachmann quit, Perry hasnt.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: TommyGunn on January 04, 2012, 12:29:30 PM
Bachmann quit, Perry hasnt  yet.

FIFY
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: Blakenzy on January 04, 2012, 12:40:57 PM
When did Bachmann quit? Her speech last night post results certainly didn't lead that way...
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: wmenorr67 on January 04, 2012, 12:57:10 PM
When did Bachmann quit? Her speech last night post results certainly didn't lead that way...

Today.  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01/04/bachmann-cancels-trip-to-south-carolina-schedules-news-conference/
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: Jamie B on January 04, 2012, 02:00:52 PM
You can't honestly be saying that ROMNEY is the best candidate?!? [barf] Why not just be honest and vote for freakin' Obama?
The dead weight needs to exit the race.
I never rendered an opinion to the best candidate.

You can't be that much of a drama queen, can you?
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: MicroBalrog on January 04, 2012, 02:30:03 PM
So everybody but the top 2 in Iowa are 'dead weight'?

Newt, who is leading in nationwide polls, is dead weight?

What kind of definition of dead weight are we using here?
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: makattak on January 04, 2012, 02:38:29 PM
As much as I want a lot of these contenders to drop out now, Micro has a very good point.

In 2008, in Iowa, McCain garnered ~15% of the vote. Iowa is not really a great indicator of dead weight.

I am glad Bachmann dropped out, though. (Not that I hate her, she just was clearly not going to win. Maybe her 6% will go to a not-Romney, now.)
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: Jamie B on January 04, 2012, 02:44:27 PM
Newtie has too much baggage and ego, and will not make the final cut.

Huntsman and Perry will never make it, but cannot recognize it just yet.

Wait and see.
 
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: MicroBalrog on January 04, 2012, 02:52:19 PM
Newtie has too much baggage and ego, and will not make the final cut.

Huntsman and Perry will never make it, but cannot recognize it just yet.

Wait and see.
 

At least make Romney work for it.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 04, 2012, 03:08:22 PM
You can't honestly be saying that ROMNEY is the best candidate?!? [barf] Why not just be honest and vote for freakin' Obama?

I didn't see Santorum on his list. I think that was the point.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: Jamie B on January 04, 2012, 03:13:03 PM
Quote
author=fistful link=topic=32963.msg657133#msg657133 date=1325707702]
I didn't see Santorum on his list. I think that was the point.


You are exactly correct.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 04, 2012, 04:22:21 PM
You are exactly correct.

Why does everybody keep telling me that?  =)
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: Harold Tuttle on January 04, 2012, 04:49:18 PM
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgooglepixel.com%2Fpictars%2Fwookierunner.jpg&hash=77a69548196b5eb84f0aaf94bc2c991d41905f4e)
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: seeker_two on January 04, 2012, 08:45:50 PM
Michelle needs to go.
Huntsman needs to go.
Perry needs to go.
Paul needs to go.
Newtie needs to go.

FIFY.....
Bachmann quit, Perry hasnt.

Perry is hoping to win SC & leverage that into a VP slot....it's his last chance at an elected office....he's pretty much done as governor here.....
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: Jamie B on January 04, 2012, 10:30:19 PM
FIFY.....
Perry is hoping to win SC & leverage that into a VP slot....it's his last chance at an elected office....he's pretty much done as governor here.....
Term limits, or patience limits?
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: roo_ster on January 04, 2012, 11:40:58 PM
Term limits, or patience limits?

The latter.  Too much exposure. 
Title: Iowa Results
Post by: Northwoods on January 04, 2012, 11:41:31 PM
 
I keep hearing on the news it was 8 votes ......  ???

The 14 vote margin was from early reports from a live blogging of the caucuses.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: roo_ster on January 04, 2012, 11:43:14 PM
So everybody but the top 2 in Iowa are 'dead weight'?

Newt, who is leading in nationwide polls, is dead weight?

What kind of definition of dead weight are we using here?

The not dead yet kind:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGFXGwHsD_A
"I feel happeeeee..."
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: Northwoods on January 05, 2012, 12:13:21 AM
Weird.  Double tapped, but roo_ster managed to get in the middle.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: erictank on January 05, 2012, 07:41:54 AM
The dead weight needs to exit the race.
I never rendered an opinion to the best candidate.

You can't be that much of a drama queen, can you?

No moreso than someone advocating, after the VERY FIRST OFFICIAL VOTE, that every other candidate but the top two in that particular election ought to drop out of the whole primary race...

The person pulling 3rd place, a mere 12.5% below the vote numbers for the two leads in that election (again, Paul at 21.4%/26.2K versus Romney and Santorum at 24.5%/30.0K each), does not constitute any reasonable definition of "dead weight".  Hell, I'd say that those with any respectable vote totals (Newt with 13%, Perry with 10%, both well into the 5-figure vote counts; less than that would make me wonder if it was worth continuing, personally) ought to think hard before deciding they're done on the basis of this one election.

If believing that, and wanting to support the only candidate in the race who actually acts in accordance with the Constitution, makes me a "drama queen" in others' eyes?  Well, I guess I'll wear that label proudly.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: geronimotwo on January 05, 2012, 08:17:41 AM
i find myself agreeing with the drama queen.
Title: Re: Iowa results
Post by: Jamisjockey on January 05, 2012, 08:56:55 AM
Enough with the nicknames.