Any predictions? Last I saw on the news they were predicting Obama for the Dems and Huckabee for the Republicans.
Have a good one!:s4:
Printable View
Any predictions? Last I saw on the news they were predicting Obama for the Dems and Huckabee for the Republicans.
Have a good one!:s4:
Let's see who the media is talking about
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrsROPaaQTM[/YOUTUBE]
It's nice to have somebody like Wolf Blitzer repeat the exact same thing I was talking about in the other thread about how the polls are not accurate at gauging support for Ron Paul. Let's see how inaccurate they are, I'm going to bet 3rd based on the nothing I know about the political landscape in Iowa, we'll see.
I think Obama will take the democrat side, I hope the small support from Kucinich will be enough, as long as Satan doesn't win I'll be happy.
So we've got Wolf, Pat Buchanan and these other analysts saying Paul will do well,3rd in Iowa and even better in the Live Free or Die state.
Then last night the C-SPAN call-in hour was a Ron Paul Revolution jukebox, with caller after caller from Iowa saying they were either disgruntled Republicans voting for Paul, or dissatisfied Democrats for the good Doctor, or Independents for Paul and new voters formerly apathetic toward politics. It's an obvious landslide for Dr. Paul. We all know the polls are inaccurate, as Mr. Blitzer mentioned. But he only brushed on the idea that these 'scientific' polls pool from 'Likely Republican Voters' from the last election...so hardliner GOP Bushies. So if Paul is polling at 7% in Iowa amongst this group, then you tack on all the other people, like me (voted Kerry in '04). He probably actually garners close to 25%!
So I think it's feasible Iowa concludes as such:
GOP
#1 Mike Huckabee (although he isn't as organized here, it's the evangelical vote and that smoooooth talking)
#2 Ron Paul (freedom is popular!)
#3 Mitt Romney (it's partially the religion paradigm in these parts)
Satan will probably get the dem nod, but not Iowa...although I'd rather see Kucinich, but that is not going to happen.
DEMS
#1 Edwards
#2 Hillary
#2 Obama
Good post....let me take a shot at this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by 420izzle
GOP
1) Huckabee.......has really picked up the pace
2) Romney....spent ALOT of cash there
3) McCain....the comeback ghost
Ron Paul may have placed better but the college crowd is home for vacation right now.
DEMS
1) Obama...by a VERY small margin
2) Hillary....offering enough "free" incentives to get votes
3) Edwards...with very poor numbers
Have a good one!:s4:
Gop
1) Huckabee...has picked up a lot of support recently
2) Paul...more support than the nation thinks
3) Romney...he still has lots of money to dump in this campaign
Dems
1) Obama...nothing good to say
2) Hillary...nothing good to say
3) Edwards...nothing good to say
GOP
1) Huckabee --- Bible thumper
2) Romney --- money
3) Not sure, but maybe McCain.
For the RP supporters, I have doubts that the Ron Paul message will play well in Iowa. However, motivation and organization count for a lot in the caucus process, so maybe he will surpirse people --- and getting into the top 3 would count as a big surprise.
Dems
1) Hillary --- has the best organization for turning out the caucus voters and a pretty reliable base
2) Obama --- counting on a lot of younger people and first time caucus voters, so his support is less reliable
3) Edwards --- not going to do very well in Iowa
Oh, what the hey...:p
Dem:
Obama
Hillary
Edwards
Rep:
Huckabee
Romney
Paul
I'm still hoping Paul will end up 2nd, but not sure enough to prognosticate on it. :D
Dems:
Obama
Edwards
Hillary
GOP:
Huckabee
Paul
Romney
Results coming in...........
DEMS
1) Obama.....37%
2) Edwards and Clinton........30%
4) Richardson....2%
GOP
1) Huckabee.......34%
2) Romney.......25%
3) Thompson...14%
4) McCain....13%
I didn't expect Thompson to be third and as they predicted, the college vote wasn't there for Ron Paul.
Have a good one!:s4:
fuck paul 10% hopfully hel do better in NH
i think its great paul got 9000+ votes, considering how few of people vote in iowa and the age demographic of people voting, RP got 3x as many votes as Giuliani.
Keep up the Revolution!
Ron Paul placed 5th with 10% Giuliani only took 4% hahahhaha
i wish Ron would have done better
Im so happy for OBAMA
Hip Hip Hurray!!!!
Im also glad Hilary and Romney were bitch slapped in the polls
Yeah, Paul coming in 5th will put a damper on some folks, but I'm ok with it since it was Iowa.
Hillary coming in 3rd made my night. :D
I'm glad to see Obama come out on top for the Dems in Iowa. Maybe he can build some momentum out of this. Kind of a pleasant surprise that Hillary was third.
McCain didn't do as well as I would have hoped, but about as expected. He should do well in New Hampshire. I was glad to see Romney denied --- that guy is a plastic robot.
I think I'd like to see the race come down to Obama and McCain as the nominees --- very different policies, but both men of character and honesty, I think. We would have two decent choices.
Well the most possitive thing I can say is....
SATAN CAME IN 3RD AND IS GOING DOWN....BOO YA JESUS WINS AGAIN
hehe, j/k :P
As for the republicans, I was really shocked Thompson did as well as he did, I mean, come on, it's Thompson, he beat out Paul and McCain, how did he beat McCain??? I guess Iowans will fall for actors more easily than other areas, probably also why Romney was able to do so well for so long too.
If you look at the numbers, Paul did do bad, but compared to McCain and Thompson he wasn't that far behind, only a few points. Coming in 5th is still bad though, especially when Giuliani wasn't even hoping to win Iowa, and Hunter, well he hasn't been very strong anywhere has he? So it almost is as if Paul came in last which is bad. However, the numbers are close and he still has the ability to do much better in New Hampshire with their larger independent crowd, but I was really hoping he could at least get in 3rd or 4th to propel him in NH.
If Paul doesn't do well in New Hampshire then that will severely effect his campaign, this is probably the 1 state where he has the best chance at getting a decent number of support, so if it doesn't show chances are it won't show anywhere else either.
Now all eyes are on the "Live Free or Die" state, this weekend is going to go by sooooo slow! :stoned:
no the antichrist got 3rd :D hahahaQuote:
Originally Posted by Nailhead
Nailhead, I don't think we usually would agree on policy, but I do agree with your analysis.
Glad to see Hillary knocked down a peg. I don't think she is actually Satan, but there is something disturbing about her, something not of this world...
Thompson is a surprise and I hope it is s fluke and he fades quickly. He's a lot better actor than he is politician (and I'm NOT saying he is a good actor). I would have liked to see McCain beat at least Thompson in Iowa. I think McCain will do much better in New Hampshire.
Ron Paul did not have a strong showing, but New Hampshire is more likely to be his kind of territiory. I don't think he is going to last long if he doesn't do well there.
P4B, I don't understand your total aversion for Ron Paul. I'm not going to provide any arguments for liking him, as I'm quite sure you've heard them all, I just want to know where you're coming from.
(Sorry for thread hijack)
I'm a realist 1st, Ron Paul supporter 2nd. That was as much of a spin I could put on the news without being completely unrealistic. I'm just hoping NH goes much better, a landslide would help...but yea, the realist part of me is kicking me about that fantasy lol. I'd say if he doesn't at least get 3rd or 4th in NH then his chance really is close to nothing, but even if he places last I'll still vote for him as long as he's on the ticket. If he looses and doesn't go 3rd party, I most likely won't be voting this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by dragonrider
Well, of course P4B will have to answer your question for himself. He's clearly not an RP supporter, but my take on it is not that he has a strong or unfair BIAS against RP, if that is what you are asking. It seems like the RP supporters are a little more agressive in promoting their candidate than supporters of other candidates (hijacking threads, for example), and if the moderator didn't step in to preserve some balance, the whole forum would be hijacked.Quote:
Originally Posted by r0k
Here's my own take on RP, so I don't get accused of being biased myself:
Pros:
- Seems honest and true to his convictions.
- Strong defender of personal liberties and constituional rights.
- Strong defender of fiscal responsibility and balanced budget.
Cons:
- I strongly disagree with his foregin policy (withdrawing from foreign military commitments and alliances).
- I strongly disagree with his economic theories regarding monetary policy (Federal Reserve and gold standard, etc.)
- He is weak on enforcing environmental regulation.
- Some of his ideas seem to me to border on conspiracy theory.
I don't personally support him, but I am glad he is in the race. I think it's important that someone bring the issue of our eroding constitutional rights to the table in a very strong way. And it is also good to see someone who is honest and true to their convictions, whether you agree with them or not --- it helps to expose the phonies and liars by comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nailhead
I don't recall bashing on Ron Paul in this thread but I'll give this one a shot I guess. First off, my statements regarding the college crowd is true.....I'm sure that if they were around that he probably would have placed in the top 3 if not the top two.Quote:
Originally Posted by r0k
As for "not liking"/supporting Ron Paul...there isn't a one of the candidates right now that I can truly say that I support or even say that I'm remotely impressed with. Find me a pro-war, pro-abortion, pro-death penalty, pro-legalize drugs candidate and THEN I'll be impressed.:D
Ron Paul did VERY well in Iowa in my book. 10% for someone that was "predicted" not to even remotely rank was a good showing and I'm sure that it'll be better in N.H. Even on FOX last night; the announcers were stating that maybe their network should reconsider not having him in the future debate since he placed so well or at least hold two different debates so he'd be included. :thumbsup:
Pretty much my feelings also. I may not support the dude but he does bring issues to the table that create debate........that's a good thing!:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by dragonrider
Have a good one!:s4:
You guys are all high!
Paul has no chance at all
Hillary is a tool
Obama is a good candidate and would make the best president
well said dragon riderQuote:
I think it's important that someone bring the issue of our eroding constitutional rights to the table in a very strong way. And it is also good to see someone who is honest and true to their convictions, whether you agree with them or not --- it helps to expose the phonies and liars by comparison.
but for all of you that say ron pauls idea of pulling out of foregin alliances is a bad idea i dont think it is. by us staying and funding isreal we are preventring them from just rubbing out there enemy. i think if we were to pull out they would take care of buissness and get it finnished with once and for all
Iowa went fine guys. While the result was not quite as quite good as we would have liked today, there are plenty of positives to take out of Iowa and we are in a much better position than many of our competitors. Below are some positive messages we should be using when we talk about Iowa to friends, family, undecided voters and the media.
(1) Contrary to what some here believe, we did significantly outperform our polls, just as we had been saying we would do all along.
According to Real Clear Politics, we were polling at 7.3% in the last five polls taken before the caucus (on average) yet, as of writing this, we are at 10.0%, meaning that we performed more than 37% better than we polled. That is a substantial overperformanceâ??about twice as good as anyone else in the field.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...a-primary.html
(2) Despite the fact that we put very little effort into Iowa until very late in the game and despite the fact that Ron Paul spent less time in Iowa than any other candidate (in a state where in-person campaigning is essential) and despite our shabby treatment by the mainstream media we still were just 3 points out of third place.
(3) We destroyed former front-runner Rudy Giulianiâ??absolutely destroyed him with almost triple his vote totalâ??and donâ??t be fooledâ??Rudy didnâ??t compete here because he couldnâ??t compete not because he didnâ??t want to.
(4) The winner in Iowa, Mike Huckabee, is completely unacceptable to large portions of the Republican party from Rush Limbaugh to the National Review crowd. Iowa has a much higher percentage of evangelicals than will primaries coming forward. Huckabee ainâ??t going to win New Hampshire and has little national organization.
(5) Meanwhile, of the other contenders, it was an unmitigated disaster for each of them. Despite spending tons of time and million of $ in Iowa Romney was crushed. And heâ??s going to lose to McCain in New Hampshire. McCain meanwhile, did not get the bounce that he needed from this performance. He is still low on cash and though he is likely to win New Hampshire itâ??s not obvious how he does well afterwards. Thompsonâ??s performance was likewise weak given his sole focus on Iowa and his one time front-runner status. He is going absolutely nowhere in New Hampshire. He is also totally out of money. He may drop out of the race soon. Meanwhile Giuliani was embarrassed in Iowa and is toast going forward.
(6) Exit polls suggest that we WON Independent Voters, who are the key crossover constituency that a Republican candidate is going to need to win in the general election.
So where does that leave us? We have a wide open race right now. We are likely to be top 3 in Wyoming and we should also do fairly well in South Carolina and Nevada, where we have spent time building our base while everyone else was in Iowa.
Virtually every other candidate is broke and with the exception of Huckabee, they wonâ??t pull in more money based on their Iowa performance. Meanwhile, we have millions in the bank and with our huge grassroots base, we can easily raise millions more. That money will matter a lot more in states that, unlike Iowa donâ??t allow candidates to meet every voter. This is where we begin to use our finances to our advantage.
Weâ??re not going to have a clear winner going into Super Tuesday on Feb. 5th. Right now, we have a large funding base and the organization to get out our message and reach voters. Almost all our competition doesnâ??t because they have spent all of their time and money in Iowa and New Hampshire. While it is still an uphill fight for the nomination (as it always was, eternal optimists on this forum aside) we are coming out of Iowa in a better position than we came in and we are well placed to do some real damage in the primaries going forward.
The Revolution Continues!
A little more info regarding Iowa. If it is true this is sad, but true or not the votes have been cast and it's time to move on to the next state.
An email from an Atlanta RP meetup member in Iowa - Ron Paul Forums
sounds like sabotage, if it's true then paul did extremely well considering...
Oh Oh another conspiracy. I'm heading for my bunker.
Barak Obama is going to be the next president of the United States!
Of course it's way to early to tell, so I'm just joking, but the Iowa caucus does give some clue as to how the national election will go.
First Democrats had twice as many supporters attend the caucuses than Republicans did in a state that is about 50-50, so Democrats are more motivated and energized.
I think Obama will quickly solidify support by the Democrats. Hillary was getting a lot of support becasue she seemed "inevitable" and "electable," but now she lost, so she doesn't seem so "inevitable" and "electable" now. Edwards's message is about change like Obama's is, but it has a divisive edge to it that isn't going to work when compared to Obama's message of bringing the country together.
The Republicans are in chaos. Huckabee won in Iowa, but that doesn't help him as much as it hurts other candidates. It weakened Romney to come in second, thank God. Giuliani didn't give Iowa any effort at all, but it still looks horrible to be so far at the bottom. McCain was beat by that joke, Thompson. My feeling is that Huckabee won't last because his support does not extend much past the evengelicals. Thompson can't last because he's basically just a lazy actor. McCain will pick up some steam in New Hampshire, but eventually he will run into the Giuliani firewall in New York, New Jersey, Florida and California. That will weaken McCain, and boost Giuliani, but by that point it may be too late for Giuliani.
Anyway, I think it's going to be a long time before we know who the Republican nominee is going to be, and by the time we do, they will all be damaged by the fight. In the meantime, Obama is going to quickly emerge as the clear front runner for the Dems and is going to have an easy time of building support throughout the primaries and momentum for the general election.
Of course, this theory could all be thrown out the window next week, and the election is nearly a year away, an eternity in politics.
I hope your wrong for his sake.......even getting the nomination. I was talking to the rents the other day about this and kind of agreed (which was STRANGE considering it was political) that if he did get the nomination there would probably be an attempt on his life.Quote:
Originally Posted by dragonrider
We've come along way in the states regarding racial issues but there are still those with ugly attitudes. A young, intelligent individual like that deserves respect BUT........
I'm no big fan of his, don't agree at all about the instant withdrawl not to mention his attitude regarding talks with Iran, Syria, etc....but I sure the hell don't wish harm on him. Just a bad feeling I guess.
Have a good one!:s4:
I was just trying to say what I see happening, not necessarily what I WANT happening. I don't agree with him on Iraq either (don't really agree with any of the Dems). And there are a few other issues I disagree with him about too. But of the top three Dems, I think I like him best.Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud
You may be right about someone taking a shot at him. That was the first thing I thought of when I saw him giving his victory speach --- a lot of MLK and JFK there, and then you have to think of what happened to them. But realisticly, all candidates have to worry about that, regardless of race or party or policy.
I am going to be really pissed if Huckabee becomes president. Religious zealots should not hold office. Plus, the Evangelical motive is to get rid of separation of the church and state. Look it up :).
I bet I'm going to be writing Ron Paul's name in myself when it comes to voting. Oh well.
You do not have to worry about Huckabee --- he won't last.Quote:
Originally Posted by mfqr
I wonder if some KKK asshole would try and assasinate him? I'm more inclined to think R.P. would be a larger target as he is targeting the fed and foriegn policy, ending the drug war, (do you realize how many people are employed in the war on drugs) and abolishing the IRS, also a huge employer., Tax preparers etc.
Hmm...If you are the original poster of this, then I apologize. Otherwise, you should give credit where credit is due. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by epxroot
Ron Paul Forums - View Single Post - Positive Messages from Iowa (READ IT-- You won't be sorry)
Twice in our history the winner of Iowa became the President. I don't think Iowa has a clue. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by dragonrider
I mostly meant that there were some lessons to learn from the results in Iowa, not that Iowans have any special knowledge. It is kind of funny that 300,000 Iowans can cause such a ruckus in a country of over 300,000,000 people. We probably give them too much importance. But when the results are a surprise, there are usually lessons to be learned.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fencewalker
Awesome observation -- and very encouraging.Quote:
Originally Posted by dragonrider
I was (and still am) an Edwards guy, but I have to be realistic about his chances. Obama is a strong candidate IMO -- not as good on health insurance as I would like, but I think he can do quite a few good things for this country culturally.
EDIT -- Dragonrider: I'm curious why you think Huckabee will fade. I think he might have a shot at the nomination (though he would lose to a potted plant in the general election).
Well done to Obama. I don't know what I think is best for America, I think in any case they ought to become less oligarchic. Whatever happens I hope the next era in politics spells and end to the bullshit we have sustained from Bush, not only us in Europe, but also the poor bastards in the middle east who have had their lives shat on by this murdering bastard. You know, I still can't get my head round 911. I am not 100% convinced that the whole thing wasn't staged, at the very least I think it probably happened because that monkey faced coward bastard stole the presidency. May whoever wins the next seat bring an end to this sad period in the history of the world.