Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-19-2012, 10:54 AM
 
Location: Keosauqua, Iowa
9,614 posts, read 21,287,626 times
Reputation: 13675

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by dixiegirl7 View Post
Uhh, yeah! Some of the precints just happened to forget to turn in votes...lol. Ok then!
What's your point here? You rasied a specific question and I gave you a specific answer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-19-2012, 11:19 AM
 
11,289 posts, read 26,225,037 times
Reputation: 11356
Losing 8 precincts isn't really a reason to come down on the entire state of Iowa. Losing 8 precincts means that 99.5% of them were counted out of the total of almost 1,800.

I know that's enough to change who won, but really this race doesn't mean a whole lot anyway. For the country, OR for Iowa.

Iowa isn't a very socially conservative leaning state to begin with. The number of people who came out to vote were only 5% of the registered voters. It was heavily weighted towards social conservatives and evangelicals. Those people tend to be registered Republicans. A large majority of the state are Democrats or Independents.

Registered Republicans: 643,950
Democrats/Independents: 1,466,434

Republicans: 30%
Others: 70%

Iowa has voted democrat for president 5 out of the last 6 times. In 2008, Obama won by almost 150,000 votes. When the state did go Republican back in 2004, Bush won by 10,000 votes out of 1,500,000 cast. If only 0.3% of the voters had switched their vote it would have gone Democrat.

Just saying, Iowa isn't really a good example of who's going to win this race. Obviously Santorum isn't going to win the election this fall. He's far too hateful and crazy to win an actual election.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2012, 11:35 AM
 
37 posts, read 21,240 times
Reputation: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by KickAssArmyChick View Post
Former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum received 34 votes more than former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney in this month's Iowa caucuses, the Des Moines Register reported Thursday.
The totals reported just after the Jan. 3 ballots had given Romney a narrow, eight-vote win over Santorum. It gave an early boost to Romney's bid for the Republican presidential nomination.






Santorum Got 34 Votes More Than Romney In Iowa Caucuses, Report Says | Fox News
The GOP establishment is making thier move against Romney. This is announced almost at the exact same time that Rick Perry drops out of the race.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2012, 12:14 PM
 
9,879 posts, read 8,027,579 times
Reputation: 2521
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita View Post
I think we could re-count who knows how many times and who knows what the outcome might end up? It probably doesn't make one bit of a difference in the end. Romney was never expected to do anything in Iowa.

According to the party they are simply going to call it a tie. That is probably the best thing so we can all get on with the rest of the campaigning.

Nita
The only difference is that now Mitt can't go down in history as the only GOP candidate to win IA & NH in a primary
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2012, 12:16 PM
 
29,981 posts, read 42,965,286 times
Reputation: 12828
Quote:
Originally Posted by KickAssArmyChick View Post
When Romney "won" by 8 votes it was a win.

Now that Santorum "won" by 34 it is a tie.

Why is that?
Because eight precincts cannot be certified.

REGISTER EXCLUSIVE: 2012 GOP caucus count unresolved | Iowa Caucuses
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2012, 12:52 PM
 
8,754 posts, read 10,180,036 times
Reputation: 1434
Default Iowa caucuses win split between Romney and Santorum

Quote:
Iowa's Republican caucuses have been certified as a split decision between Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney because of missing data.
Former Massachusetts Governor Romney was declared the winner of the 3 January presidential nominating contest by eight votes.
But a new count by state officials puts Mr Santorum ahead by 34 votes.
However, results are missing from eight precincts. The Romney campaign said in a statement it was a "virtual tie".

BBC News - Iowa caucuses win split between Romney and Santorum




The votes are missing from eight precincts! You have got to be kidding! This smells very fishy! Iowa needs to be reconsidered in their position after this debacle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2012, 12:54 PM
 
6,902 posts, read 7,543,733 times
Reputation: 2018
I noticed a lot of people in the media and folks here are just waiving this off as if it doesn't matter. But it does. The fact is there are votes missing. It doesn't matter if it makes a difference to the outcome, votes are missing, can't be located.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2012, 01:10 PM
 
37 posts, read 21,240 times
Reputation: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackandproud View Post
I noticed a lot of people in the media and folks here are just waiving this off as if it doesn't matter. But it does. The fact is there are votes missing. It doesn't matter if it makes a difference to the outcome, votes are missing, can't be located.
That's because Ron Paul got the most votes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2012, 01:18 PM
 
791 posts, read 461,502 times
Reputation: 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThreeLockBox View Post
That's because Ron Paul got the most votes.
Yep, wasn't it AMAZING that Santorum jumped 15% on Caucus night with no $$$ and no organization? That was a real clean vote count, all right. Wasn't it Hugo Chavez that said it doesn't matter who votes, it matters who COUNTS the votes?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2012, 01:20 PM
 
37 posts, read 21,240 times
Reputation: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'Zona Stona View Post
Yep, wasn't it AMAZING that Santorum jumped 15% on Caucus night with no $$$ and no organization? That was a real clean vote count, all right. Wasn't it Hugo Chavez that said it doesn't matter who votes, it matters who COUNTS the votes?
It was Joseph Stalin actually who said that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:29 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top