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.
"What is the difference between first place and third place in Iowa going to be, 4,000 votes? It's like a student body election," says Stuart Stevens, who was Mitt Romney's chief strategist in 2012.
"What is the difference between first place and third place in Iowa going to be, 4,000 votes? It's like a student body election," says Stuart Stevens, who was Mitt Romney's chief strategist in 2012.
Sorry, I just don't like Iowa. I don't like that they vote before my state does, I don't like they way they vote, and I don't like the results of that vote. I think all states should have the primaries on the same day and we might end up with a better president. My favorite candidate is Huckabee and because of Iowa he has dropped out. Is it fair that I don't get a chance to vote for him just because of these people that don't even care that the person they are voting for is even qualified to be running? Iowa just messed up everything.
Sorry, I just don't like Iowa. I don't like that they vote before my state does, I don't like they way they vote, and I don't like the results of that vote. I think all states should have the primaries on the same day and we might end up with a better president. My favorite candidate is Huckabee and because of Iowa he has dropped out. Is it fair that I don't get a chance to vote for him just because of these people that don't even care that the person they are voting for is even qualified to be running? Iowa just messed up everything.
Iowans get to vote regardless of whether you approve or not.
What is so important about the people of Iowa that they get to choose before the rest of us? It is like people who push ahead of others and think they are more important than we are. Maybe we should rename Iowa the "Me First" state. It's not like they even think before they vote. You can tell that by the choices they make.
Look at the Democrats. The best candidate got the fewest votes.
Or, it could be that people were finally able to 'see' the other candidates because the room wasn't full of trump. They may have actually seen something that made them decide on one of the other candidates during that last debate.
I thought the last debate was a waste of time..
All they did was bash Trump, and then once the 5 year on stage got tired of that, they went and answered Muslim terrorists for every answer..
I guess raising money for vets is less important to fox than blowhards lying about all the things they are going to do if they are elected.
I am so over fox news and their pitiful brand of journalism.
That was a smokescreen. IMO Trump just didn't want to be asked questions about his policies before the Iowa caucus. I'm not sure if it hurt or helped Trump, because he did rather well in Iowa, but the absence of Trump gave Rubio more strength and he almost tied with Trump.
When Trump is around, the focus all seems to be on him and he continues to get a disproportionate amount of media coverage. However, eventually a candidate can't keep shouting at people without actually saying something meaningful. I do, however, agree that a news network shouldn't be strongly criticizing a candidate, especially if it is sponsoring a debate, so I don't blame Trump for boycotting it.
What is so important about the people of Iowa that they get to choose before the rest of us? It is like people who push ahead of others and think they are more important than we are. Maybe we should rename Iowa the "Me First" state. It's not like they even think before they vote. You can tell that by the choices they make.
Look at the Democrats. The best candidate got the fewest votes.
I don't worry about Iowa. I suggest you relax about it.
Iowa likes having the first primary because that's the only reason a non-Iowan ever cares about it.
Iowa is not an indicator of anything, and no candidate has ever needed Iowa to win. We already know how Iowa will vote in the primary and the general.
In the primary, the Rs vote for the religious conservative - or in this case, they split their vote between three religious conservatives. It doesn't matter who the Ds vote for in the primary. In the general election, the state will go R, whether a religious conservative is the nominee or not, because that's what Iowa does.
Now, for the rest of your life, you will know how to predict Iowa's behavior in a presidential election, and you can start thinking about knottier problems, like Pennsylvania.
Obviously that's what he was afraid of. The whole Megyn Kelly debacle was a smokescreen. He was afraid of being shown up for his lack of actual knowledge or ideas so soon before actual voting began and people were really paying attention. And maybe he was right--maybe he would have fared worse had he shown up and exposed his ignorance, which would have been fresh in the minds of the Iowa caucus goers. Much safer to hold a rally where he can talk AT people rather than have to listen to and answer to them instead.
You make excellent points, and that is why I see him falling even further in the coming months. Either he doesn't show up (and risks alienating people), or he shows up and gets hammered in the debates.
Doubt that the clown show that Fox news is had anything to do with it. Iowans likely saw Trumps history that has not been conservative and saw through him on that
"Also Bret, interesting to point out that Donald Trump did not do particularly well with people who decided late," Roberts discussed with his colleague, Fox News anchor Bret Baier. "Marco Rubio seems to be doing better with them, so he may come to rue the day that he did not show up for that final debate on Thursday night because a lot of people were looking to that debate for some signals on how to make up their mind. Trump was not there."
I don't normally put much stock in anything that comes from Fox News, but I was thinking the same thing leading up to the last debate. A lot of voters don't start to pay attention until it's close to the time that they go to the polls, and I wondered if Trump skipping out on that last debate would cost him because of it. Not saying that was the only reason, but it's an interesting theory.
Fox is no different than the rest of the mainstream media, and now we find out that Murdoch is a big "open borders" proponent.
I doubt that Trump skipping the debate was the reason for the Iowa results. Cruz has been making headway for some time. I would prefer Cruz. I was happy with the result.
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.
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.
