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.
Looking at the Iowa polls, including the new one showing Sanders up, it appears it is going to be about turnout, especially among those who haven't attended Caucuses in the past.
Clinton leads in polls that have a very tight voter screen which focuses on those who have Caucused in the past, meanwhile Sanders tends to have the advantage on those who say they are likely to attend the Caucus regardless of if they attended previous Caucus goes or not. If there aren't that many new Caucus goers, Clinton likely wins the state, if many turnout who haven't Caucused in the past, Sanders likely wins.
If there aren't that many new Caucus goers, Clinton likely wins the state, if many turnout who haven't Caucused in the past, Sanders likely wins.
I agree with your analysis. However neither will "win the state", there's no state-wide victor in Iowa. The most likely outcome is they'll split the delegates more or less evenly.
At this point there's been so much hype by the media and both candidate's supporters that it would take a landslide for either candidate to look like a victor.
Who do people think O'Malley voters would go for if they decide to not caucus for him? Looking at that RCP link, with the numbers as close as they are, his 5% could be a critical factor.
Who do people think O'Malley voters would go for if they decide to not caucus for him? Looking at that RCP link, with the numbers as close as they are, his 5% could be a critical factor.
They are 2-1 in favor of Bernie Sanders in the polls I've seen.
Who do people think O'Malley voters would go for if they decide to not caucus for him? Looking at that RCP link, with the numbers as close as they are, his 5% could be a critical factor.
It won't be in Iowa because Iowa is a proportional state where delegates are decided by precinct and not at the state level. Each candidate gets to keep every delegate they win. So winning 52% of votes statewide vs 48% doesn't do anything except generate a nice 1-day media banner.
On the other hand, if MOM arrives at the national convention with 4-5% pledged delegates overall, and neither of the leaders has 50+%, then MOM has a very strong hand.
That scenario is unlikely to happen with the Dems but is almost guaranteed to happen in the GOP. It's why the pundits are saying if neither Cruz nor Trump have better than a 35% lead, then whoever's in 3rd place could walk away with the whole thing by collecting the 4th and 5th place candidate's delegates, then raking in enough unpledged delegates to put him over.
That's why Rubio, Kasich, Christie, and Bush are staying in; they're battling each other for 3rd place.
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.
