Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wow, only 100k showed up? Less than 2/3 of 2016 turnout. That is embarrassingly low turnout. Seems like republicans are not enthusiastic about their choices.
MAGA is blaming the weather, but thatās Midwest weather. Enthusiasm was mild at best.
It was the coldest caucus in history with temps in the negative 30's. Many parking lots were not cleared and walkways were slippery from the snow a few days ago.
Most pundits were predicting a low turn out because of the bitter cold.
Bottom line.... Trump won over 50% of the vote - more than any candidate has ever won.
And, he got more votes than he received in 2016.
It was definitely a win for him.
If Biden only got 50% in a primary, Iād be pretty concerned.
Iowa doesn't have a primary. It has a caucus, which is what occurred last night. Caucuses are closer to rank ordering than a straight vote. More to the point, the vote for Trump was the largest percentage in Iowa caucus history. To say it another way, no candidate has ever done better in an Iowa caucus in the history of Iowa caucuses. So the interpretation that this is a lackluster outcome is not contextually logical.
Wrong. Bush did much better in 2004.
Bush was the incumbent, so that was a proforma caucus. Out of what we consider actual contests, this is the biggest win on record.
Didn't Trump win in 2020?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wow, only 100k showed up? Less than 2/3 of 2016 turnout. That is embarrassingly low turnout. Seems like republicans are not enthusiastic about their choices.
MAGA is blaming the weather, but thatās Midwest weather. Enthusiasm was mild at best.
It was the coldest caucus in history with temps in the negative 30's. Many parking lots were not cleared and walkways were slippery from the snow a few days ago.
Most pundits were predicting a low turn out because of the bitter cold.
Bottom line.... Trump won over 50% of the vote - more than any candidate has ever won.
And, he got more votes than he received in 2016.
It was definitely a win for him.
If Biden only got 50% in a primary, Iād be pretty concerned.
Iowa doesn't have a primary. It has a caucus, which is what occurred last night. Caucuses are closer to rank ordering than a straight vote. More to the point, the vote for Trump was the largest percentage in Iowa caucus history. To say it another way, no candidate has ever done better in an Iowa caucus in the history of Iowa caucuses. So the interpretation that this is a lackluster outcome is not contextually logical.
Wrong. Bush did much better in 2004.
Bush was the incumbent, so that was a proforma caucus. Out of what we consider actual contests, this is the biggest win on record.
Anonymous wrote:I am in Texas and I think immigration is maybe 9 on my list of public policy concerns.
But Republicans have certainly been successful winning support via xenophobia.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wow, only 100k showed up? Less than 2/3 of 2016 turnout. That is embarrassingly low turnout. Seems like republicans are not enthusiastic about their choices.
MAGA is blaming the weather, but thatās Midwest weather. Enthusiasm was mild at best.
It was the coldest caucus in history with temps in the negative 30's. Many parking lots were not cleared and walkways were slippery from the snow a few days ago.
Most pundits were predicting a low turn out because of the bitter cold.
Bottom line.... Trump won over 50% of the vote - more than any candidate has ever won.
And, he got more votes than he received in 2016.
It was definitely a win for him.
If Biden only got 50% in a primary, Iād be pretty concerned.
Iowa doesn't have a primary. It has a caucus, which is what occurred last night. Caucuses are closer to rank ordering than a straight vote. More to the point, the vote for Trump was the largest percentage in Iowa caucus history. To say it another way, no candidate has ever done better in an Iowa caucus in the history of Iowa caucuses. So the interpretation that this is a lackluster outcome is not contextually logical.
Wrong. Bush did much better in 2004.
Anonymous wrote:I have a bad feeling that Trump will be re elected. Heās winning the gop nomination.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Itās more like 50% at this point in the count.
The real development here is De Santis edging out Haley. He needed this to prove to donors that heās still viable and he nailed it.
DeSantis and Haley are gone. Both will drop out after Turnip wins NH. Neither are "viable" and neither "nailed it."
Nailing it would be defeating Turnip or coming very close. Turnip got more votes than DeSantis and Haley combined. He got more votes than everyone else combined. It's a blowout. A thumping, huge blowout.
But it is just a caucus so you can always hope and dream for another day despite the realities on earth. Turnip is going to steamroll through the rest of the primaries, lock up the nomination and most likely defeat Biden in November.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Immigration is #1 issue for voters.
As it should be. National security affects us all.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am in Texas and I think immigration is maybe 9 on my list of public policy concerns.
But Republicans have certainly been successful winning support via xenophobia.
You think those people protesting against migrants in Chicago, NYC, & Denver are Republicans? Idiot.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wow, only 100k showed up? Less than 2/3 of 2016 turnout. That is embarrassingly low turnout. Seems like republicans are not enthusiastic about their choices.
MAGA is blaming the weather, but thatās Midwest weather. Enthusiasm was mild at best.
It was the coldest caucus in history with temps in the negative 30's. Many parking lots were not cleared and walkways were slippery from the snow a few days ago.
Most pundits were predicting a low turn out because of the bitter cold.
Bottom line.... Trump won over 50% of the vote - more than any candidate has ever won.
And, he got more votes than he received in 2016.
It was definitely a win for him.
If Biden only got 50% in a primary, Iād be pretty concerned.
Iowa doesn't have a primary. It has a caucus, which is what occurred last night. Caucuses are closer to rank ordering than a straight vote. More to the point, the vote for Trump was the largest percentage in Iowa caucus history. To say it another way, no candidate has ever done better in an Iowa caucus in the history of Iowa caucuses. So the interpretation that this is a lackluster outcome is not contextually logical.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Itās more like 50% at this point in the count.
The real development here is De Santis edging out Haley. He needed this to prove to donors that heās still viable and he nailed it.
Anonymous wrote:Itās more like 50% at this point in the count.
The real development here is De Santis edging out Haley. He needed this to prove to donors that heās still viable and he nailed it.