Biased Iowa Interpretation

Here is my, admittedly, biased interpretation of the Iowa results.

Romney - Proof positive that money and lack of principles are still a formidable force in American politics.

Santorum - I love the conservative of the month club!

Paul - I would just like to say to all my supporters...Ha...the jokes on you...I don't want to really win anything. I just want to blow my hot air.

Gingrich - Karma sucks!

Perry - Suddenly I cannot remember why I am in Iowa...ooops.

Bachmann - I told everyone that religious conservatives could vote for a female leader...ooops.

Huntsman - There is a state called Iowa...why wasn't I informed.

Rhoemer - I will buy all my supporters in Iowa a new pickup truck...wheww...got out of that one cheaply.

There are three factions:

1. Libertarians and others open to Libertarian ideas who support Ron Paul.

2. Moderates who support Romney.

3. Conservatives who are looking for a truly conservative candidate that represents them.

Those in group 3 are trying to figure out who their candidate is. Once Bachmann and Perry drop out, Gingrich and Santorum will fight to be the representative for this group.

That about sums it up.

I turned on MSNBC about 10 to see what was going on, and then went over the Fox Noise to see how they were feeling. The Fox crowd was having a lot of trouble trying to make applesauce out of rotten apples.

The caucuss was a clear display of a party in disarray. This is the legacy of the GOP's cynical decision to play the hard right and the evangelicals for suckers with the tea party. Hammity , Kristol and the whole gang knew it too. It was written all over their faces.

This is great. I love that the republican party all of a sudden feels that it can't find one perfect canidate to represent them. Hopefully the same happens with the democrats and we can get away from this two party system.

Those who want to be libertarians, vote libertarian.

Those who want to be vote based on religious morals, I am sure you can have a canidate.

Those who want to vote on social issues, there should be a guy.

Those who want to "vote with your wallet", I am sure there will be someone to sell that point too.

My god does the media control people. The media says "Bachmann and Perry will drop out now" and that just becomes a truism to most people.

All of it is that way. They declare Romney most likely one to beat Obama - and people chant it as fact. The last week the focus on Santorum claiming he is surging and is supported by 1 Iowa evangelical minister in a Caucus system in which over 50% are evangelicals - while ignoring Bachmann far more minister's endorsements and boom - Santorum surges as the media dictates.

I guess that isn't surprising. Most people are sheep. What is puzzling is why people feel some compulsion to post what the talking heads of the media are declaring as fact as their own insights? It is like a student in school proving the heard the teacher? The teacher says 2 plus 2 equals 4. Then the student proud states 2 plus 2 equals 4 proving that got the answer right.

Yes, the media said Bachman and Perry will drop out. I think most of us heard that.

To know what is going to happen all you have to do is listen to the media telling people what will happen. Because the vast majority of "news" (meaning political commentary) comes from 2 networks, they control what people think and "know."

While personally I greatly oppose Paul intensely, I felt the push for Santorum by FOX - which is on record as against Paul - was largely to use Santorum to take evangelical and ultra rightwinger vote from Paul. They had to get evangelicals and rightwingers to be less fragmented. That is just my sense of it. Santorum was working like crazy in Iowa and hadn't been hit with massive negatives - instead mostly an unknown. So the media could make him whatever they wanted to be to voter's minds.

Santorum as the Republican nominee? What a joke.

The only way your Libertarian or other "third party" candidate would have a chance would be if your state adapted a runoff election system.

Joko,

Who is going to donate money to a candidate that only got 5 percent of the vote?

Without money, how does a candidate run a campaign?

I'm not sure whether Gingrich or Santorum can stay in the race.

Gingrich is out of money, and GOP Washington isn't about to put any money in him.

Santorum is on a shoestring, but he could get a big financial boost from the Right to Life crowd.

Romney has all the cash he needs, and access to as much as he wants. He's going to buy the nomination. The question is wether he's going to have to (or want to) take one of these kooks on as VP candidate in order to keep the far right from staying home in November. The experience of Sarah Palin looms large.

johnny_rebson said:

Joko,

Who is going to donate money to a candidate that only got 5 percent of the vote?

Without money, how does a candidate run a campaign?

Click to expand...

Santorum has essentially $0 dollars.

As long as Republicans keep having televised debates every 3rd day all a candidate needs to see him/herself on TV is gasoline money. There's no reason for a candidate to drop out. Maybe will, but no necessity to do so with massive levels of free advertising via the debates.

"A candidate can't win" and "a candidate must drop out" are not the same thing. The incessant free televised debates are a totally new political dynamic.

Iowa is a joke every 4 years, Were the libs expecting anything to be different ?

Listening to the media is like drinking rubbing alcohol. Make up your own mind.

joko104 said:

My god does the media control people. The media says "Bachmann and Perry will drop out now" and that just becomes a truism to most people.

Click to expand...

You know, people who just listen to the media...or understand a bit of political science.

First, the it wouldn't have been hard to get a feeling Perry MAY drop out based on his concession speech, where he explicitely stated he'd reevaluate things, without any additional media commentary.

Second, it wouldn't be hard to suggest Bachmann may drop out when, in a state she had the best shot of winning to get early momentum that she'd bank on to carry her, she finished second to last out of the main candidate. Beating a guy who didn't bother campaigning pretty much at all in Iowa. And on top of that, having such a result when someone who is the closest ideological twin to her in the primary finish in a heated 2nd.

Like Santorum, Bachmann doesn't have a ton of infastructure in many of the other states. Unlike Santorum, Bachmann won't have the excitement and momentum behind her going forward.

Stating fact they're going to drop? That's a bit premature. But there's definite reasons to suggest they likely will drop without being brainwashed by the media.

johnny_rebson said:

There are three factions:

1. Libertarians and others open to Libertarian ideas who support Ron Paul.

2. Moderates who support Romney.

3. Conservatives who are looking for a truly conservative candidate that represents them.

Those in group 3 are trying to figure out who their candidate is. Once Bachmann and Perry drop out, Gingrich and Santorum will fight to be the representative for this group.

Click to expand...

i hope you are right because i would hate to see a brokered convention where a candidate who could have a chance to actually prevail over Obama, such as christie or jeb bush, would be placed into nomination

Eighty Deuce said:

Iowa is a joke every 4 years, Were the libs expecting anything to be different ?

Click to expand...

Iowa is a state with citizens who vote just like you do, as for being a joke, what's so funny?

TomFitz said:

That about sums it up.

I turned on MSNBC about 10 to see what was going on, and then went over the Fox Noise to see how they were feeling. The Fox crowd was having a lot of trouble trying to make applesauce out of rotten apples.

The caucuss was a clear display of a party in disarray. This is the legacy of the GOP's cynical decision to play the hard right and the evangelicals for suckers with the tea party. Hammity , Kristol and the whole gang knew it too. It was written all over their faces.

Click to expand...

I turned to MSNBC, too. That is a panel? LOL

Five people who spent their childhoods getting stuffed in trash cans. A girl on the left with a distracting lisp, next to a guy that looked like he got dressed in the dark, next to a guy in the middle who sounded worked up on caffeine and cocaine, next to some frumpy embittered twit, next to the first openly gay Indian man ever seen on TV.

Now that certainly represents the voting public. LOL

Wow...looks like the Media is so great at brainwashing people that it brainwashed michelle Bachmann to believe she was going to step out of the race to the point where she's stepped out of the race! AMAZING!

Who misses Pawlenty? :lol:

Zyphlin said:

Wow...looks like the Media is so great at brainwashing people that it brainwashed michelle Bachmann to believe she was going to step out of the race to the point where she's stepped out of the race! AMAZING!

Click to expand...

Damn you lamestream media!!

Zyphlin said:

Wow...looks like the Media is so great at brainwashing people that it brainwashed michelle Bachmann to believe she was going to step out of the race to the point where she's stepped out of the race! AMAZING!

Click to expand...

a sad, sad day for the daily show

joko104 said:

My god does the media control people. The media says "Bachmann and Perry will drop out now" and that just becomes a truism to most people.

All of it is that way. They declare Romney most likely one to beat Obama - and people chant it as fact. The last week the focus on Santorum claiming he is surging and is supported by 1 Iowa evangelical minister in a Caucus system in which over 50% are evangelicals - while ignoring Bachmann far more minister's endorsements and boom - Santorum surges as the media dictates.

I guess that isn't surprising. Most people are sheep. What is puzzling is why people feel some compulsion to post what the talking heads of the media are declaring as fact as their own insights? It is like a student in school proving the heard the teacher? The teacher says 2 plus 2 equals 4. Then the student proud states 2 plus 2 equals 4 proving that got the answer right.

Yes, the media said Bachman and Perry will drop out. I think most of us heard that.

To know what is going to happen all you have to do is listen to the media telling people what will happen. Because the vast majority of "news" (meaning political commentary) comes from 2 networks, they control what people think and "know."

While personally I greatly oppose Paul intensely, I felt the push for Santorum by FOX - which is on record as against Paul - was largely to use Santorum to take evangelical and ultra rightwinger vote from Paul. They had to get evangelicals and rightwingers to be less fragmented. That is just my sense of it. Santorum was working like crazy in Iowa and hadn't been hit with massive negatives - instead mostly an unknown. So the media could make him whatever they wanted to be to voter's minds.

Santorum as the Republican nominee? What a joke.

Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity are referring to my interpretation of the results as part and parcel of what the media spin is? Those facts don't add up. Everyone in the media is tiptoing around the real reason Bachmann performed so miserably. It is the same reason that many women before her have failed in Iowa. Religious, rural voters don't like women leaders. While I may biased against the conservative perspective. I am from the very same small town, rural, religious communities that abound in Iowa. They do not, as a rule, like women running things other than programs for children and fund raisers.

As for Perry he should get out of the race while he has some reputation left. I see now that someone convinced him to stay in for South Carolina. Not a good move to engender future support from the Republican Party. If the both parties have anything in common it is that they hold grudges against people who stay in races for their own ego's sake.

As for my interpretation of Paul...that is taken straight from his own mouth. If you are asked if you can invision yourself the President of the United States while you are currently running for that office and you say no. That about sums up your chances of winning. He is clearly in this to espouse his own viewpoints and to get a larger audience for them. That is OK, but lets not pretend he is really running for President.

As for Romney's interpretation this is admittedly biased. Every time I see Romney he makes my skin crawl. He is the ultimate politician. A person who will say and do anything to get elected. That might be who you want against Obama in the fall but lets not pretend he is anything else but that.

As for Santorum...I could be wrong. He might be able to scrape together enough support and momentum to be a legitimate candidate. The prevailing media opinion is that he will. I don't think he can. His views are too extreme to be appealing to any group other than the very conservative. That is not to say I don't have a certain amount of respect for him. When it comes time to sell out his positions in order to win elections Santorum has always stuck with his principles. I don't agree with those principles but at least he has them and isn't a weather vane. However, his principles are too far out of the main stream to mount any serious threat of being elected.