~~~The Official Iowa Caucus discussion Thread~~~

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: KarmaPolice

Originally posted by: Lothar
GOD IS GREAT!!!
My favorite candidates won on both the democratic and republican side.
(Actually Richardson was my favorite on the Dem side, but he didn't have much of a chance of winning and told his delegates to vote for Obama)

How can you like Huck and Obama at the same time.....

Huck is pretty much the only republican I can vote for, with McCain being a close second.
There is nothing wrong with picking one from each party to support.

How can people like Ron Paul and Obama at the same time?
The same reason why I like Huck and Obama.

I'll vote for Huck and McCain before voting for Hillary any day of the week.


My vote is for the individual, not the party.

 

[bamacre]

How can you support Huckabee and his national sales tax? That is the most retarded thing I have ever heard. It would greatly increase the tax burden on the poor and middle class, even the upper-middle class. Because some people are spending beyond their means, those people would be taxed on money that don't even have yet. That's just evil.

 

[Pabster]

I agree on Huckabee, and the National Sales Tax. Both terrible ideas.

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: Perry404
Oh and in case no one noticed...Hillary picked up one more delegate than Edwards.

What "voodoo" formula does the democratic caucus use in the calculation of delegates?
Huckabee got 17 vs 12 for Romney with an 8 point margin.
Why is Obama only getting 17 vs 16 for Hillary with his 8 point margin?

And how did Hillary end up with more delegates than Edwards even though he beat her? (not that I care about either of them, but I'm just both amazed and worried at how there's only a 1 delegate difference between Obama and Hillary with his victory margin.)

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: bamacre
How can you support Huckabee and his national sales tax? That is the most retarded thing I have ever heard. It would greatly increase the tax burden on the poor and middle class, even the upper-middle class. Because some people are spending beyond their means, those people would be taxed on money that don't even have yet. That's just evil.

I'm against Huckabee on the "Fair Tax" issue.
I have yet to see a candidate in which I agree 100% on issues with.
Have you?

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Lothar

Originally posted by: bamacre
How can you support Huckabee and his national sales tax? That is the most retarded thing I have ever heard. It would greatly increase the tax burden on the poor and middle class, even the upper-middle class. Because some people are spending beyond their means, those people would be taxed on money that don't even have yet. That's just evil.

I'm against Huckabee on the "Fair Tax" issue.
I have yet to see a candidate in which I agree 100% on issues with.
Have you?

No, but that is a very important issue, and I think you'd agree. There are other reasons why I would not vote for Huckabee, but that issue alone, his idea, lends me to believe he's ignorant.

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Lothar

Originally posted by: bamacre
How can you support Huckabee and his national sales tax? That is the most retarded thing I have ever heard. It would greatly increase the tax burden on the poor and middle class, even the upper-middle class. Because some people are spending beyond their means, those people would be taxed on money that don't even have yet. That's just evil.

I'm against Huckabee on the "Fair Tax" issue.
I have yet to see a candidate in which I agree 100% on issues with.
Have you?

No, but that is a very important issue, and I think you'd agree. There are other reasons why I would not vote for Huckabee, but that issue alone, his idea, lends me to believe he's ignorant.

The same can be said about Ron Paul and all the other candidates.
Huckabee has his tax issue, Ron Paul has his economy issues, etc...

If it wasn't for Ron Paul's view of the federal reserve system, how the economy works, and the belief that we should return to a gold standard that some of his believers here seem to profess; Ron Paul would get my vote.

LegendKiller has already hammered the issue several times.
Do a search of his posts.

 

[Corbett]

Originally posted by: Perry404
Ron Paul took 29% of the independent vote people. New Hampshire is 41% independent!! Most didn't expect Paul to do better than third in Iowa. NH however is another story. I believe it is entirely possible we take first.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/20...ults/epolls/#val=IAREP

Time to eat some crow! Not even close in NH!

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: Perry404
NH residents gave 4x as much money to Ron Paul as did Iowans and NH has half the population of Iowa. If this is a reliable indicator(which I believe it is) then NH has four votes to every one of Iowas waiting for Ron Paul.

So when are your "reliable indicators" going to be the actual scientific poll data instead of tons of unscientific polls, useless information, misleading statistics, and wishfull thinking?

You were partly correct, Paul did get more votes in NH than in IA. But you were way, way off on the amount. It wasn't even close to 4x as many votes. Last I saw they were 17,831 votes in NH (96% of votes counted) and 11,817 votes in IA (98% of votes counted). Thus, there were 1.51 times as many votes in NH. You estimated 11,817*4 = 47,268 votes. He got nearly 30,000 less than that. He wasn't even close to what your "reliable indicator" predicted. Even if you took those 30,000 votes equally from the front runners in NH, Paul still wouldn't have been any better than 3rd.

Paul didn't move from his 5th place showing in IA. Paul didn't reach 10% in this "favorable state". Heck, if you count all votes (dem and rep) Paul only got 3.51% of total votes cast that day. Spin it all you want, Paul didn't do well in NH.

When other candidates drop out, their votes aren't going to go significantly to Paul. Even if they did all go to Paul, he'd still have done poorly. If you add Huckabee + Giuliani + Paul + Thompson + Hunter and gave them all to Paul, he'd still be in 3rd for the republicans and 5th if you consider the democrats Clinton and Obama. Lets go further, suppose Richardson, Kucinich, Biden, Gravel, and Dodd dropped and all their votes also went to Paul. He'd STILL be in 2nd place on the republican side and 3rd overall.