Iowa caucuses, up-to-the-second, constantly-refreshed results.
Democrats
Republicans
UPDATE:
Obama wins, which is cool. Huckabee wins, which is cool (for Democrats).
The most notable news this evening is that almost all the independents (one-third of Iowans) showed up at the Democrat's caucus: The number of people voting on the "D" side of the aisle almost doubled from turnout 4 years ago, while the number of Republicans turning out was only marginally improved since their last get-together. Twice as many people in Iowa voted for third-place Democrat finisher Hillary than voted for first place Republican winner Huckabee. More people cast votes for a generally unknown Democrat, Governor Bill Richardson, than for Rudy Giuliani.
It was obvious that the Republicans lost the independents back in the 2006 elections, and now it is obvious that they still haven't gotten them back... and apparently they plan on exacerbating the situation by putting up a highly-conservative, religious-right, Baptist preacher as their candidate for President.
So that's an exceptionally important thing to remember from tonight, if this trend holds true (and the reason Iowa is so important, is because that is usually the case): The one-third of America who call themselves independents are going to be leaning way over to the Democratic side this coming election. Republicans have done nothing so far to win them back.
I would guess that it is highly likely that the Democrats will win the White House, but the real question is how many more seats will Republicans lose in Congress this year? According to Cook Political Report, there are currently 22 Republican seats that Democrats could steal in the House of Representatives, and zero Democrat seats that the Republicans can conceivably win. In the Senate, up to 6 more Republican seats might fall to the Democrats this election. All the Republicans can do is keep losses to a minimum... and nominating the Reverend Huckabee for President is not a good start.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Iowa will be long forgotten by next week. Then a new set of front runners will appear from New Hampshire. Probably Hillary and Mccain. But when it is all over I still say it will be Giuliani and Hillary head to head for the votes. Unfortuately I don"t like either!
From Jakal
TMF: Watch out for Ron Paul. If I'm not mistaken, he has more money from campaign contributions saved up than any other GOP candidate, and his Constitutionalist message plays better in the big urban states than it does in Iowa. A double-digit showing is pretty good for him in Iowa. I don't expect him to win the nomination, but he will be moving up as Super Tuesday nears.
Jakal: Hillary was a lot of people's choice because they were hesitant about backing the "unknown" Obama. Now, after Iowa, they know that he can win. Most importantly, African Americans who were supporting Hillary over Obama by a substantial margin may finally swing towards him as well. That will probably give him South Carolina early on. Watch out in the other big urban states with large black and urban populations as well (Florida, Texas, Michigan, Georgia, California, and maybe even New York). It's a brand new day in Democratic party politics after these results.
I wouldn't be surprised to see McCain slip past Romney and Huckabee, but it's too early to tell, as the Republican voting bloc is not as homogenous as the Democratic vote, with its values voters, Christian voters, conservative voters, libertarian voters, et cetera.
Oh... also, if voter turnout tonight is any indication, in addition to the "unique characteristics" of the Democratic field (female, black) makes this election and the primary results appear to be much more on the minds of Americans than before. Therefore, I disagree that the Iowa results will be long-forgotten by next week. Besides, historical precedent (Howard Dean) says that people do tend to remember Iowa. (Although I'll give you Paul Tsongas as a counter example to that, heheh.)
Great...four more years of tax increases.
Thanks a lot to all the people who pay the least in taxes (females) for having a say in who the next president is.
Woe to the usa.
Great...four more years of tax increases.
Thanks a lot to all the people who pay the least in taxes (females) for having a say in who the next president is.
Woe to the usa.
Well, with cuts in spending on the war and military that a Democratic president will likely make, there probably won't be any need to raise taxes.
There certainly can't be any more increases in government spending compared to what the Republican Congress and White House had done from 2000-2006. (Knock on wood.)
Well I must admit. I have long THOUGHT Hitlary would be our next President, I have also long hoped I was wrong. Now she still leads in Electoral votes for the nomination. The more I think about it, Obama might be the best choice for change. He is New to the Political scene, as he stated himself while referencing something his wife said. As far as Huckabee goes…….I don’t even want to go there other then to say he will be the best reason NOT to have a Republicrate in office. Has anyone checked out free republic? They banned me long ago but Im curious as to what those psycho’s are saying, LOL.
Could we see an Obama and Hitlary ticket? Iv watched Ron Paul for many years, he was on with Tim Rusart and Rusart (spelling?) really made him look nutz I hate to say.
DAGO
A president is (should be)just a face - it's the people behind that advise on the important decisions that is the most effecient puppeteer.
Obama is arrogant inexperienced. Bush only he wants to escape the cage
When Americans wallets are on the line they forget they have everything to loose and go for broke
This time America is doomed
Post a Comment