Democrats Obama - 38% Edwards - 30% Clinton - 29% Richardson - 2% Biden - 1% Dodd - 0% Gravel - 0% Kucinich - 0% A state with 2% black population voted for Obama, the first black person to win anything in Iowa and a presidential caucus/primary. More women voted for him than Clinton. Edwards did well, but probably spent his wad in Iowa and don't have much money left or a structure in other states. Biden and Dodd dropped out of the race. Looks like an Obama and Clinton showdown. Republicans Huckabee - 34% Romney - 25% Thompson - 13% McCain - 13% Paul - 10% Giuliani - 4% Hunter - 1% Not surprised Huckebee won, but am surprised with the margin of victory. We'll see what kind of boost he gets from this. Romney spent an enormous amount of money in Iowa and has a ton left, but I don't think he connects with people. McCain and Giuliani didn't campaign hard in Iowa and are saving it for later, which is a risky strategy. Race is wide open.
the big questions are-- who will edwards supporters vote for? who will thompson supporters vote for? i think both wont last long. id guess obama gets most of the edwards votes. not sure about thompson. are his supports voting for him for social or fiscal issues. id guess a split there between huckabee and romney. obama looks great with hillary coming in third. he has to screw up now to lose it. she has $$ and a machine, but its not a good position for her to have to come out fighting. she will look like a nagging wife or a bitch. huckabee wont last. his best case scenario is to win a three-way race with guiliani and romney. could happen, but i think the hammering he'll take in NH will continue.
I really don't care if Barney Fife is the damn president, as long as it isn't either of the two headed socialist monster that the democrats have out there right now.
I think huckabee's strong win vs. other rep. candidates shows what those in charge of the republican party(namely the delegates) want to do in the election. If pandering to those who value conservative social values over fiscal responsibility won them the last two elections, and this one looks like it's gonna be tough to win, why not go with an even more socially conservative candidate than the last one. Of course, many say that pandering was what got them into this situation in the first place, so this could backfire horribly and lead to a runaway win for whoever is "not republican" Edwards supporters will split 70/30; the 70 going to who ever he attaches himself to for the veep spot. thompson doesn't seem to have that many supporters to make that much of a difference, but they will probably go with huckabee
Iowa just does not represent America and neither does New Hampshire. I hate this whole primary system, where two states get to weed out most of the candidates before they even begin to campaign in the rest of the country. The candidates should campaign for six months and then let every state have its primary on the same day and get to vote for any of the candidates. The primary winners would run for six months before the general election. Wrap it all up in one year. Elections last way too long in this country. In Britain they are limited to 16 weeks, that's it. Our long, expensive elections lead to influence peddling to raise campaign cash. Donors quickly own the candidates . . . or at least rent them.
Agreed Agreed Completely agree. Agreed. And they become so full of **** by the end I want to kill someone.
im still referring to primaries, not general. once edwards and thompson are out (soon) their supporters in other states will have to pick someone else before either of them get on the ticket as VP.
well, i guess thats up to the parties. does the 16 wks in UK include time for parties to select nominee? because technically, our system doesnt take any longer than 16 wks. my main problem with it is about candidates that are sitting politicians. not many of us get paid for doing other work. at least the most intense part of the primaries is out of session for congress.
