Friday, January 04, 2008

That's not a good start, but keep going.

This was interesting, the results are in for the Iowa caucuses:

  • Gold - Barak Obama (38%)
  • Silver - John Edwards (30%)
  • Bronze - Hillary Rodham Clinton (29%)

  • Gold - Mike Huckabee (34%)
  • Silver - Mitt Romney (25%)
  • Bronze - Fred Thompson (13%)
  • Bronze - John McCain (13%)

So, what does all this mean?

1. Concern for Clinton & Romney. Clinton earlier appeared as though this nomination was hers to lose. Now, she placed 3rd. Romney outspent Huckabee "15 to 1," but lost by a significant margin.

2. Winning Iowa is not a shoe-in for the nomination, but it helps greatly in building momentum and garnering financial support. People are more likely to contribute to a perceived winner.

3. Huckabee & Obama may get greater scrutiny now from the media after taking the "first leg" of the race.

4. What I find interesting in these races is the impact they have on the running mate that will accompany the eventual nominee.

5. Ron Paul got 10% of the Republican vote, which is in no way insignificant. I think that might have surprised some folks that he's more of a potential player outside of the Lone Star State than many had surmised.

6. The biggest spenders aren't always the biggest winners.

7. There's a good chance that a black man will win a presidential nomination, which in itself will be historical. If not him, then there's a good chance a woman will win a presidential nomination. Either way, I'm thinking history will be made by the Democratic party.

My parting thoughts:
  • Rudy did not campaign in Iowa, which may prove to be costly.
  • Kudos to Huckabee for taking the gold. I think he's surprised some folks, but the Democrats don't fear him as much as they do McCain.
  • Fred, you better pump up the jam. You got the bronze, but only 13%. That's not a good start, but keep going.

Your thoughts?



At 04 January, 2008 07:33, Blogger Tony Kummer said...

As much as I like Mike, the GOP is still in a very bad spot this election cycle.

People hate Bush - and that translates to a deep felt need for "change." Obama owns that word.

I've heard a few pundits saying the democrats had 2x the turnout of the republicans. That's bad news in a swing state like Iowa.

At 04 January, 2008 08:22, Anonymous Lionel Woods said...

Let the games begin!!!!!!!

At 04 January, 2008 10:04, Blogger Jesus Girl said...

I don't believe the presidency is a woman's position. I just don't think that's the way God would have intended it.

At 04 January, 2008 10:38, Blogger Oilcan said...

Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy

Huck will get slammed in NH. McCain has been and will again be rejected hard by the GOP. Story will be whether Rudy or Romney will win the moderate Republicans and whether Huck or Fred will win the conservative Republicans. I don't think we will know much until we have Super Tuesday results on Feb 5. Then, the winner of these two sub-races, moderate vs conservative, will compete to win the GOP nomination. I don't think it will be decided on Feb 6, but I think it will be a two man race from there.

For the Dems, I cannot help but root for Obama just to guarantee that Hillary is out. She is a terrible candidate, but we'll see if the Bill party machine can win it for her or if Obama is strong enough to wrestle it away from her. I hope the latter.

At 04 January, 2008 10:45, Blogger Oilcan said...

Oh, I forgot to endorse Fred Thompson. He is the true social and fiscal conservative, and I hope he and the conservative media will be able to expose the non-conservativeness of Huckabee. I am looking for the South Carolina primary results to reveal who will win the conservatives. I know Huck and Fred will do poorly in NH and Michigan, so who cares about those states.

At 04 January, 2008 10:49, Blogger Blackhaw said...

Do you think Obama and Clinton might become running mates? I was thinking that it might be a good choice for either to choose the other. Just think of how many would vote just to have a african-american president or vice president and a Female president or vice president. The downside would be that it might alienate the moderate democrats. I could see it happening though and it would make the presidential race actually interesting.

At 04 January, 2008 13:27, Blogger Jesus Girl said...

I posted you some love today.

I hope you like it.

At 04 January, 2008 18:56, Anonymous RonH said...

Vote for Ron Paul! He's actually *read* the Constitution!

At 05 January, 2008 01:08, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wish the primaries were on the same day in all the states. Why should Iowa be so important? I strongly agree that this early primary influences people's decisions. Some people may begin to think their favorite will not win, so they vote instead for what they perceive as the better of the top two candidates. So, if someone does poorly in Iowa, it may lead to less support in other states. Seems unfair to me.

But, who says life is fair.

At 06 January, 2008 02:18, Anonymous Anonymous said...

RonH said: Vote for Ron Paul! He's actually *read* the Constitution!

Why is read in quotes? I guess he's never read it and this is one of those "wink, wink, nudge, nudge. A wink's as good as nod to a blind bat. Know what I mean. Say no more," insuations?

At 06 January, 2008 02:38, Blogger GUNNY said...


Yeah, Ron, what's with the *emphasis* there.

Are you insinuating something? (He asks knowingly.)

I'll bet Ron Paul likes *sport* ... eh, nudge, nudge, say no more!

At 06 January, 2008 19:57, Anonymous RonH said...

Anon: Those weren't quotes. They were asterisks. Back in the old days -- before blogs and blog comments -- there was USENET. USENET was plain text, before all this fancy HTML stuff. And in those days, if you wanted to emphasize something you put it in asterisks like *so*. Sometimes I tend to save a few keystrokes and default back to my old habits.

My point is that Ron Paul has actually read the Constitution. If you look at what most of the other candidates in the race say, you gotta wonder if they've read it at all. The Constitution does not permit Congress to pay for your medical bills, buy your groceries, or teach your kid to read (all of which it does by confiscating your income, BTW). The Constitution does not permit the President to declare war --- only the Congress is permitted to do that. The Congress is not permitted to abdicate the responsibility for declaring war to the President.

The Federal government has simply gone off the rails as far as the Constitution is concerned. The Founding Fathers would be appalled. Ron Paul is one of the few members of the Federal government with the cajones to admit this (and put his actions where his mouth is).


Post a Comment

<< Home

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting