Ron Paul Wins Iowa

[mrjarrell]

After all these months and no small amount of chicanery from Romney and the machine, Ron Paul took the majority of delegates at the Iowa convention. Just goes to show you can't count anyone out till all the delegates are in and counted.

Ron Paul Wins The Iowa Caucuses At Last - Business Insider

 

[Classic Liberal]

Ron Paul 2012

 

[Kirk Freeman]

The third winner of Iowa? LOL.

Shouldn't it be . . . Ron Paul wins Iowa--for now, until we count again.

Hopefully this will push Iowa and other states to abolish caucuses. They are a laughingstock now.

 

[mrjarrell]

They may well be a laughingstock, but he has the delegates from that state.

 

[hondatech2k2]

w00t

 

[Kirk Freeman]

but he has the delegates from that state.

For now until the 4th recount then someone else will have them.

 

[Lex Concord]

For now until the 4th recount then someone else will have them.

Let's not be disingenuous, Kirk. You know (or should know, with your oft-expressed disdain for caucuses) that this wasn't a recount, but a count of the delegates at conventions as opposed to the popular vote counted on election night and recounted in the following weeks in January.

 

[mrjarrell]

Let's not be disingenuous, Kirk. You know (or should know, with your oft-expressed disdain for caucuses) that this wasn't a recount, but a count of the delegates at conventions as opposed to the popular vote counted on election night and recounted in the following weeks in January.

That wouldn't play into Kirk's narrative.

 

[sepe]

That wouldn't play into Kirk's [STRIKE]narrative[/STRIKE]trolling.

FIFY

 

[rambone]

Statists gonna state.

 

[strahd71]

all i can say is "its gonna be interesting to see how it plays out"

jake

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Let's not be disingenuous, Kirk. You know (or should know, with your oft-expressed disdain for caucuses) that this wasn't a recount, but a count of the delegates at conventions as opposed to the popular vote counted on election night and recounted in the following weeks in January.

With respect, I disagree as to the characterization. The delegate election proves that the caucus system is . . . less than optimal. Put aside my numerous objections to the caucus system, we now have a third winner of Iowa. It undercuts the election and robs it of any authority it may have carried within the party.

Assume arguendo that the situation is reversed. Say Paul originally won and then a delegate election gave us Gingrich.

The caucuses provide a fertile ground of political shennigans. Abolish caucuses and implement primary elections in all 50 states. At least I hope Iowa will provide the impetus for the states to do so.

 

[strahd71]

the system only works when your guy wins

jake

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I disagree. I would still criticize caucuses if my guy, Calvin Coolidge, carried the state.

 

[strahd71]

I disagree. I would still criticize caucuses if my guy, Calvin Coolidge, carried the state.

yes but disagreeing is kinda what you do

jake

 

[jedi]

all i can say is "its gonna be interesting to see how it plays out"

jake

It will play out the same way the "fast and furious" scandal is playing. The masses don't care and the media won't report it. So nothing to see here. Move along now...

 

[iwearcowboyboots]

Hopefully this will push Iowa and other states to abolish caucuses. They are a laughingstock now.

Honestly, the caucus system seems to make more sense than a primary. Why should people who aren't interested in showing up to the meetings held by private club have the say in who should be leading the club?

The only reason why some of the caucuses became jokes is because the people mismanaging them are jokes.

The only state that I'm aware of that truly awards its delegates based of primary voting results is South Dakota (pre-selected slates by campaigns themselves, state convention delegates don't decide it).

Indiana's Republican party rules, for example, say that more than 40% of its delegates are unbound and selected at convention. Indiana's primary rules could very well make us a laughing stock as we could have someone win the majority of the votes, someone else win more of the Congressional districts, and yet someone could pick up a few of the congressional districts plus the unbound delegates at convention (therefore appearing as the 3rd winner).

The primaries held in many states are just as much of a joke as you can vote in people directly to the state convention/caucus that may not have even shown up to a single previous party event. If not enough run for delegate slots, then after the fact the county chairman can appoint people as delegates at will (which the chairman's own candidate preference could likely come into play).

For now until the 4th recount then someone else will have them.

In case anyone is wondering, the 4th recount will be First Ballot at the RNC. These are the actual delegates going to Tampa, some some silly fake believe prediction of delegate leanings based on non-binding beauty contest voting that did not matter in terms of actual delegates. The delegates could turn, but so can more than 40% of our delegates determined after the Indiana primary.

With respect, I disagree as to the characterization. The delegate election proves that the caucus system is . . . less than optimal. Put aside my numerous objections to the caucus system, we now have a third winner of Iowa. It undercuts the election and robs it of any authority it may have carried within the party.

Assume arguendo that the situation is reversed. Say Paul originally won and then a delegate election gave us Gingrich.

The caucuses provide a fertile ground of political shennigans. Abolish caucuses and implement primary elections in all 50 states. At least I hope Iowa will provide the impetus for the states to do so.

With respect, if the comments aren't disingenuous, they are ignorant. I'd personally rather stick with disingenuous if it were me but if ignorant is your thing then you go girl.

The situation you describe could also play out in any primary state that has a good portion of unbound delegates (like Indiana) so I don't understand the point of faulting caucuses when it is most definitely a rules issue for both systems.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Honestly, the caucus system seems to make more sense than a primary. Why should people who aren't interested in showing up to the meetings held by private club have the say in who should be leading the club?

Because those people are forward deployed to Afghanistan or Iraq or away on business.

The situation you describe could also play out in any primary state that has a good portion of unbound delegates (like Indiana) so I don't understand the point of faulting caucuses when it is most definitely a rules issue for both systems.

And the primary states in which we now have three distinct winners would be?

 

[iwearcowboyboots]

Because those people are forward deployed to Afghanistan or Iraq or away on business.

As per some states' rules on primaries, absentee/provisional ballots aren't required to be counted in all circumstances.

And the primary states in which we now have three distinct winners would be?

When has any caucus state have three distinct winners? If you count the media running with stories that have no bearing on the process, then Iowa is your only example.

Winner #1: Mitt Romney was falsely declared the winner of the NON-BINDING beauty contest

Winner #2: After a recount of Romney and Santorum caucus goer preferences, Rick Santorum was the winner of the NON-BINDING beauty contest

Winner #3: Ron Paul supporters were appointed a very high percentage of the national delegates slots for Iowa

Turn off the MSNBC and think about it for a minute. Just because Rachel Maddow says there have been 3 winners (until we count again of course), that doesn't make it so.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

As per some states' rules on primaries, absentee/provisional ballots aren't required to be counted in all circumstances.

In those few primary states that do not require this then a legislative fix is easy to do, one cannot do this in a caucus. Caucuses are inherently unfair in this regard.

When has any caucus state have three distinct winners?

I'll take Iowa for the block and the win.

If you count the media running with stories that have no bearing on the process, then Iowa is your only example.

It was not the media. The GOP realized that the caucuses are a disaster that is why the GOP Chairman in Iowa resigned and proposals in other caucus states to replace them with a primary.