It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Only 50% of "opposed" Republican Iowan Caucus winners go on to receive party nod.

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 09:03 AM

Previous Republican winners that didn't get the nod:

2008 – Mike Huckabee
1988 – Bob Dole
1980 – George H. W. Bush

That's right, the "contested" sample size is... six.

As I don't think RP will win the nomination, even if he wins Iowa, it could be that after 2011 the majority of Republican winners of "contested" Iowa Caucuses don't actually get the party nod.(7 to 6)

And if you expand the data:


2008 – Mike Huckabee (34%), Mitt Romney (25%), Fred Thompson (13%), John McCain (13%), Ron Paul (10%), Rudy Giuliani (4%), and Duncan Hunter (1%)
2004 – George W. Bush (unopposed)
2000 – George W. Bush (41%), Steve Forbes (30%)[citation needed], Alan Keyes (14%), Gary Bauer (9%), John McCain (5%), and Orrin Hatch (1%)
1996 – Bob Dole (26%), Pat Buchanan (23%), Lamar Alexander (18%), Steve Forbes (10%), Phil Gramm (9%), Alan Keyes (7%), Richard Lugar (4%), and Morry Taylor (1%)
1992 – George H. W. Bush (unopposed)
1988 – Bob Dole (37%), Pat Robertson (25%), George H. W. Bush (19%), Jack Kemp (11%), and Pierre DuPont (7%)
1984 – Ronald Reagan (unopposed)
1980 – George H. W. Bush (32%), Ronald Reagan (30%), Howard Baker (15%), John Connally (9%), Phil Crane (7%), John B. Anderson (4%), and Bob Dole (2%)
1976 – Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan

You see the last time this happened was the last election cycle, when the THIRD place finisher got the nod (McCain).

In 2000 Bush practically ran unopposed (Forbes was the would be spoiler that year).
The last year I would consider to be vaguely similar would be '96. Look at the pathetic candidates... oof... 25% of Iowans went with Pat Buchannan that year.. enough said.

A Paul win in Iowa is actually pretty meaningless... I mean, bully for him.. I hope he gets the Republican nod... given the choices... but he won't.
edit on 23-12-2011 by captainnotsoobvious because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-12-2011 by captainnotsoobvious because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 09:13 AM
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious

I think we all know that Iowa is only 1 state. They don't pick the nominee all by themselves. Next comes New Hampshire, and then Florida. Now Florida does actually pick the president in most cases, and this year Florida is even more important, because Florida is one of the very few "winner take all" states left.

So Iowa provides some positive press and momentum, New Hampshire validates it, and Florida will then identify clear front-runner.

Paul needs to win Florida!! Cain had a great showing here, and hopefully that support will transition over to Paul.

posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 09:28 AM
I don't think it's supposed to be an indicator of anything but the fact that, if he wins, he is popular enough to have a chance at the nod. Also you are missing one important fact, they are all big MSM backed contenders. If Paul wins or comes close against the media and establishment will it is something more.

Any ideas on other states that he might be doing well in? I don't hear about anything, but Iowa.

edit on 23-12-2011 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 10:04 AM
I've never understood why they still do a 'caucus' there instead of doing a primary vote. The primary vote makes so much more sense to me. But whatever ... it's their state so they can do what they want. A caucus just seems outdated to me.

posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 10:17 AM
Just to be clear, I posted this because a lot of folks seem to think that Paul winning Iowa means he's got a real shot at the nod. I don't think that necessarily follows.

It's quite interesting to see the actual data as well.

top topics

log in