It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

How important is Iowa election? 1/3/2012

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 12:23 AM
link   
I don't understand why.. but for some reason Ron Paul winning Iowa seems to be a win or bust.. if he wins he has a chance, if he loses, its over.. just from my limited knowledge..
Anyway... if Paul loses today, is it over for him? And if he does win, will 'they' try to claim the polls got hacked?

And please, those smarter than me.. why is Iowa so important?




posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 12:58 AM
link   
It's very important to the naysayers. It's also important to get the ball rolling on a good note for us. With the MSM not giving Ron the attention/the negative attacks, it becomes more-so.

I watched CNN and Faux News tonite for a bit. Hannity had everyone on EXCEPT for Ron Paul. Then watched some of Greta on Faux. She had Dick Morris on RIPPING on RP and then Trump on the phone. Trump said RP had the least chance of beating Obama of all the Repubs and that him winning Iowa would HURT the Repubs. Trump continued saying RP was a joke and when pressed by Greta as to name other Repubs, Trump wouldn't even say a number of Repub candidates who had no chance vs Obama....only ripped on RP more. Next was Carl Rove who acknowledged RP but said he didn't think he'd win Iowa and bragged up Santorum. I'd had enough and shut off the TV.

CNN had these charts showing different voting tendencies from 2008 on a county by county basis during Anderson Cooper's joke of a show and they were hyping Romney and Santorum. Santorum almost pulled a "Hillary" and started to cry when interviewed by Hannity.


MSM is a joke and have treated RP like he is the plague. It's laughable how MSM is so biased towards anyone other than RP.


Not one person can say that MSM has treated RP ANYWHERE close to fair.




If you think you can claim this, I challenge you to debate the matter!!!! There's literally hundreds of hours of evidence of MSM footage to disprove it.

But somehow, this is what will happen-








Ron will kick butt 18 hrs from now! Go Ron Go!


edit on 3-1-2012 by freedom12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 01:01 AM
link   
According to NZ news, Iowa is really important.

Other than that, I don't know.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 01:03 AM
link   
I believe, that the candidate that has won in Iowa, has ended up winning the POTUS office, ever since they started keeping track of these 'pre elections in Iowa' and THAT is WHY it is so very important.....
.....the winner in Iowa ALWAYS wins the 'big election'

Please someone school me in this IF I am wrong............
edit on 3-1-2012 by theRiverGoddess because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 01:14 AM
link   
According the the MSM, the Iowa caucus isn't important in 2012, but in 2008, they sung a different tune.....




posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 01:38 AM
link   
Actually Mike Huckabee won Iowa in 2008, but John McCain was the nominee.

2008 Iowa Caucus

Here is a run down of how the candidates have done in Iowa in the past. As you'll see, Bob Dole won Iowa in 1988 but George H.W. Bush won the nomination.

Iowa Caucus results of the past

Basically, this caucus is what it is. It will bring attention to whoever wins it. However the MSM will downplay it harshly if Ron Paul wins. Count on it.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 01:42 AM
link   
have a look at mitt romneys FB page 1.2 million fans, look at the comments from his supporters, all bots...

how can we possibly win when the corruption is so thick you can carve it.

i feel sad already knowing the outcome



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 01:52 AM
link   

Not one person can say that MSM has treated RP ANYWHERE close to fair.


Jon Stewart.
edit on 3-1-2012 by SpectreDC because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 02:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by ReadyPower
I don't understand why.. but for some reason Ron Paul winning Iowa seems to be a win or bust.. if he wins he has a chance, if he loses, its over.. just from my limited knowledge..
Anyway... if Paul loses today, is it over for him? And if he does win, will 'they' try to claim the polls got hacked?

And please, those smarter than me.. why is Iowa so important?


Iowa does not mean a damn thing. If you want to vote for Ron Paul for president, would you not vote for him because he did not win a stupid folded paper, hand raising, yell here, vote that actually means nothing?

I do not understand Paulers. You all seem afraid that you will not be able to vote for him if he does not win Iowa. I am positive most of his fans are not long time voters.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 02:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpectreDC

Not one person can say that MSM has treated RP ANYWHERE close to fair.


Jon Stewart.
edit on 3-1-2012 by SpectreDC because: (no reason given)


Yup!

Stewart has really been riding the media's ass for how they treat Ron Paul. It almost seems like a personal issue with him he has brought it up so much. I dunno, I see Paul getting interviewed ALLLLL THE TIME. After a while, doesn't it start to become your fault you cannot get your message out?



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 02:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by jazzguy
have a look at mitt romneys FB page 1.2 million fans, look at the comments from his supporters, all bots...

how can we possibly win when the corruption is so thick you can carve it.

i feel sad already knowing the outcome


I feel sad reading your thoughts on how the presidential election is already over because of how many facebook friends someone has. Thank god none of you were around 20 years ago. The entire election process would have had you so confused without good solid things to look at like fake facebook friends.

Does this mean I could not vote Ron Paul if I wanted to because Mitt has a lot of friends?

I only see Paulers making these weird arguments and I really want someone to explain them to me.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 02:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by theRiverGoddess
I believe, that the candidate that has won in Iowa, has ended up winning the POTUS office, ever since they started keeping track of these 'pre elections in Iowa' and THAT is WHY it is so very important.....
.....the winner in Iowa ALWAYS wins the 'big election'

Please someone school me in this IF I am wrong............
edit on 3-1-2012 by theRiverGoddess because: (no reason given)


Not even close. It has been half.

Iowa is as good as a coin toss. That is it. And it means nothing in reality. You can still vote for whoever you want to vote for.

These threads about Iowa make me sad. So many people running around screaming about who is deciding for them who they will vote for when that is not at all what is happening.

Jesus people, if you want to vote for Ron Paul, vote for Ron Paul. Let Iowa go. If he wins Iowa, loses Iowa, it makes no difference.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 02:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by freedom12


CNN had these charts showing different voting tendencies from 2008 on a county by county basis during Anderson Cooper's joke of a show and they were hyping Romney and Santorum. Santorum almost pulled a "Hillary" and started to cry when interviewed by Hannity.


Really? Well if I were Anderson Cooper I would probably punch Hannity out for coming to my studio and making people cry on my show. I was watching MSNBC last night and they spent a lot of time talking about Ron Paul both good and bad.

You watched Sean Hannity on Fox then you watched him make someone cry over on CNN. Maybe you need to watch less tv. It sounds like it actually got to you. Sean Hannity and Anderson Cooper do not tell me how to vote.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 04:08 AM
link   
It isn't anything really all that important on it's own for Ron Paul a win there is mostly good, if he only comes in second and doesn't win for him it is still good. If only for the exposure it will give him. For Romney its about the same given his consistency in polling. It won't really become clear until after the results of some of the other states start coming in, whether Iowa was important or not. In most of the primaries for the Republican Party, Iowa doesn't usually predict the winner.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 04:51 AM
link   
It's very simple:

If Ron Paul wins, Iowa is NOT important.
If Ron Paul doesn't win, Iowa IS important.

That the media are already playing down the importance of the Iowa vote shows they know Paul will win and they are terrified.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 05:25 AM
link   
reply to post by ReadyPower
 


Please Watch..




posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 08:32 AM
link   
reply to post by LilithWon
 
For someone who claims to have been around so long as to understand how politics works, you really don't seem to.

A good show in Iowa is very important. If you're a low-funds candidate, Iowa can effectively be make-or-break and kill your campaign if you don't do well - or it can give you a mountain of coverage and amplify your fundraising.

If you're an actual anti-establishment candidate like Paul that the party would rather sweep under the rug, a decent showing in Iowa and New Hampshire to bump up odds in North Carolina and give you momentum in the face of resistance moving forward is VERY important. Sure, people can vote for Paul later regardless, but if the avalanche of organized party and media attacks does their work and stifles a positive showing in the early states to choke out any "Pick-a-winner" on the fence support, such a vote has essentially become NOTHING but a (valid) protest or principle vote.

I know you don't like Paul, but don't come spouting off about the early states not having any meaning, whether or not they SHOULD or it's fair that they do - THEY DO, and the parties and media have acknowledged it for years until it looked entirely plausible that Paul might win this one. Now they are openly admitting to trying to figure out how to intentionally craft the outcome as they desire and to ensure that he doesn't:



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 08:37 AM
link   
Even if Paul were to win the nom, the racist stuff will kill him in a general election.

Paulers are delusional.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 09:14 AM
link   
I don't think it's all that important if he wins Iowa or not. Huckabee won last election and dropped out of the election when it became clear that he didn't have a prayer.

I saw a graphic last night about how the GOP contenders have ALL had their time at the top of the heap. It just so happens that Paul's rise somewhat coincided with the Iowa caucus, giving his supporters hope for a win... But he's slipping in the polls already as Santorum rises... If the timing is right, I predict a Santorum win in Iowa. Many predict Romney as he has maintained a steady support, unlike ALL the others who have gone up and down like a game of Whack-a-Mole.

Santorum's positions are more in line with the voting public in Iowa. (IMO)

There are many months between January and November. LOTS of time and lots of state elections. If Paul loses Iowa, it's just a sign that Paul and his supporters have to work harder.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 09:24 AM
link   
wait a MINUTE... so we can really blame Iowa, for x2 bush terms and 1 Obama term...?

the state of this country for the last 10+ years... is all to blame on Iowa...???


Iowa.... you better watch it this time... one wrong move and the country will fall apart;
and it will be all your fault...





new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join