Says the NYT, in "What’s at Stake in the New Hampshire Primary/Here are the candidates competing in the primary."
I just want to say:
1. 2004 was not that long ago.
2. What do you mean "after Iowa"? We never got to "after Iowa."
3. Maybe that's why we never got to after Iowa — The Democratic Party needed to keep everyone in, so the results were withheld, lest somebody drop out.
११ फेब्रुवारी, २०२०
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
५४ टिप्पण्या:
How could you tell?
the FIX is IN!
Mark Stein last night:
Whoever wins New Hampshire will have momentum going into the Iowa caucus official results.
Dick Gephardt dropped out on January 20, 2004, after the Iowa Caucus on January 19 and before the New Hampshire Primary on January 27.
Didn't one of the Republicans drop out?
The Democratic Party needed to keep everyone in
Why would they need to keep everyone in?
Half the field dropped out before Iowa.
Here’s hoping for no tabulation issues after tonight’s vote.
Speak for yourself Beasts.😎
For the first time ever, nobody seems to have won Iowa...
Bernie Sanders won Iowa.
And he's going to win NH, SC, and Nevada.
@AllenS, I would say instead that Donald Trump won both primaries in Iowa.
If the candidates start splitting victories and the third fourth and fifth place candidates continue to accumulate delegates there’s an incentive to remain in the race. You can drop your burn rate and take to free media.
The goal becomes keeping the counts split close enough for a brokered convention. They can game it.
Maybe that's why we never got to after Iowa — The Democratic Party needed to keep everyone in, so the results were withheld, lest somebody drop out.
I don't know why you bait your commenters with unsupported conspiracy theories (never assume a conspiracy when incompetence can explain the actions). They are already prone to believing the most ridiculous things without your prodding.
End result. Milwaukee burns while cigar filled room in Chicago* picks Hillary as the nominee.
*where half the delegates have hotels
I don't know why you bait your commenters with unsupported conspiracy theories (never assume a conspiracy when incompetence can explain the actions).
Just because they rigged the last nomination doesn't mean they're rigging this one! It's all on the up and up this time. Swearsies.
...after Iowa. (waves hand as in Jedi mind trick)
Freder, I am glad to read you view the Democratic Party as incompetent.
An app paid for by pelosi steyer and buttigeg isnt suspicious in its flawed implimentation.
Trump is going to win in a landslide, so they may as well ALL drop out and stop wasting money.
I think #3 is overthinking it. Incompetence is often the best explanation.
Alternate Observation: It seems as if a lot more candidates than usual dropped out *before* the Iowa caucuses. Just my hunch. Who would have thought Harris would not make it that far? She's been gone for awhile.
Joe constructively dropped out.
OK, let's just say that Trump wins really bigly, and I do mean really bigly, what will the Democrats do differently next time? It just seems to me that they've decided to go down that left/Socialist path, and there doesn't seem to be a fork in the road.
seems to me that they've decided to go down that left/Socialist path, and there doesn't seem to be a fork in the road.
Socialists took it to redistribute...
Blogger CJinPA said...
I think #3 is overthinking it. Incompetence is often the best explanation.
____________++++++++++++++
Ahhh...
Can one be nefariously incompetent - that is the question
The Iowa debacle is a symptom of something deeply baked into today's Democratic Party: the worship of the new at the expense of the tested. Only fools would imagine that an "Ap" would solve all their problems; but there you go. We've got the Appeal to Novelty, Appeal to Authority, Divine Fallacy. There are a whole raft of others following the "results."
Of course no one dropped out. Who wants to be the first man to die in Iowa?
Never blame conspiracy for results caused by incompetence. Although in this case, there may be portions of each.
Remember, these are the people who wish to control every aspect of our lives.
App not "ap."
For the first time since never.......No one dropped out cuz they never released the results.
"Who wants to be the first man to die in Iowa?"
Second. Radar's Uncle Ed died in Iowa.
Can't read the specific language behind the NYT paywall, but if they didn't exclude Republicans, Rory's right: Joe Walsh dropped out after Iowa. I think his official statement was, "Couldn't get much higher [in the polls, so] out to pasture, think it's safe to say"
Second. Radar's Uncle Ed died in Iowa.
Buddy Holly, The Big Bopper, Ritchie Valens...maybe fifth?
The app does offer a free 12 month subscription to Kaskpersky anti-virus so it's not like it was totally useless.
2004 was a long time ago if you are a journalist. Remember Ben Rhodes's comments.
"The Democratic Party needed to keep everyone in"
But why?
To show that they are all midgets who need to be defeated by Mini Mike?
Hoping against hope that someone, anyone will stop Bernie?
Or because the Dem party doesn't know what it "needs"?
1. 2004 was not that long ago.
Meaningless statistics are all the rage, particularly in pro sports.
Football commentators constantly bring up trivial statistics like, "Tony, that was the first time a QB has scored a running touchdown longer than 20 yards in the fourth quarter since 2015." I point out the meaninglessness to my wife with some visible annoyance.
Mrs Francisco constantly tells me, "Honey that's just because they have interns with nothing else to do".
They all win, even with a coin toss.
I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat.
- Will Rogers
First results are in from New Hampshire. The town of Dixville Notch (population 5) voted at midnight. Three votes for Mini-Mike, one each for Sanders and Buttigieg. Note that Bloomberg was not on the ballot and had to be written in.
I'm surprised there weren't 7 votes for Bloomberg from Dixville Notch (population 5).
Exactly. Its like Iowa never happened. Hopefully, Nevada can be saved. The D's are morons and always looking to needlessly complicate the voting (numbered lists, ranked candidates, etc.) while expanding the number of voters. The big left-wing goal - worldwide - is to expand voting to 16 year olds and illegal aliens.
Beasts of England said...
Here’s hoping for no tabulation issues after tonight’s vote.
Nah, I'm hoping some town pulls a Milwaukee and "discovers" a big box full of votes late in the counting process
One with vote wildly disproportionately for whichever "non-Sanders" candidate is in 1st or 2nd place
AllenS said...
OK, let's just say that Trump wins really bigly, and I do mean really bigly, what will the Democrats do differently next time?
That depends. If Sanders doesn't get the nomination, and Trump wins bigly, then the far Left goes absolutely nuts, and we get an AOC level candidate in 2024.
Whereupon Pence crushes her utterly.
If Sanders does get the nomination, then well, going by past history, they double down on stupid (see Dukakis), and lose in 2024, too. But in that case the candidate won't be quite AOC level of stupid, and the loss won't be quite as bad.
Then, sometime between 2025 and 2027 (inclusive), they bring back the DLC (under a new name), and start pretending they're sane
In NV there's a lot of hard feelings that Bernie got screwed the last time. This time Harry Reid isn't around to deliver for the non-Bernie.
You have to get to 15% to get delegates. It is improbable that 3 candidates continually divide delegates primary after primary. After tonight, there will likely be two leading candidates going into Nevada and South Carolina, with third place an also ran. I would not be surprised at all to find only Sanders and Buttuvwxyz reach the 15% threshhold- I give it about a 50% probability. However, the top two tonight will likely accrete more support in Nevada making it even less likely third place there gets delegates, and then the same happens in South Carolina with the obvious caveat that it is Biden's last stand or comeback point.
60% of Dixville Notch got suddenly wealthier this morning.
"I'm surprised there weren't 7 votes for Bloomberg from Dixville Notch (population 5)."
Too far from the MA border, and the Canadians don't care (Quebecois).
Birkel said...
Bernie Sanders won Iowa.
And he's going to win NH, SC, and Nevada.
Sanders is going to win.
But he is not going to win-win.
Greg the class traitor said...
That depends. If Sanders doesn't get the nomination, and Trump wins bigly, then the far Left goes absolutely nuts, and we get an AOC level candidate in 2024.
Whereupon Pence crushes her utterly.
If Pence is the nominee in 2024 I am out.
“If Pence is the nominee in 2024 I am out.”
Ditto. At least the socialist clusterfuck would be entertaining and historically interesting, like living in an Ayn Rand novel. Whereas Pence’s GOPe jive would be just be the usual sell-out to the Establishment kleptocracy.
I'm surprised there weren't 7 votes for Bloomberg from Dixville Notch (population 5)
population 5? Apparently that's debatable
Pence, ugh. We need Trump v2.0. I fear there is no such creature. Might have to amend the Constitution to allow him to pursue a third term.
I think Pompeo would be a pretty good successor, ymmv
Yang just dropped out. Poor guy, why did he wait so long?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा