What Does Iowa Mean?
January 4th, 2008 at 01:44am Mark Noonan
First and foremost, it is a day all Americans can be proud of - a black American won a caucus in a mostly-white State, indicating that whatever racism remains in America, it is vestigal and of no great consequence. Race-baiters like Jackson and Sharpton will still shout “racism” at the drop of the hat, but America has largely gotten past race as an issue. Obama won in Iowa because a plurality of Democrats believed he will be the best man to recapture the White House - and the fact that he is black, as far as I can determine, made no difference at all…and in the measuring of the man against other Democrats and prospective GOP opponents, his chances are not predicated (plus or minus) on account of his race.
Second, while Hillary polls well nationally among Democrats, when faced with the true-blue, dyed-in-the-wool Democrats who attend caucuses, it has been demonstrated that Hillary Clinton lacks that magnetism which pulled Democrats over to Bill Clinton time and time again. This doesn’t mean she can’t get nominated, but it does demonstrate that all the talk of an inevitible Hillary nomination was just so much gas from people who, apparantly, haven’t bothered to check with rank-and-file Democrats about how they feel about her.
Third, to say the GOP race is wide-open is to understate the unsettled nature of GOP politics. GOP rank-and-file are looking for someone who can lead them to victory in 2008, and they are unsure whom it will be - except among Evangelical Christians, who have fallen rock-solid behind Mike Huckabee (word is that Evangelical participation in Iowa was double that of 2000). This doesn’t mean that Huckabee will now cruise to the nomination (Evangelicals are a major part of the GOP coalition, but they aren’t a majority of GOP voters), but it does mean that Huckabee is someone who can’t be easily dismissed - and, also, that whomever the GOP nominates will have to pay close attention to the issues dearest to Evangelical Christians (abortion, gay marriage, defense of Christian morality, etc.).
How this will all play out in the upcoming primaries and caucuses is anyone’s guess - will Edwards voters gravitate to Obama, or to Hillary? If Hillary continues to fall, will there be a late-arriving Gore in the Democratic race? Will a Romney win in NH really help him that much? Is Giuliani’s plan of winning late still viable? To al these and a score other questions I answer: I dunno.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Democrats, Republicans
92 Comments
1. Thrower | January 4th, 2008 at 2:04 am
Nice analysis Mark. It seems to me that the candidates with the most positive messages won. Maybe we are tired of slander and division in politics.
And like you, I think it speaks to the goodness of the American people that we have perhaps left race and gender behind in choosing leaders. The Iowa primary is peculiar and anachronistic, but those folks get a better sense of the candidates than the rest of us ever will.
2. Aitch | January 4th, 2008 at 2:17 am
“and the fact that he is black”
Why does eve(r)yone think Ba(r)ack Obama is black? I know he looks black, but ethnically he is white and black. His mothe(r) is white and his fathe(r) is black. But we can’t call him a white guy. Seems the(r)e should be anothe(r) wo(r)d to use fo(r) his (r)ace. If white is w(r)ong then black should be equally w(r)ong.
3. Mark Noonan | January 4th, 2008 at 2:17 am
Thrower,
It would be nice to have a race about the issues - which we’d get with Obama as the Democratic nominee (ie, any GOPer vs Obama means a battle of ideas)…but its a long way from Iowa to the Convention, and I don’t think that Obama will be able to pull it off (this is mostly “gut” on my part - he’s a man of great parts, but not quite ready for the White House, in my view). Naturally, I believe that in a battle of ideas, we GOPers will come out on top.
In the GOP, enthusiasm is building for Huckabee, Thompson and McCain - flat or falling for Romney and Giuliani (the problem with being an early front-runner: people get a belly full of you early on, and thus grow tired of you). I’m gravitating towards Thompson, but I still haven’t made up my mind.
4. Presidential election 200&hellip | January 4th, 2008 at 2:19 am
[...] Does Iowa Mean? January 4th, 2008 Poison Pero wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptSecond, while Hillary polls well [...]
5. Ricorun | January 4th, 2008 at 4:10 am
Back on Dec 11 I said, “… my guess is that Edwards will win, but probably not by a lot. Clinton will probably come in second, because Obama doesn’t have to do well in Iowa. But if he manages to come in first or a close second, I suspect he will start to really surge.”
Back on Dec 18 I said this: “And if by some chance Obama wins big in Iowa, he’s going to be very tough to beat the rest of the way. But I still don’t think that’s going to happen.”
Well, Obama did win big. Consequently, I do think he will be tough to beat the rest of the way. His win in Iowa was amazing, and perhaps tectonic. I don’t believe racism has become “vestigial” — assuming they’re honest, I doubt a single person here has failed to notice that Obama is, according to the accepted definition, black. But whatever else could be said about it, Obama’s win in Iowa suggests that it has become a form of baggage that is not appreciably heavier than many other considerations. That alone is a beautiful, transforming thing. It was a wonderful day for America.
On the GOP side, I said on Dec 11, “Huckabee is not only surging in the polls (which are probably more reflective of how the urban districts will vote), he has high rural appeal. So my guess is he’s going to kick some Romney butt. I suspect Thompson will be a distant third.”
I called that one pretty good, huh? — despite all the negative press Huckabee got between then and now. I wouldn’t call Huckabee’s win transforming, but it was definitely significant. It puts Romney in a very difficult situation. And it could get more difficult if he places a distant second to McCain in New Hampshire. And a third place finish would be pretty close to fatal.
6. Huck Fillary | January 4th, 2008 at 4:43 am
Okay Rico, how does it go in NH? I’ve already told Princella, a big Huck supporter, that if Huck wins the nomination, I sit out. Is there any reason, from a conservative standpoint, that I should support Huck?
Laura Ingraham’s commentary last night, on Greta’s show, was very telling. The Donks at the Hawkeye Cauci were lively, and the GOP’ers were not. Also, Obama was able to get a high turnout of Donk voters, and, IMHO, the GOP increase from that of 2004 was due to the fact that there’s no incumbent Republican running.
At this time, I’m disheartened by the lack of enthusiasm on the GOP side. However, unlike Laura, who posted in an earlier thread about “eight lost years,” I won’t let the results of any election influence my happiness or well-being.
Besides, I’ll be watching American politics from afar for the next 5-8 years anyway. Hope that NHS in Great Britain is available to me while I’m there…
7. Magnum Serpentine | January 4th, 2008 at 6:38 am
Iowa means nothing. Iowa is a Fundamentalist state (On the republican side that is). When Huckabee won it was a given.
Huckabees plan on taxes is designed to destroy Social Security. you cannot pay people back from a Tax fund with-out having income replace it. (The so-called prebate of Huckabees so-called fair tax plan is in ideal, suppose to pay the poor back for their burden of sales tax… Where will they get the money for this? By cutting social programs and increasing the so-called Sales tax thats where they will get the money and this will not at all effect those of the upper middle class and rich) Huckabee will get that income from Social programs thus it becomes a LOOSE LOOSE for the Elderly, Disabled and poor.
Wonder what they will do when the money runs out from paying the Prebate? increase the so-called national sales tax to 50%? 75%? 100%? Where will it stop Huckabee?
I think the Nation wants an independent thinking person, not someone who calls the SBC HQ every time he needs to make a decision.
And thats my opinion
8. coulterfan | January 4th, 2008 at 6:41 am
>>In the GOP, enthusiasm is building for Huckabee, Thompson and McCain
REALLY, Mark?
Did you have a look at the vote totals for both races combined? Here’s they are:
24.5% Obama
20.5% Edwards
19.8% Clinton
11.4% Huckabee (R)
So, all three of the top Dem contenders appear to have generated MUCH more enthusiasm than the GOP frontrunner. In fact, all three nearly DOUBLED the voter turnout over Huckabee.
Is it any wonder that Huckabee and Romney are adopting the Dems ‘populist’ rhetoric? Watching both of them last night, they sounded just like the Democratic frontrunners.
I think the GOP is in BIG trouble in November, if the IA caucus is any indication.
9. Christian Wright | January 4th, 2008 at 6:46 am
The Republicans had a hard time yesterday. They had to choose between neo-fascists and Christian Taliban. They chose Christian Taliban.
10. OhioOrrin | January 4th, 2008 at 6:53 am
while Iowa is significant to politicos, it means close to nothing 4 me in ohio…other than some candidates quiting, so I don’t have those choices.
quite simply, I don’t give a rat’s a$$ how discussion groups in Iowa vote.
far as I’m concerned, we need a national primary date, same as the general.
11. Magnum Serpentine | January 4th, 2008 at 6:55 am
I agree with you Ohio we need one day for primaries just like we have one day for the National Election.
12. FGFM | January 4th, 2008 at 7:33 am
I like how Noonan declares the End of Racism and immediately starts ranting about JJ Sr. and Rev Al!
13. Retired Spook | January 4th, 2008 at 8:00 am
I’m finding myself agreeing with both Ohio Orrin and the Big Snake. Jonah Goldberg has a similar take in a TownHall article this morning.
14. liberalT | January 4th, 2008 at 8:10 am
First and foremost, it is a day all Americans can be proud of - a black American won a caucus in a mostly-white State, indicating that whatever racism remains in America, it is vestigal and of no great consequence
its great that Obama one yes - but I think its ridiculous to claim that “racism in America is now vestigial and of no great consequence” - I think the number of members in organizations like the KKK prove you dead wrong on that. Unfortunately racism is still a big issue in this world - like it or not , Obama victory or not…
15. js | January 4th, 2008 at 8:25 am
Racism will not go away until white are not discriminated against any more.
The cliche white boy is a target of black racism, and the only thing you hear is about targets of white racism. Until we recognize this, we will never cure racism’s problems in our society.
16. liberalT | January 4th, 2008 at 8:26 am
its great that Obama one -> its great that Obama won
ugg - why do i have to make every stupid typo possible…
17. neocon | January 4th, 2008 at 8:33 am
libT,
Racism will always be alive and well as long as people like you continue to promote it. The Klans suspected membership total is approx. 5000, out of a country with 300 million people, yet you just cited that 5000 fanatics are representative of an overall racist society. Sad. 5000 people doesn’t even represent a respectable sized town in this country.
I find that the people that generally point their fingers and call others racist, are indeed the most racist themselves. Al Sharpton, did you hear me?
18. Bull | January 4th, 2008 at 8:34 am
sure there is racism. there will always be racism. but it’s not as rampant as it was 40 years ago, 30 years, 20 years, and so on.
i think a lot of people mix up racism with prejudice. there is much more prejudice than there is racism. just my 2 cents.
19. The Questions To Your Ans&hellip | January 4th, 2008 at 8:35 am
[...] that America has “largely gotten past race as an issue” as Mark Noonan claimed over at Blogs For Victory. Closing of the wage gap between races in America might be a start. [...]
20. neocon | January 4th, 2008 at 8:50 am
The Questions,
So Affirmative action is not enough? In order to eliminate racism, you want to continue to divide the races by regulating wages by skin color? Rather than ability?
What happened to MLK’s plea of judging one “by the content of their character other than by the color of their skin”?
21. Joe | January 4th, 2008 at 8:53 am
Orrin/Magnum & Spook,
I too believe there should be one NATIONAL primary date. However, wouldn’t that also make many states (the smallest ones) meaningless and the few states (the biggest ones) the most powerful?
If one day was the day for everyone to vote in a Primary, wouldn’t the key candidates just flock to Cali, NY, Texas and Florida and forget about the RI’s, Delaware’s and other small states?
It is a tough call.
Maybe have regional primary dates. Northeast states one day. A few days later the Southeast, etc etc. You could rotate the order every 4 years.
Not sure if there is a good way or a bad way to do it….. or if it even makes a difference.
22. Casper | January 4th, 2008 at 9:12 am
If anyone is interested, I’m predicting Romney will in in Wyoming tomorrow, with Huckabee coming in second.
Also, I agree with those that want a single primary date although the idea of regional promaries that rotate isn’t too bad either.
23. Casper | January 4th, 2008 at 9:13 am
Opps. that should have been primaries.
24. neocon | January 4th, 2008 at 9:25 am
There is, and always has been Super Tuesday. This year, 24 states will hold primaries in what is being called Supr Duper Tuesday.
I don’t know why people want to fix something that’s really not broken. Iowa and New Hampshire have never really determined the general election candidates, but they do remain good bellweathers for those candidates on the rise and those on the decline.
25. liberalT | January 4th, 2008 at 9:27 am
well there are many more organizations than just the KKK
American Nazi Party
American Protective Association
Aryan Brotherhood
Aryan Nations
etc etc etc…
So now I am promoting racism neocon? Before I sue you for slander care to back that up with anything. Amazing - I simply point out the obvious fact that there is still racism in America and you declare it a “minor” or “vestigual” problem and then claim that I promote it. That is just pathetic…
26. french student | January 4th, 2008 at 9:33 am
Well I don’t know if it will help on the primaries debate, but here is how we do it in France.
Our election is made in two turns. The first turn, the primaries if you will, anyone can apply (with a few restrictions: age, citizenship, and you have to have over 500 “great electors” (mayors and above) signatures). There is a second turn around a month later between the second and the first from the first turn.
And, little caveat for the campaign financing : the candidates’ campaigning is paid for, in part, by the state if they get enough votes , with of course different rates.
As for the problem of some states getting more attention than others, I recall seeing a movement a few months ago to pass bills in every state (or at least enough states to have more than half of the electoral college votes) to give all the electoral college votes to the candidate that gets the most votes nationwide, regardlessof the results in the state. The idea was to force the candidates to talk to everybody, and not concentrate on swing states.
It seemed to me like a good idea, I wonder what happened to the movement.
27. Brian | January 4th, 2008 at 9:42 am
liberalT, how are you going to “sue” neocon for slander when slander is spoken?
You might want to grab a dictionary. While you’re at it, look up the word “libel”.
28. neocon | January 4th, 2008 at 10:00 am
libT,
Please proceed with the slander suit. I want to see how it turns out.
Also, could you please tell me of your opinion of Affirmative Action. And how, and when you see America achieving what MLK spoke of nearly 40 years ago.
And all of those organization that you mentioned are comprised of maybe 20,000 people, and that’s being generous.
And please give me your thoughts on the following:
We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian… Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an African people, and remain “true to our native land,” the mother continent, the cradle of civilization. God has superintended our pilgrimage through the days of slavery, the days of segregation, and the long night of racism. It is God who gives us the strength and courage to continuously address injustice as a people, and as a congregation. We constantly affirm our trust in God through cultural expression of a Black worship service and ministries which address the Black Community.
29. Mark Noonan | January 4th, 2008 at 10:33 am
LiberlT,
There are 300 million Americans - how many belong to your listed groups? Even if its 3,000,000 (which it ain’t), that is only 1% of the population; even supposing that it is 3,000,000 with 27,000,000 sympathisers, that is only 10% of the population…these people can be as racist as they like, but they aren’t going to be able to effect the overall state of race relations in the United States.
I know you on the left are firm in your damn fool convictions that racism is endemic to the United States, but that is just a bit of leftwing idiocy. The Obama result, as a fact, should make you rethink your views, but I’m finding that a modern definition of “liberal” may be expressed as “one who never rethinks views”.
30. Mark Noonan | January 4th, 2008 at 10:37 am
French,
Actually, such a movement would make candidates ignore the little States and pay attention to large States - our system is best, as it makes places like Iowa just as important as California. We are not a democracy in the United States, and thank God for that! We are a democratically-governed Republic - we are not one-man, one-vote (though some have tried to make it so) because it is sheer idiocy to think that wisdom is determined by a mere count of noses.
31. neocon | January 4th, 2008 at 10:41 am
“one who never rethinks views”. - Mark
Or could we say “stuck” in a mindset? Much like the Chris Matthews rant on Hardball last night.
32. SteaM | January 4th, 2008 at 11:16 am
Do you know Iowa means to me?
The Republican party is dead. You can blame the Cheney, Rove, Bush, warhawking, neocons, world-domination lovers, diplomacy haters, abromoffs, tom delay, fema, homeland security, “bring em on”, foleys, etc etc.
The party screwed itself and screwed it’s constituents. The People in this country are supposed to have a say in their representative government and I think last night the People spoke. They spoke when they kicked out the Republicans in Congress.
It’s not BDS or Bush hatred. It’s not the media’s fault. It’s not mediamatters fault. It’s not DailyKos’ fault. It’s not moveon’s fault. It’s not George Soros’ fault. It is the Republican party itself that brought this defeat onto itself.
If the Republican party is to survive in this country it will need to move more to the center. Don’t insist that gay people are bad and should not be able to marry. Maybe you can insist that legal gay marriage not be forced onto private churches. That I think most people would be ok with. Don’t force personal, private choices onto woman because they fit with your world view. Don’t force Christmas on an already debt-ridden population and insist that it be a commercial holiday. Just go shopping? How about go spend time with family and give LOVE not just gifts that are made in Communist China, shipped overseas and sold at WalMart with lead paint all over them.
Your party is falling apart. What changes will you make? Or will you go down with this ship refusing to change?
I think, without a doubt, that a Democrat will be President. I hope it’s Obama personally but I’d take Edwards, Ron Paul (yes I know he’s a repub), or even Hillary over any of the wierd religous or neocon candidates that the Republicans have to offer.
33. plainjane | January 4th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
32. SteaM | January 4th, 2008 at 11:16 am
Well said, eight waisted years. Will be interesting to see how the Republican Party’s Wall Street-Washington Axis warms to Huckabee. Limbaugh has been going after Huckabee relentlessly for days. Reminds me of the good old days and his rants against Clinton. Iowa’s results shows Limbaugh’s current impact.
Maybe Mark can answer this question. If Huckster and Obama are the final candidates which one will be considered the liberal?
34. Brian | January 4th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
The Republican Party is dead, but yet they’ve won 7 of the last 10 presidential elections?
Yep, makes perfect sense…….
35. neocon | January 4th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
SteaM,
You didn’t cite any evidence to support your assertion. Just complete liberal hatred.
Any facts?
36. SteaM | January 4th, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Brian,
So? Unless the party changes it will continue to lose the American people.
Neocon,
That is the difference between you and me. I don’t need any citations to back up what I said. It’s just the way things are buddy.
37. neocon | January 4th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
Oh I get it. So if I said that the Democratic candidates are all interchangeable which reveals the lack of diverse opinion within the party and that Obama is just another in a long line of Dukakis’s, Mondales and Kerrys that will ultimately lose the general election, that that would be accepted as the way things are?
Or that the Democrats have, in part, built their base by claiming that blacks are disenfranchised and held back by the Republican party and now Hillary finds herself in a predicament by having to tell voters why she is a better candidate than Obama, that that would be accepted as fact?
Cool.
38. Max Power | January 4th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
Out of 365,000 voters
24.5% Obama
20.5% Edwards
19.8% Clinton
11.4% Huckabee (R)
The third place Democrat had over twice the support of the first place Republican.
Anyone want to do some “faith based” spinning of that slice of reality?
39. liberalT | January 4th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
Mark -
members of the KKK and the like are the outright and extreme racists. You don’t have to be a member of the KKK or the American Nazi party to be racist - and there are many people whose discrimination is much more subtle than out and out calling for lynching of blacks and other minorities. Is the US a “racist country” - surely not. However to claim that racism in the US is vestigual is out and out moronic. In a country where a black man on trial is 8 times more likely to go to prison than a white man on trial for the same crime - see the Bureau of Justice Statistics, in a country where there have been 0 non white male presidents, only 5 black senators in the entire history of the senate (and currently only 1), and where there were over 7000 racially based hate crimes last year - again see the Justice Department Statistics - you claim that racism is only is not important. You have a real hard time dealing with facts don’t you…
40. neocon | January 4th, 2008 at 12:48 pm
Oh and SteaM,
Turnout was also up on the Republican side, where projections showed about 114,000 people taking part. The last contested Republican caucuses in 2000 drew 87,666 in caucuses won by then-Gov. George W. Bush.
Also, Iowa has voted Democrat in 4 out of the last 6 POTUS elections. This means that Iowa is primarily a Democratic state, I just thought I needed to clarify that for you.
41. neocon | January 4th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Max,
Read post #40
Highest turnout on the GOP side since 2000. Remind me again who won in 2000?
42. SteaM | January 4th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
Neocon,
Yes, your opinion has it’s valid place in the public forum of discussion relating to US politics. But it doesn’t mean what you say, or I say, is truth or fact. I’m not saying that anything I willy-nilly pull out of arse should be taken as truth.
But people who use their own eyes and brains can tell when an individual on a messageboard, comments section on a blog, a politician, or an entire party as a whole has consistently been wrong. And…
As Abraham Lincoln once said… you can fool some of the people all the time but you can’t fool all of the people all the time.
43. SteaM | January 4th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Neocon,
You’re in denial. That is a symptom, I would opine, of the entire Republican party that exists in 2008.
44. JHL | January 4th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Brian:
I think the point about the Republican party made by steaM is that the party no longer resembles what it was 40 years ago. Or even 10 for that matter. Invasion of the Body Snatchers is an appropro analogy. A great example of the rejection of authoritarian “leadership” is what happened to Rudy last night and although I wouldn’t call Romney an authoritarian but he’s changed positions more times than a porno star. People want honesty and straight forwardness. They also want competence and they are sick of the direction this country has gone in during the past 8 years.
45. Web Smith | January 4th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
Racism is not perpetrated by the majority. Slavery was not supported by the majority.
Without trying, you can hear white people calling black people niggers in every major city in the country. Numbers mean nothing when a black man stops for gas on a lonely stretch of road in the middle of the night and is afraid.
Saying that racism does not exist in this country is racism.
46. neocon | January 4th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
JHL,
Read the JFK inaugural address and tell me how that relates to the current Democratic Party.
Here’s a little excerpt:
Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
And here’s the link:
http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres56.html
47. neocon | January 4th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
Without trying, you can hear white people calling black people niggers in every major city in the country. - Web Smith
WOW.
48. SteaM | January 4th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
Perfect example of the chronic denial of the Republican party.
Mitt Romney, today:
Is he serious? Is he suggesting that Bush and Cheneys consistantly low approval ratings show that people want more of the same?
Denial.
49. neocon | January 4th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
Yea let’s talk about denial. Romney said, had you listened, that people don’t want another Washington “insider” hence the poor showings of McCain and Clinton.
That was the simple message. And you even got that wrong.
Denial indeed.
50. SteaM | January 4th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Ok, well fine then. But do you think Romney is going to bring about change?
51. neocon | January 4th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
No. I had been leaning towards Romney until recently. I didn’t like his attack ads and anyone that is willing and capable of spending tens of millions of dollars to achieve power; shouldn’t have power.
52. SteaM | January 4th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
So who, of the Republican candidates (other than ron paul) do you think will be able to bring about change?
To the average hardworking taxpaying American I ask:
A) Is resolving and ending the war in Iraq, the economy, transparency in our government, and climate change important?
B) Or is abortion, gay marriage, and endless war important?
53. Joe | January 4th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
neoconL
Turnout was also up on the Republican side, where projections showed about 114,000 people taking part. The last contested Republican caucuses in 2000 drew 87,666 in caucuses won by then-Gov. George W. Bush.
However…
The Repubs went from 87,000 to about 115,000. An increase of 28k or about 32%
The Dems went from 59,000 to about 236,000. An increase of 177k or roughly 300%.
I’m going with the Dems getting the better of that deal, but you can go on and be happy with that increase on the Repub side.
54. FGFM | January 4th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
You don’t say…
55. Reg Dwight | January 4th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
The evangelical right wing GOP bigots put the final nail in Romney’s coffin.
56. sleepygene | January 4th, 2008 at 4:31 pm
The Iowa results are just a confirmation of what has been predicted for awhile now. Democrats are pretty psyched about thier candidates, and especially this new fellow, Obama. The republicans aren’t so happy about their guys and that the three branches of the Reagan coalition, socons hawks & fiscals do not have anyone to rally around. A side note about the repubs is that Huckleberry’s victory is the result of the fundis on the right tiring of being used by the party. I assume they know Gomer can’t win but he is one of them and their party will have to listen to them in the future or they will continue to slpinter the gop. I could be wrong but this seems patently obvious.
Did anyone see ElRushbo on Fox last night he looked like he just swallowed a turd. It was priceless.
57. Whew!! « The Krile &hellip | January 4th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
[...] What Does Iowa Mean? [...]
58. Whew!!&hellip | January 4th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
[...] What Does Iowa Mean? [...]
59. Mark Noonan | January 4th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
LiberalT,
8 times more likely? That sounds like a made-up stat…you’re trying to tell me that after a jury convicts a man of murder, that judge/jury will be 8 times more likely to sentence a black man to life in prison than a white man. Does that sound stupid? It should, because it is. You might want to check your source.
As for disparate impact - what BJS stats show is that our justice system is horribly sexist, as 82% of the people sent to jail for a felony conviction are male…and we all know that if there wasn’t any sexism involved, then it’d be about 50/50…and don’t try and bring up the numbers of men and women who commit felony offenses! Thats not fair!
60. Mark Noonan | January 4th, 2008 at 7:05 pm
Gene,
GOP turnout in Iowa was up over 2000 and 2004. So as for your theory: not based on fact.
Nice try - but do attempt to assess facts in the future, ok?
61. Gozer the Carpathian | January 4th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
*Shrugs*
I’ll fully agree that as of now the GOP base isn’t “energized.” We’ve got almost twice as many “top tier” canidates after all with quite different opinions and views. So we’ve got a bunch of choices and splits going on right now and I’m fine with that. All these early primaries can help weed out our canidates and hopefully give us someone worth getting excited about.
Hmm… what’s this SteaM?
“To the average hardworking taxpaying American I ask:
A) Is resolving and ending the war in Iraq, the economy, transparency in our government, and climate change important?
B) Or is abortion, gay marriage, and endless war important?”
Okay besides the fact that is a poorly designed question I’ll answer it since I’m an average taxpayer. :)
Sure, resolving the war in Iraq is a good thing, though how we want to resolve it is probably different than how you would.
The economy is going along fine and the number one thing the government can do is get the FRACK out of the way! Stop putting up stupid road blocks and inane rules and laws in the way. Unfortunetly I can’t name a single canidate who’d do that. *Sigh*
Transparancy in government? You honestly want to know every single thing the government is doing all the time? I’m pretty sure most of it is quite dull and wasteful. Hmm…. well sure then! I’d love more people knowing all the crap we’re spending money on. :)
Climage Change? Don’t get me started there. I can’t think of a single canidate who’d do something HELPFUL for any future climate change. Everything I’ve heard is inane, reactionary, or just plain stupid that’d screw us over big time.
Abortion IS a big deal. You complain about “endless war” yet you have no problem with the senseless killing of babies? While I’m not the biggest Pro Lifer here (Not by any stretch of the imagination) it’s a big deal to a lot of people. Though I hate that it’s a “single Issue” for a lot of folks. (I’m more Gun Control than Abortion when it comes to the “Single Issue” votes)
Gay marriage? *Shrugs* I could care less really. Personally I think all pairings should be “Civil Unions” as far as the government is concerned. Marriage is a religious thing and should stay there.
As for “Endless War” you do realize this is the human race you’re talking about right? Even if we were to remove every single soldier from our army, or never leave our shores there’d be war going on.
So I’ve got a different question for you SteaM:
“Name the top five issues that are important to you.”
See? An open and unbiased question. :)
Mine? In no particular Order:
Gun control
Taxes
Military Spending (Seperate than the war directly)
Terrorism
Internet Neutrality
Those are my top five.
62. JHL | January 4th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
Here are some facts Mark. Obama beat Huck 24.5% to 11.4%, regardless of an increase of Republican turnout. Now if one were to extrapolate those numbers to a national election I think even you would have a monumental spin job to undertake.
As I was watching Obama speak after the event was over I could not help but think about RFK. This impression has been mirrored through out the day by various talking heads both on TV and on line. Now don’t jump to conclusions here. I am not stating a personal preference for a particular candidate. I am merely relaying a brain cloud that I observed. It is interesting to note that Huckabee represents a sort of Frankenstein monster that Rove created by exploiting evangelicals in order to try to gain a one party rule. Hense folks like Rush and Faux Noise and the NRO completely flipping out about Hucks coming out ahead of Romney.
Obama connects with people. Like RFK.He creates passion. Like RFK. But more importantly he offers change. A diametrically opposed point of view to what America has had to endure for the past 8 years.
You have opined for years about how favorably GWB will be viewed by history. I think what we are watching unfold is a complete and total rejection of what Cheney/Bush has wrought.
Who do you support Mark? Huck? Romney? Thompson? Or god forbid Ron Paul.
The choices offered by the GOP are comparable to death by hanging, poison or being eaten alive by sharks.
63. Gozer the Carpathian | January 4th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
-JHL
Umm… you’re extraplating percentages of a 3 way race and a five way race? Okay… enjoy.
64. JHL | January 4th, 2008 at 8:30 pm
Gozer? I like the Carpathian reference.
Here are my main concerns.
The end of the idea of a unilateral executive and subsequent imperial presidency suggested and undertaken by Nixon and inacted by Cheney almost 40 years later.
The inprisonment of Dick Cheney.
GWB having to be in the same hospital room as Brittany Spears. Along with her pregnant 16 year old church going sister.
Their parents having to explain.
Global Climate Change. (It’s real.)
A massive reduction on oil dependence. (Think about how many problems that would solve!)
I am pro-choice and I eat meat so abortion is not an issue with me. Nor are gays as long as they leave me alone.
Christianists to stop thinking that the end is near and getting in our collective faces about their religion and trying to legislate their particular beliefs.
And finally, a chicken in every pot and 3 electric cars that go from zero to 60 in 4 seconds in every garage.
Oh yeah, I forgot. Grass highways with magnets buried under ground for the cars to run on.
No more asphault.
I hate asphault.
65. Gozer the Carpathian | January 4th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
*Chuckles*
Thank you, it’s funny how I ended up being Gozer the Carpathian. :)
I never said Global Climate change wasn’t real. My concern is that reducing “Carbon emissions” and such will do jack about it. I’d much rather see more plans on how to continue to live in a changing climate.
I’m all for reducing our dependance on oil. You’ll get no argument from me on the shift from it, in the mean time though do you have a problem with us reducing the costs to the consumers by getting our own bloody oil? I mean seriously the shipping costs alone are insane, plus all the different fuel formulas (I believe there are 26 different ones in the US) for the states.
What does being a meat eater (as am I) have to do with abortion? Just trying to figure out where you’re coming from there.
Can you do the same for the Athiests and Muslims then please? I’m none of those religions and would love to stop having them force me into giving them special attention or dispensation. One law of the land and all that.
*Chuckles*
I’d love an electric car like that. Though can I have an electric motorcycle instead of one of the cars? Also, can they be bigger than bread boxes? I HATE small cars. (I don’t fit in them for one. :p )
I’m with you on the asphault. It hurts. :D
66. phnx | January 4th, 2008 at 9:19 pm
“The People in this country are supposed to have a say in their representative government and I think last night the People spoke.” SteaM
250,000 dems caucus giving the winner less than 100,000 votes in a state with a population of 3,000,000.
So with a tunout of less than 1% of the state you think the COUNTRY has spoken. You are delusional. It’s the voices in your head that you are hearing, not the people of this country.
67. JHL | January 4th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
Oil is the biggest problem that modern humanity faces. It is a limited resource and as such one that is fought over. I’d be willing to bet that very few of the posters here even know from whence it came. (Seeing how they deny evolution and the age of the earth and all. If they were to admitt that it is the result of millions of years of organic material being buried by the changing geology of the palnet earth that would undermine their religious point of view.)
BUT: I could be wrong and if I am I appolgize.
As far as global climate change, human activity and especially the burning of oil or oil by-products is a contributing factor.
For anyone who has ever taken a class in geology or earth science or any other related course in the development of human civilization the 1st issue that is taught is that sedintary societies were given the encubation to develop because of a stable enviroment that had lasted for ~ 10K years. We could count on the seasons. The rain, the sun and we were able to exploit agriculture as a result. But now, 10,000 years later our energy needs are so great that in the burning of this elixer (oil) has the potential to radically alter our evolutionary development both physically and culturally.
As far as abortion my position is this. Either life is sacred or it is not. To me it is hypocritical to claim that human life is somehow superior to other creatures and if it is, then don’t eat them.(Cows, pigs, shrimp, lambs, chickens etc.) If it is equal then we all play god. Personally I don’t think that a 2 month old fetus is a conscoius, feeling,upright walking,fully developed human and I have no problem with a womens right to chose. It’s her body, not yours and as an incubator she has the 1st call. Rape? Incest? Malforemation?
And yes, you can have the motorcycle. You can have 5!!!
How’s that??
68. phnx | January 4th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
French Student,
The good think about your system is the limited time for campaigns, as opposed to ours which seem like they go on forever.
The bad thing is that the method of election funding by the government, unfairly favors the incumbent. Since the funds are apportioned according to the number of votes which the parties won in the previous election. This favors a status quo.
69. Gozer the Carpathian | January 4th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
-JHL
An interesting view on abortion and one you back up at least with the rest of your view. Too many folks supporting ideas is more of the lines of “Just cause.” :)
Now your veiw just begs the question though: if man is no better than animals, and it’s okay to kill animals, is it okay to kill men? As you say it’s hypocritical to claim that human life is somehow superior to other life, than a fully walking, breathing, and eating cow can be killed so can you or I correct? No repurcussions?
I shall bypass your nice parenthesis comment since it didn’t seem aimed at me. :)
You’re right, oil seems to be a finite resource. As is Iron, Coal, Silicon, water, gold, heck pretty much everything. I mean there is only so much of EVERYTHING now isn’t there?
What I’m not seeing is this “contributing factor” thing you’re saying here. I mean in our recorded history we’ve seen major climate change, and it was before we were burning oil regularly. How do you explain the “Mini Ice age?” I mean we used to grow grapes in England after all, and north Africa used to be the breadbasket of Rome. Not so much anymore and I think you’ll agree we weren’t oil dependant back then.
For me, knowing the earth changes is a major thing to acknowledge. All fine and good, but just reducing carbon emitions isn’t preparing us for any major climate change. That’s my point, what are we doing to prepare for this change WHEN it occurs? (Be it in 10 years as Algore says or in 1000.)
Cool beans on the motorcycle, but you didn’t mention my Electric SUV. :D
70. neocon | January 4th, 2008 at 9:50 pm
JHL,
So a human life is worth the same a the life of an ant? The same worth as a mosquito?
And here maybe an interesting read for you JHL.
http://www.climatecooling.org/
I am sure others have stumbled on this before me, but I thought it was interesting.
And for just a random grouping of complex cells, you sure seem to think you have everything figured out.
71. liberalT | January 4th, 2008 at 9:57 pm
mark mark mark
go look it up - its a true statistic. It is from the department of justice of the united states of america no less. I know I know - one vote in Iowa proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that racism is only vesitgual in the US. Oh christ - give me a break…
72. JHL | January 4th, 2008 at 10:11 pm
Yeah, I have figured out most everything Neocon.
But to respond to my new BBF Gozer the evolutionary development of life on this planet has been that mankind; humanity; was for the most part of our development subject to the uncontrolable forces of the enviroment in which we lived. We lived on the savanah. We lived in trees. We lived in caves. Large preditors ate us. But then our brain size enabled us to out smart the enviroment and the creatures that meant to do us harm. Until now when we do harm to each other.
Neocon asked if a human life is worth more than tha of an ant. Well, not to the ant!
The point is god is a human invention, whether a higher being exists or not. There is no way to prove or disprove this point of contention but to me abortion is as much a function of human behavior as is politics but to mix morality with civil rights is an explosive combination.
Just look what has been started here on this thread.
And, oh by the way. Look in your garage!!!
73. Christian Wright | January 4th, 2008 at 10:13 pm
Neocon:
Everything in existance is made of atoms, so everything is equal.
74. neocon | January 4th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
What made the atoms?
75. liberalT | January 4th, 2008 at 10:23 pm
which ones neocon? the heavy elements you see around you were made in the sun the light elements were made in the big bang (as far as we know)..True - we don’t know what caused the big bang.
Who made god? Oh right - if someone 5000 years ago writes down in a book that God just is - then it must be so. How could I be so stupid…
76. neocon | January 4th, 2008 at 10:32 pm
So you don’t know what caused the big bang? So, in effect you’re saying that you don’t know the origin of life, right?
77. liberalT | January 4th, 2008 at 10:43 pm
um - the two are different things. The origin of the universe and the origin of life are not necessarily (and almost certainly are not) the same thing. Do we “know” - of course not - but we have many experiments and models which point to the best scientific explanation we have of the origin of the universe- the big bang. And the origin of life .
Such as..
1. Plausible pre-biotic conditions result in the creation of certain basic small molecules (monomers) of life, such as amino acids. This was demonstrated in the Miller-Urey experiment by Stanley L. Miller and Harold C. Urey in 1953.
2. Phospholipids (of an appropriate length) can spontaneously form lipid bilayers, a basic component of the cell membrane.
3. The polymerization of nucleotides into random RNA molecules might have resulted in self-replicating ribozymes (RNA world hypothesis).
4. Selection pressures for catalytic efficiency and diversity result in ribozymes which catalyse peptidyl transfer (hence formation of small proteins), since oligopeptides complex with RNA to form better catalysts. Thus the first ribosome is born, and protein synthesis becomes more prevalent.
5. Proteins outcompete ribozymes in catalytic ability, and therefore become the dominant biopolymer. Nucleic acids are restricted to predominantly genomic use.
Can I say that with absolute 100% certainty - of course not - but you can’t say that about anything in science.
78. Gozer the Carpathian | January 4th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
*Chuckles*
Well I hope I’m not your BF like on Animaniacs. :)
You kinda side-stepped my question though. Does your belief/theory mean you think it’s just normal and okay for us to kill a human as we would an animal? Say I get out my rifle and go human hunting is that okay?
Okay Liberal I have to say it before someone else does….
Since you can’t say anything in science can be taken with 100% certainty doesn’t that mean you have to take a bit of it on faith? Belief? The word of others?
Sure some dead man wrote down the words 5000 years ago does that mean they’re worthless? Can you prove with 100% certainty that none of what was written occured?
(Sorry but it was obvious and had to be said)
79. Ucommon | January 5th, 2008 at 12:07 am
I’m going to guess that neocon, Mark, and anyone else that is arguing with LiberalT about racism has a) no friends that are black, and b) probably lives in an area that is very much absent of blacks (i.e. Suburbia). If any of these were not the case then they would know they are full of BS. All you have to do is ask any black man and they can easily list all of the incidences of racism they have experienced on one hand and much more. At least this has been the case in my experience- I grew up in East Oakland California so ALL of my friends were/are black. If there is one thing that perpetuates racism it is denying that it does not exist. I now live in Kansas and I can’t go anywhere is this God forsaken state without hearing the N word or seeing it scratched into some bathroom wall. If these things have escaped you then you obviously live a life secluded from minorities. And it isn’t just blacks either, hispanics are also largely attacked here and I place much of that on anti-immigrant red neck conservatives. If you really want to start towards the end of racism then we need to start addressing it openly and honestly and stop worry about hurting each others feelings and being PC.
80. liberalT | January 5th, 2008 at 12:44 am
–
Since you can?t say anything in science can be taken with 100% certainty doesn?t that mean you have to take a bit of it on faith? Belief? The word of others?
—
no - not at all it means that your beliefs are not dogmatic. It means that you take it to be a working explanation - the best we currently have but always looking for new evidence, new ideas, to replace our current (and always) imperfect knowledge of the world.
—
Sure some dead man wrote down the words 5000 years ago does that mean they?re worthless? Can you prove with 100% certainty that none of what was written occurred?
—
of course not. Nothing is a matter of 100% certainty - its a matter of degree of probability. It is of course possible - but you take it as the evidence as it is a 5000 year old document that has a lot of crazy things in it. For me fossil evidence , carbon dating, and the rest of the collected knowledge of thousands of people over hundreds of years holds a lot more weight…
81. Mark Noonan | January 5th, 2008 at 2:31 am
LiberalT,
I did look it up and I couldn’t find any such stat. As I said, it sounds like a made-up stat, like that one Bill Clinton used to throw around about how many kids are killed each day by guns…
82. Mark Noonan | January 5th, 2008 at 2:34 am
Uncommon,
Yeah, you got that right - lilly white here…’cept for my next door neighbors…’course, all my friends are white…’cept for the ones which are black, hispanic, Arab, Jewish and varied mixed races…
83. Mark Noonan | January 5th, 2008 at 2:48 am
JHL,
I can see the Bobby Kennedy comparison - except that Bobby Kennedy had actually done something in his life, unlike Obama.
Watching Obama last night I was disheartened by how entirely cliche’d he is. There wasn’t an original thought or a bold proposal - just psuedo-intellectual mush; which is why it impressed you, I guess.
And as for your weird math - President Bush got 24% of all Iowa caucus votes in 2000, Gore got 26%. I know that lefties are out there trying to make it seem that 300,000 people have decided the 2008 campaign, but it just ain’t so.
84. neocon | January 5th, 2008 at 7:47 am
libT,
I’ll ask again, since you don’t want to answer. What precipitated the big bang?
The fact is you don’t know and neither does anyone else. Therefore, what Gozer said is correct, you have to have a little faith.
So then why do you feel comfortable ridiculing a belief system of others that you disagree with on a subject that we are all not 100% certain of? That’s would be called prejudice libT.
85. Eric T | January 5th, 2008 at 7:57 am
Libs,
You libs make it sound as if Christians supporting and voting for Mike Huckabee is wrong.
Does that same logic apply to women voting Hillary. Blacks voting Obama. Or Hispanics voting Richardson.
#45 Web Smith- Racism exists, I’m White, I live next to blacks, I work with blacks. When I have gotten mugged, beaten up, and home break-ins by blacks. I try not to focus on their race. I focus on the individuals and try not to assume every member of that race is bad. Because I know it is not true.
Unlike me, Many people who have a bad experiance, don’t try to keep an open mind. If you look at Black on White crime statistics you will see that Whites are victimized much more by blacks than Blacks are victimized by Whites.
I’ll be honest with you, I really would like to move into a different neighborhood, my wife was down the street not long ago, and came running as fast as she could because five blacks were chasing her. I can’t ignore the experiences that have not been pleasant.
People who are rascist usually are because of some bad experiances or being victims. I’m not going to tell someone who’s wife/girlfriend was raped by blacks not to be angry about it or tell him his views on racism are wrong. Some people will be racist till they die. It is not politically correct, but racism exists and people have the right to their own opinion. In countries like China where everyone is the same race. Racism is not an issue. But here in the U.S. it can be an issue.
86. Christian Wright | January 5th, 2008 at 9:15 am
Big Bang was caused by the collapse of the previous universe.
The universe expands after the Big Bang, then the expansion slows to a stop, and gravitation forces causes the contraction of the universe that continually shrinks with building speed. Eventually, all matter is collides at a focal point which causes another Big Bag.
87. neocon | January 5th, 2008 at 11:25 am
Christian,
Who, or what, created the previous universe.
I am really enjoying watching the atheist liberals try to explain all of this.
88. Rana Quijotesca | January 5th, 2008 at 11:36 am
What does it mean?
It means that a state that is not representative of the whole US population chose who they would like their candidates to be for President…
It is absolutely baffling that such a small and atypical state should have that much of an effect on the selection of Presidential nominees… There is no reason why Iowa should be more important than Georgia, Texas, New York, California, or any of the multitude of other states that don’t get nearly the attention that a bunch of corn farmers in Iowa receive…
89. Faceplant | January 6th, 2008 at 5:51 am
“So you don’t know what caused the big bang? So, in effect you’re saying that you don’t know the origin of life, right?”
Nope, but you don’t know either. You know, I believe in God. I always have. But I’ve never felt that I should tell other people what they should believe in.
90. Faceplant | January 6th, 2008 at 5:52 am
And I’ve always felt that science is completely compatable with faith.
91. City Custom Design Kansas&hellip | February 18th, 2008 at 2:56 am
Effective SEO Exclusive For Web Design
Webmasters who believe that there is no need to optimize web design are on a state of SEO confusion. This belief will lead to the failure of the overall search engine optimization process. It is important to optimize your site’s design along with othe…
92. Jack&hellip | February 27th, 2008 at 10:29 am
Jack
This is real good info. Thanks for sharing.