The Iowa Caucuses: Five Not-So-Unlikely Surprises

1/3/08, 11:06 am EST

The smart money — not to mention the latest polls — gives an edge to Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in tonight’s Iowa caucuses.

But take a couple hundred thousand Midwesterners, pack them into gyms and libraries and town halls on a frigid Iowa night, add a heaping measure of peer pressure to the equation, and, well, anything can happen.

Here are five unlikely results you that shouldn’t be shocked to see when the final precinct tallies come in:

1) John Edwards Wins Going Away

No one in presidential campaign history has ever worked a state like John Edwards has worked Iowa. No one. But for a brief hiatus for the 2004 general election, Edwards has been campaigning there non-stop since early 2003. He’s answered more questions from more voters at more diners and summer cookouts — in every last corner of the state — than Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama combined.

(Hillary Clinton recently tried to barnstorm some of the state’s far-flung counties by helicopter. Edwards, by contrast, has worked the backroads — having personally visited each of the state’s 99 counties — not once but twice!)

For a process wherein your average caucus goers expect to have shaken the hand of the candidate they support, Edwards has simply reached out to more Iowans than his competitors. There’s an intangibility to that personal connection. And it will likely pay off for Edwards in precincts in rural Western Iowa where he invested much of his time in 2003 — and where he again outdid his opponents this cycle.

Then there’s the Bill Richardson factor. The New Mexico governor is polling at 6 percent in the Hawkeye State — largely on the strength of his Get-Out-ASAP prescription for ending the Iraq war. When Richardson fails to pull in the requisite 15 percent support needed to be considered “viable,” his supporters will be forced to caucus in another corner, and guess who just endorsed a plan to pull all combat troops out within 10 months of taking office?

Finally, there’s Edwards’ unspeakable advantage — shhh! — he’s the last white guy standing. As one prominent Democratic strategist told me earlier this cycle: “Obama and Clinton are terrific candidates, but they each represent an untested threshold in American politics. You have to entertain the idea that when Democrats really think about who is going to ensure that the party wins in 2008, a lot of people might get nervous and say, ‘Damn it, we need a good-looking, charismatic white guy.’ I hate to be crass. But that’s baldfaced politics.”

These folks are hiding in plain sight in the polls: Some are in Chris Dodd’s camp. Others are backing Joe Biden. Others show up among the six percent of undecideds. As the Other White Guys become “non-viable” it shouldn’t be a shock if their backers break, predominately, for Edwards.

All told, according to the latest Des Moines Register poll, 19 percent of likely caucus goers are uncommitted to a viable candidate. If even half of those folks find their way to Edwards, they’ll call his victory a landslide.

2) Hillary Clinton Comes in Third

It’s entirely possible that the top three Democratic candidates will emerge from Iowa as deadlocked as they entered it. And barring the kind of self-inflicted wound Dean caused with his infamous scream, all of this ado about Iowa may be moot, with the caucuses merely serving to kick the can to New Hampshire… where Edwards will fade, and Obama and Clinton can duke it out for real.

But Iowa will truly be a difference maker if the national front-runner takes only the bronze. And that could easily be Hillary’s fate. It’s easy to see how Edwards finishes stronger than he’s polled. Ditto for Obama, who is counting on unprecedented turnout to goose his precinct tallies. But where are Hillary’s hidden backers? I can’t see them.

And neither, apparently, can the Clinton camp. Surrogate Tom Vilsack, Iowa’s former governor, is already lowering expectations, spinning that a third-place finish would be just dandy.

But let’s get real: If Obama wins, Edwards places, and Hillary tumbles into third by any notable margin, her candidacy could be toast. Inevitable candidates don’t finish last.

3) Mitt Romney Springboards Toward Inevitability

Tonight, Mike Huckabee could well get his shoestring clipped — and his clock cleaned — by Mitt Romney. Huckabee’s a grassroots, movement candidate, and his Jesus-fearing faithful may still propel him to victory. But Romney’s got the money, the organization, and the plan.

His strong suit is supposed to be as an executive, and here’s his chance to prove it. He rescued an Olympiad that seemed to be sunk in Salt Lake City, and he’s got a chance to pull a similar rabbit out of his hat tomorrow night.

And if he can pull off a win in Iowa, Romney will emerge all the stronger for having fended off the Huckabee surge. Before Huck, it was hard to say Iowa mattered very much on the GOP side. But now, for Romney, this would have been a real victory against a formidable opponent — and a huge momentum boost heading into his (vacation) home turf of New Hampshire.

They say Democrats fall in love with their candidates; Republicans fall in line. An Iowa-anointed Romney should have little trouble regaining his footing in the Granite State. And that one-two early-state punch would give him all the Big Mo he needs to tackle South Carolina.

If Romney takes Iowa, he could. go. all. the. way.

4) Ron Paul Clips McCain

Iowa is time for the Paul patrol to put up or shut up.

Everybody’s favorite anti-war libertarian is in fourth, tied with Fred Thompson at 9 percent in that Register poll. But that’s just 4 points behind John McCain — or a hair outside the margin of error.

If Ron Paul’s supporters can catapult him into third place, they will do more than prove their candidate is no novelty act. More important, the anti-war Republicans can also clip the wings of McCain, the GOP’s biggest Iraq-war booster.

McCain is angling to be the Last Man Standing on the GOP side. If Huckabee kneecaps Romney, New Hampshire becomes McCain’s for the taking, and you can see how he just might win a narrowed field against the Huckster in South Carolina and beyond.

But all of that is premised on his making a decent stand in Iowa. Lose to Ron Paul and you’re not a viable candidate. Period.

5) The Youth Vote Makes All The Difference

Consider this fact: Likely caucus goers born after Watergate prefer Obama to Hillary Clinton 56 percent to 11 percent. The support for Obama among young women is even stronger.

There’s no doubt the under-35 crowd are Obama’s base. And he’s done a remarkable job organizing them. He’s hired the former political director of Rock the Vote. He’s reached out to 17-year-old high school seniors — his “Barack Stars” — for support. And if you’ve been to an Obama rally this political season, you know he’s got the star power to get them “fired up” and “ready to go.”

Obama’s campaign manager, David Ploufe, pointed to this secret trove of voters back in September, writing that “polls consistently under-represent in Iowa the strength of Barack’s support among younger voters… Of course, there are organizational challenges associated with maximizing this support, but we are heavily focused on that task.”

And here’s the thing. In the last Iowa caucus only 124,000 people showed up. Obama doesn’t need to bring 50,000 new caucus goers into the process. Given how tight this race appears to be, 5,000 or even 500 could easily push Obama over the edge.

How confident is Obama’s camp about turning out new caucus goers? They’re predicting a total turnout of 200,000.

We’ll see soon enough.


Comments

Noman | 1/4/2008, 11:43 am EST

Wonder if this means Rudy is no longer viable. And will Thompson still hold out for SC, or will he decide to fold by next week and retire to make Centrum Silver commercials. Will Duncan Hunter finally throw in the towel? He had less reason to be in the race than Tancredo. And will the paulsheviks still claim that “Dr Paul” (the Dr title is added to imply his upcoming beatification) is going to win this thing even though he only beat a guy who gave up on the state weeks ago?

Winston Webb | 1/4/2008, 11:01 am EST

see I told you all

Ron Paul is the man !!!!!!
first place !!!!

oppps I had the results upside down,

well he did beat undecided by a few votes

Boomer | 1/4/2008, 6:38 am EST

I prefer to see how the rest of the country votes. One state does not predict the winner. At the end of the day–it’s Super Tuesday that counts.

Awesome! | 1/4/2008, 12:23 am EST

Anybody but Hillary!!

Awesome! | 1/4/2008, 12:22 am EST

Anybody but Hillary!! Great night for America

Eric Probola | 1/3/2008, 11:26 pm EST

I am very happy that Clinton did not win; her presidency would not differ much from her husband’s or bush’s. Edwards has changed his position on many things, and while he may be a liberal today, he has been very conservative i the past, voted for the war, and can’t seem to collect votes in any election. So, we are left with Obama. On some issues, especially Iraq, liberals must work to push im further to the left. He should declare that he would leave no troops behind in Iraq, and would begin an immediate drawdown of troops. He should initiate a plan to allow iraqi refugees in; work to repai our image; work on a plan for global warmng; institute healthcare for all; and work towards other goals important to liberals. Remember: moderation is not the response to Bush.

Mark | 1/3/2008, 10:29 pm EST

Lord… Their already announcing the winners only an HOUR and a half after the caucus started (can’t say how they can). Lets see what happens folks..

Jennifer | 1/3/2008, 9:05 pm EST

I like Mike!
I have personally met Mike Huckabee several times, and know him to be an honest and sincere man. I think his stand on taxing consumption not production is a great idea! Especially since it does have options to still help the lower classes while not hurting those just barely out of the lower classes!

Frankie | 1/3/2008, 7:41 pm EST

it depends on what you deem an “inappropriate place.” ha ha! but for real, why do I need to touch myself when there are plenty of fine ladies willing to touch me wherever I want them to? by the way, i am predicting that Paul wins 1st in Iowa. no pessimism from me people.

Aurrelius Fiat | 1/3/2008, 7:25 pm EST

Recubo, 20% interest is 20% interest. It still represents the same portion of your income no matter how inflated (or not) the money supply is.

Frankie, are you saying you don’t touch yourself?

The Real Jesus Christ. | 1/3/2008, 6:57 pm EST

I notice this thread had a lot of posts, must be more”christians” making fun of Elizabeth Edwards cancer again.

Frankie | 1/3/2008, 6:49 pm EST

Very clever and mature of you to use my handle to make people think I “touch myself in inappropriate places.” I won’t dignify that by stooping to your level. All I want to say is educate yourselves people! Make an informed decision in that voters booth when it comes time for you to do your thing. Although I can not disagree, it is the best place to live on Earth, America can be greater than it is today. Let’s try to make it so.

rutilus recubo | 1/3/2008, 6:48 pm EST

Assuming your statement true, Aurrelius Fiat, I still see a flaw in your argument. 20% interest on house at current pricing is an invalid argument. The fed got us to the point where housing is as expensive as it is. You are using the failings of the fed itself as an argument for them. Using expensive pricing as a reason to stick with the fed only works if the fed is not responsible for said expensive pricing, in part or whole. Your misunderstanding suggests that it is you who has little understanding of economics.

misguided bias? | 1/3/2008, 6:39 pm EST

“Iowa is time for the Paul patrol to put up or shut up.”

What Paul patrol? Are you suggesting that the supporters of Dr. Paul are some kind of mob? Seems rather biased and unfair if you ask me. The only other time I’ve heard this type of insinuation is from random crazy posters and Fox News. I don’t understand why you feel so threatened, but I sincerely hope you reconsider your attitude. Either way though, I will never ’shut up’. I will continue to advocate the ideals that made this country great: the rights and liberties described in our Constitution.

Dallas | 1/3/2008, 6:06 pm EST

I’ll bet that Ron Paul comes in fifth out of all the GOPers. People don’t know enough about him, especially his supporters. In fairness, I guess I can say the same for all the candidates.

Frankie | 1/3/2008, 5:55 pm EST

sometimes i touch myself in inappropriate places

Winston Webb | 1/3/2008, 5:09 pm EST

“Ron Paul has a poor understanding of economic theory.”

I’m afraid that’s incorrect. Ron Paul has a fantastic understanding of economic theory - which is why he sees the Keynesian model for the ponzie scheme that it is. He is a proponent of the Austrian School, along with such economic powerhouses as Friedrich Hayek, David Hume, Adam Smith, and Ludwig von Mises.

bk | 1/3/2008, 5:04 pm EST

obee, way to lure the majority of voters (women and pro-choice americans). RP had me at anti-war, anti-fed. Lost me at anti-woman. I don’t care if it’s at the fed or the state level. How could any doctor approve of government making rules that disregard solid professional medical recommendations? nut job.

eff-u

kucinich 08! :)

Aurrelius Fiat | 1/3/2008, 4:54 pm EST

Ron Paul has a poor understanding of economic theory. His dream of ending centralized banking would do more to undermine the common man than anything the so-called corporatocracy might be responsible for. In order to meet reserve requirements and provide for economic growth, the US would have to dramatically raise interest rates to attract foreign capital. Imagine trying to pay off a mortgage with a 20% interest rate. Home ownership would be out of the question for most young couples starting out today.

Gene Scotia | 1/3/2008, 4:45 pm EST

“Edwards specifically has made much of his fortune suing doctors for not performing C-sections, arguing that they help prevent cerebral palsy in children … Now doctors do C-sections “just to be safe,” meaning safe from lawsuits, though the procedure is not so safe for mothers.

Medical malpractice was his specialty, and he reportedly tried more than 60 such cases, winning more than $1 million in over half of those. Most involved Ob/gyns. Indeed, he was so feared, according to the Center for Public Integrity, “that doctors would settle cases for millions of dollars rather than face him at trial.”

Cesareans in the U.S. had begun dropping in the late 1980s, going as low as 22 percent of deliveries. As Edwards and friends spread fear across the Ob/gyn land, rates began to climb again. The rate is now 30.2 percent, a record high for the nation.”

Whoever posted that, well done! Most people don’t haven’t heard what a shiitbag Edwards truly is.

agree but disagree | 1/3/2008, 4:42 pm EST

Ron Paul has many good ideas
but the reality is that he has far few to little support

The Media has decided the the big FRAUD … Hillary is going to be the next president

mgs | 1/3/2008, 4:39 pm EST

jack b.

study history, if the us govt didnt let the CIA overthrow Irans democratically elected govt and install the Shaw into power they wouldn’t have any problems with us today.

if we stayed out of syria israeli situation they wouldn’t have a problem with US.

We should have stayed out of the korean peninsula and they wouldn’t be our problem today.

If we didn’t overthrow the elected iraqi govt and install Saddam Husein as president of Iraq just so we could get him to fight a war with Iran we wouldn’t have to be there today.

Go RON PAUL 2008.

Larry | 1/3/2008, 4:35 pm EST

People who think a strong defense starts only at your borders should be informed that a few new inventions have come along
such as

long range missles with nuclear warheads
drone planes
super sonic jets with the capabilities to fire far from our shores

and so much more

sorry, its a dangerous world, its either there or downtown LA, NYC and maybe perhaps your neighbor hood too

Morgan | 1/3/2008, 4:32 pm EST

Ron Paul is a long shot, that’s a given. His chances of winning don’t negate the fact that he’s right.

Notice also that the majority of his supporters never resort to juvenile name calling. They almost always use a coherent argument over an issue to make their point. NO ONE can say the same for ANY democrat.

Ron Paul and his political beliefs are the correct way. Period. Will the nation go for it? Probably not.

The reason why isn’t because he’s a kook, it’s because he represents personal responsibility and the current mind set in th U.S. is entitlement.

I’m not now or have I ever been a Republican and I’m voting for Paul.
I don’t care about “the lessor of” mentality.

Look at the issues, study our history, READ THE CONSTITUTION, then make your choice.

Jack B. | 1/3/2008, 4:27 pm EST

right Adrian

Bad USA, we bring it on ourselves.
Iran, Syria, North Korea, and Iraq
would all be resort towns if it were not for our bad behavior.

The UN is full of people loving, saints disguised as ruthless dictators.

We are terrible. If left alone the world would be paradise.

outside of this country and a few other spots in the world, you would be imprisoned or shot for your views against your own country.

Here you have the right to say whatever you want, even when you have your foot in your mouth

Remember 2013? | 1/3/2008, 4:24 pm EST

John Edwards would like you to forget.

Adrian | 1/3/2008, 4:19 pm EST

Hey, Jack B.,

Nobody said the U.S. military is bad. However, it is being used for things that it never should, such as invading nations that never did anything to us.

If you don’t want bombs dropping on your head, maybe you need to stop and think about WHY people want to bomb us in the first place. Could it be because we refuse to live in peace with the rest of the world? Because we insist on meddling in other nations’ affairs?

The U.S. military is for defending our borders. Not for nation-building. Not for attacking nations that never attacked us. And not for contributing to the potential for blowback.

Jedwardo | 1/3/2008, 4:03 pm EST

Dear Iowa:

John Edwards has a bankrupt immigration policy. Consider his voting record:

Sen. Edwards cosponsored S. 2252, the Save Summer Act of 2004. Introduced by Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA), S. 2252 would have raised the annual cap on H-2B visas for 2004 by 40,000, for a total of 106,000 H-2B visas. This would have allowed thousands of low skill foreign workers to enter the U.S. and compete with American workers.

Sen.Edwards voted for S.2045, the Abraham foreign worker bill to nearly triple the number of foreign high-tech workers. On the heels of the release of a GAO report finding no proof of a high-tech worker shortage and evidence of abuse in the H-1B program, Sen. Edwards voted for this foreign worker bill that contained no worker protections or anti-fraud measures. The bill passed the Senate 96-1.

Sen. Edwards voted as part of the Judiciary Committee in favor of S. 1545, the so-called DREAM Act. S. 1545 would have granted in-state tuition and amnesty to illegal aliens under the age of 21 who have been physically present in the country for five years and are in 7th grade or above. Such a reward for illegal immigration serves as an incentive for more illegal immigration. S. 1545 passed the Judiciary Committee by a vote of 16-3.

Sen. Edwards cosponsored S. 1545, the DREAM Act of 2003. S. 1545 would have granted in-state tuition and amnesty to illegal aliens under the age of 21 who had been physically present in the country for five years and are in 7th grade or above. Such a reward for illegal immigration serves as an incentive for more illegal immigration.

Sen. Edwards cosponsored S. 1645, the Agricultural Job Opportunity, Benefits, and Security Act of 2003, an amnesty for agricultural workers. Of the 1.2 million illegal aliens currently working in agriculture, an estimated 860,000 plus their spouses and children could have qualified for this amnesty, so the total could have reached three million or more. The potential recipients of the amnesty would have been required to prove 100 days of agricultural employment in the 18-month period that ended Aug. 31, 2003. Then, prior to receiving amnesty, workers would have had to show 360 days of additional farm work over the next six years.

Sen. Edwards co-sponsored S. 778 a one-year extension of Section 245(i), an immigration provision that allows certain illegal aliens to pay a fine and adjust their status to legal status. In addition, Section 245(i) removes the all-important security step that is performed by our embassies on potential immigrants in their home countries. Section 245(i) rewards illegal immigration, contributes significantly to the INS processing backlog, and poses a national security threat.

Sen. Edwards voted to include an amnesty for illegal aliens from El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Haiti in the Senate H-1B bill (S.2045). The move to include the amnesty with the H-1B legislation failed43-55 in a procedural vote on the Senate floor.

Jack B. | 1/3/2008, 3:53 pm EST

Hey Rand Thinker

Right, The US Military is BAD.
Lets just pack up and bring all the troops home AND then everyone will leave us alone.

Only problem is that when the BOMB falls on your head, it falls on mine and my families too,

people like you will get us all killed

monkeying around | 1/3/2008, 3:49 pm EST

Winston, I thought you lived in your parents’ basement.

Ron Paul hates liars. Ron Paul is a golden god. Ron Paul has a seven-pound cok.

Jim Lundberg | 1/3/2008, 3:48 pm EST

I will have helped Ron Paul win Davenport over McCain. I put up 25 16′ banners and 75 signs. Anywhere McCain had a 2′ sign, I put a 4′ sign. Anywhere he had a 4′ sign, I put a 16′ banner. He had some yard signs, but the kids there welcomed me since they had run out of yard signs, and there was not enough time to get more from the campaign. I saw many more John Edwards signs than Obama or Hillary, so I think he will take the Democrat side. I am an ex-democrat, now supporting Dr. Ron Paul. You guys who think he is crazy are the ones who always want to be on the winning side, even if it means not reading the facts about the positions of their candidates. It is probably fun to make fun of someone if everyone in your click is doing so, but you are just following your “crowd”. We’ll see around 9pm who is more accurate, the main stream media or the American people themselves.

Winston Webb | 1/3/2008, 3:47 pm EST

Dear Imposter:
Choose any political topic you like.
Quote the section of the Constitution dealing with said topic.
Explain how Dr. Ron Paul is wrong in regard to same.

Thank you.

Stand Up Guy | 1/3/2008, 3:44 pm EST

Snippets from Ron Paul’s voting record:

Right to privacy:
S 1927
A bill giving U.S. spy agencies expanded power to eavesdrop on foreign suspects without a court order. Ron Paul did not vote.

US troops in Iraq:
HR 2956
A bill equiring the president to begin reducing the number of U.S. troops serving in Iraq 120 days after its enactment and would require most troops to be withdrawn by April 1, 2008.
Ron Paul did not vote.

Rand Thinker | 1/3/2008, 3:43 pm EST

We have over 700 military bases in over 130 countries. This costs over $1 trillion per year and the next generation is going to have to pay for it. We protect Seoul better than NYC or DC. The Pentagon uses more oil than 180 countries. This is not sustainable. Ron Paul is the only candidate willing to address these problems.

Winston Webb | 1/3/2008, 3:41 pm EST

I am your typical conspiracy theory, anti establishment, ill informed political radical.

I have never read the constitution and I am sitting in my basement in my boxer shorts

I have a minimum wage job have accomplshed nothing in my life but I know everything about everything

Go Ron Paul !!!!!

This is Winston Webb, too. | 1/3/2008, 3:36 pm EST

Yeah, that was clever. Reusing my name. No one would EVER figure out such a stealthy ruse.

Winston Webb | 1/3/2008, 3:31 pm EST

Please ignore all my previous posts.

I just took my medicine and I feel alot better now.

I am really harmless

Voice of Reason | 1/3/2008, 3:29 pm EST

People,

enough of the name calling and enough of the wild dreams.

Ron Paul has some good Ideas but all for not.

Ron Paul will never be nominated.
He has no chance. He is another Raplh Nader type candidate. All of these arguments are moot.

There is just no chance and everyone with any sense knows it.

George Kaplan | 1/3/2008, 3:27 pm EST

John Edwards’ only special interest is himself.

Winston Webb | 1/3/2008, 3:26 pm EST

Yes, what on earth are people thinking?
Really, do you REALLY want a President that will honor the Constitution?
That goddam piece of paper?
Isn’t it much better to let the corporate elites keep telling you what is best for you and yours?
Isn’t it better to let the military/industrial complex dictate how we handle foreign affairs?
Isn’t it SOOOOO much better to give the federal government carte blanche as to what your civil liberties are and aren’t?
Please, check your brain at the door and pull the lever for the “Status quo”. That way you don’t have think - it’s much easier to let the oligarchs in DC do it for you.
Right?

Sally from New York | 1/3/2008, 3:24 pm EST

Ron Paul doesn’t know anything about Evolution becuase he’s
a clone.

They used a gene from Gomer Pyle
(USMC)

Duh | 1/3/2008, 3:22 pm EST

Not everyone can vote, read about how caucuses work

Florida Nurse | 1/3/2008, 3:22 pm EST

Ron Paul for President.

George Doctoroe | 1/3/2008, 3:20 pm EST

John Edwards- the best hope for the Democrats, and only one who offers real change from the special interest dominated mess of the last 30 years.

Jerry | 1/3/2008, 3:18 pm EST

I’d rather see rupaul the drag queen on the ticket before Ron Paul

what on earth are people thinking ?

a disappointed biped | 1/3/2008, 3:18 pm EST

Evolution is not a theory. It’s a fact.

Your are a descended from apes. Ron Paul is descended from apes. Mike Huckabee is descended from apes. Get over it.

Ron Paul was too embarassed to acknowledge that he often panders to the monkey-haters, so he didn’t raise his hand during the MSNBC (May 3) debate.

Frank in SC | 1/3/2008, 3:14 pm EST

” Lose to Ron Paul and you’re not a viable candidate. ”

Well that is not my opinion, its about time these journalist report on a candidate’s position and stop trying to select who the voters should consider as a viable candidate. To me McCain is totally out of touch on many important issues of the day, Rommey is more of the same with no real intent on getting the country back to its roots, Huckabee has had his 15 mins in the sun. Only Ron Paul gets the country headed in the direction of minding our own business, dis-engage the war machine, addresses large government in our lives, and stops illegal immigration. Now what is not viable about that Rolling Stone.

doit | 1/3/2008, 3:14 pm EST

I’d vote for the Ron Paul/Spongebob ticket! It’d be better than the typical corrupt money-grubbing politicians that America has grown to love.

Joe Voter | 1/3/2008, 3:09 pm EST

Ron Paul who ?

for president of where ?

Ha HA HA HAHA HA HA HA HA HA HA
I love these wacko’s
how about sponge bob square pants for vice president while where at it

George Kaplan | 1/3/2008, 3:01 pm EST

SandraL, damn you for posing us with this metaphysical quandry. How can any of us be certain who is who in this mixed up world now? We were supposed to be talking about the question of John Edwards’ alleged infidelity. Instead we’re rattling on about identity, push-pops, John Mcain’s love child and Chris TX.

Personally, I am undecided too - well except for the fact that I simply cannot stand John Edwards.

No, I do not think a little hanky panky will hurt Edwards. It is hardly relevant, but in a state where men are men, women are women and the children are always well behaved and above average, it’s worth considering that even the slightest rumor of infidelity might be enough to cause voters to take a second look at John Edwards.

NonUSAobserver | 1/3/2008, 2:29 pm EST

The election process is just the beginning of the battle, so I would say that each and everyone voting for their president should ask themselves if they are prepared to follow through with their support of their candidate which may at times need to include ruthless honesty. This is something I have seen displayed through Dr. Ron Paul’s actions, he voted for President Bush and when Bush went off course Dr. Ron Paul has faught in support to bring Bush back on track. This is just one of many reasons why I trust the credibility that Ron Paul shows. I am not an American but I hope with all my heart that Dr. Ron Paul continues to gain ground, for I believe he leads by good example in the course of his current service to America and if he reaches the top his service will also benefit the rest of the world.

And Furthermore | 1/3/2008, 2:21 pm EST

Where do these people find the time for all of this campaigning and debating and ass-kissing? Don’t most of them have jobs as Senators and such? Will they be cheating the clock like this if elected as Prez? Who’s running this place, anyway?

abbusa | 1/3/2008, 2:14 pm EST

I don’t too much about Hillary. But what I know about her is she is a hypocrite.

abbusa | 1/3/2008, 2:14 pm EST

I don’t too much about Hillary. But what I know about her is she is a hypocrite.

Ray | 1/3/2008, 2:14 pm EST

“Lose to Ron Paul and you’re not a viable candidate. Period.”

This means that when Ron Paul comes in third in Iowa, there will only be 3 viable Republican candidates, right?

Chris | 1/3/2008, 2:09 pm EST

PulSamsara wrote

“America is a Democracy - Not a Monarchy.”

No it’s not. Actually it is a Constitutional Republic. A Democracy allows for the “majority” to rule the minority. In a Democracy, if the majority are white and voted to enslave all green people, it would be allowed. That is countered in a Republic by the Rule of Law that we find in the Constitution.

Who stands for the Constitution? I would encourage you to find out which candidate best serves the interests of our CONSTITUTIONAL Republic, and vote for him / her.

Murph

Chris | 1/3/2008, 2:02 pm EST

How can so many people in this great country be so obtuse? Seriously. The “Theory of Evolution” is just that. It is an unproven theory. It is not fact. It is so simple. You ask how a Doctor can “reject” this theory? First of all, he didn’t “reject” it, he stated he didn’t “accept” it as fact. Any rational scientist unwilling to turn to Evolution as a faith based belief would do the same. I am utterley ashamed of all who hang on this issue. It is not a fact, it is a theory. Unproven and therefore unacceptable as “fact”. By the way, the video you saw was grossly edited. Fortunately, if you have access you can find the unedited one that clearly demonstrates Dr. Ron Paul clarifying his position; one of not being willing to “accept” a theory as fact.

Now really, what would you expect a man of science to do? To claim full acceptance of an unproven theory? That’s not science, that is blind faith. A good trait for Huckabee apparently, but not for Dr. Paul.

Fair and balanced my ass.

Murph

Chris | 1/3/2008, 2:02 pm EST

How can so many people in this great country be so obtuse? Seriously. The “Theory of Evolution” is just that. It is an unproven theory. It is not fact. It is so simple. You ask how a Doctor can “reject” this theory? First of all, he didn’t “reject” it, he stated he didn’t “accept” it as fact. Any rational scientist unwilling to turn to Evolution as a faith based belief would do the same. I am utterley ashamed of all who hang on this issue. It is not a fact, it is a theory. Unproven and therefore unacceptable as “fact”. By the way, the video you saw was grossly edited. Fortunately, if you have access you can find the unedited one that clearly demonstrates Dr. Ron Paul clarifying his position; one of not being willing to “accept” a theory as fact.

Now really, what would you expect a man of science to do? To claim full acceptance of an unproven theory? That’s not science, that is blind faith. A good trait for Huckabee apparently, but not for Dr. Paul.

Fair and balanced my ass.

Murph

I'm George Kaplan and Chris TX | 1/3/2008, 2:02 pm EST

I should also point out how ridiculously easy it is for someone to change their name and reply to their own posts in a forum like this.

– SandraL

SandraL | 1/3/2008, 1:58 pm EST

George Kaplan, please don’t continue to insult the intelligence of the readers of this column. Next, I imagine, you’ll be asking us to comment on whether the fact that “McCain has a black baby” will influence our votes.

People are getting wise to this push-polling BS, George. Personally, I’m undecided, but these tactics tend to make me more likely to vote for the target - er, candidate - in question.

Chris TX | 1/3/2008, 1:55 pm EST

George Kaplan:

It is always going to be a problem. Tho it’s not a big deal, once again a religious outlook will turn a breeze into a hurricane.

Instead of saying “hey, Edwards is a great candidate, this is what he’s offering, this is what he can do, this is what i like”.

People are going to say “hey, Edwards cheated on his wife! i’m not going to vote for him because that’s a sin!”. or í’m not going to vote for him because he’s not loyal”.

Honestly, how many people do you know that have cheated on their partner, started making “bad”decisions at work? lol the whole idea is stupid, but you’ll have those type of people.

Yes, the population is still so closed minded.

Mike48723 | 1/3/2008, 1:53 pm EST

bhannon…
Dr. Paul feels abortion should be legislated at the state level, that the Federal Gov’t. has no constitutional authority to be involved in the issue. Hense, RvW, which was in reality legislation by the court, should be overturned. His personal views are against abortion, and in view of the fact that he’s delivered 4000 babies, I can understand.

monkeying around | 1/3/2008, 1:52 pm EST

George, most guys have to go to a motel to conduct their illicit affairs. John Edwards could just go to another wing of his 28,000 square foot house!

John T | 1/3/2008, 1:48 pm EST

“Let’s hope Barack Obama and Dr Ron Paul with big tonight, and eventually win the nominations for their parties. If that happens, choosing between them would be a wonderful problem to have…for the first time, voting can be about choosing the better candidate, not about choosing the least repulsive one!”

I hope and pray every day these two will come out the winners of their respective parties.

reality check | 1/3/2008, 1:46 pm EST

When it’s all said and done, the average American citizen will sold out to the special interest groups that finance all of this b.s. I suppose, to some extent, it matters who’s bending you over, but it’s hard to keep that in mind while you’re looking at your toes.

George Kaplan | 1/3/2008, 1:46 pm EST

SandraL, I was hoping that a person as well-informed as you appear to be might be able to provide some insight into the orginal question I posed.

Is the question of John Edwards alleged infidelity a liability?

replyr | 1/3/2008, 1:43 pm EST

bhannon,

do you seriously believe that Ron Paul sent that anti-abortion mail himself? did you consider the possibility that his campaign manager targets certain geographic regions to push certain political ideas in order to gain more support? he may PERSONALLY believe that abortion is wrong, and so does half of the USA. the key difference here is that he will not FORCE his personal opinions on ALL of america like many previous presidents (cough, cough, BUSH). the thing you must realize about Ron Paul to consider his opinions valid is that he will allow each of the 50 states to have their own say in whether abortion (along with other issues such as the criminalization of drugs) should be legal or illegal.

bhannon: it is possible that Ron Paul is sending anti-abortion mail to states he believes would end up outlawing abortion if he were elected while also sending pro-choice mail to areas that he believes that would gain him more support

Saint Subversive | 1/3/2008, 1:43 pm EST

Paul will come in at least 3rd, and if he does even better than that, the story will overshadow whoever the Dems choose (unless through a last minute flash of logic sanity, they wise up and vote for Richardson, who is the best candidate on either side). There are record numbers of new voters who arent included in these polls. If they break towards Obama, that’s one thing. If they are an indication of a Ron Paul “hijacking” of the Republican nomination, thats something entirely different. You can bet that school-age kids voting their first time arent gonna give a damn about the Clinton name, they were in diapers when Bill was president.

Either way, expect some major surprises tonight.

tomdawg | 1/3/2008, 1:43 pm EST

Judgeing from this thread, Ron Paul has a clear majority of support. Or perhaps it is only three 40-year-old-virgins in their mama’s basement spamming for him…or did we get past that yet.
Well, anyway, I invite all fans Romney, Huckabee, Thompson and McCain to consider a Constitutional Conservative who will begin to bring the Federal Gov’t back within the restraints of the U.S. Constitution. Remember, it was ratified to restrain the gov’t, not the people.
Cheers!

monkeying around | 1/3/2008, 1:41 pm EST

Dallas, good points. Anyone who is interested in Ron Paul’s position on evolution can find all they need on youtube. While you are there, you might search ‘GOP evolution question’. I guess Ron Paul has a problem with his views on evolution on national TV. You see guys, he’s just another lying snake like the rest of them.

Chris TX | 1/3/2008, 1:40 pm EST

Christian Mythology (Christianity to those whom are religious), Has really hurt us as a race. From the inquisition, dark ages, to this abortion discussion. All religious.

I don’t believe anything is alive until it has a heart beat and becomes aware. I believe in abortion. Would you eat a baby chicken? I wouldn’t but you’d eat a fertilized egg. Same thing right?

and just to follow the rules (because I brought religion up). Huckabee needs to stop throwing his religion into the faces of voters. Constitution does state “Seperation of Church and State”. Understand it.

SandraL | 1/3/2008, 1:38 pm EST

George Kaplan wrote:

> Does anyone think the rumours
> about Edwards’ cheating on his
> wife will hurt him today?

> Are Iowans willing to put a man
> in office who might have
> disgraced his family?

Wow - we’re getting push polls in comment sections now. How very 21st-century. I’d like to think that internet users are too savvy to fall for this drivel, but then again…

Donna | 1/3/2008, 1:34 pm EST

I agree Joe Biden is the best qualified candidate.

Chris TX | 1/3/2008, 1:33 pm EST

All I have to say about McCain is he pushed for the surge far before it was implemented. If people would have listened to McCain, the surge could have happened alot sooner, and we could have saved hundreds if not thousands of lives.

McCain is an intellegent man. If Barak is Democratic nominee, and McCain is Republican, i’m voting McCain.

Jason from Chicago | 1/3/2008, 1:33 pm EST

WHAT HAS BARRACK OBAMA DONE?! The guy has SO LITTLE experience in the professional and political worlds. He’s a lawyer!!! That should scare you enough.

bhannon | 1/3/2008, 1:32 pm EST

My husband received a mailing from Ron Paul yesterday which is totally anti-abortion - for any reason. He pledges to overturn Roe v. Wade and take us back to where we were in the early 1970s. He is all for individual liberty, unless you happen to be a woman with a problem pregnancy, then you have no rights compared to the fetus you’re carrying. careful of these “liberty” folks, they’re like the founding fathers, liberty for some, not all.

Dustin in Shawnee | 1/3/2008, 1:31 pm EST

Since abortion is a good topic lets think about this. Your wanting a president to leave the abortion choice to the state. All that will do is make people drive further to murder there babies if there state bans it. Since what, 1974? we have killed over 50 million babies in this country from abortions. Maybe we need a president that will step in and stop such disregard for life.

Missiourian | 1/3/2008, 1:31 pm EST

I’ve been reading articles for months online. One of the first I thought was well done.

My guess:
Republican results tonight.
#1 Romney
#2 Huckabee
#3 Paul
#4 McCain

Democrats
#1 Obama (very close win)
#2 Edwards
#3 Hillary
#4 Richardson

anonimuss | 1/3/2008, 1:30 pm EST

I personally feel that Ron Paul is the most legitimate candidate out there right now. If people would research his opinions and background instead of immediately labeling him a ‘longshot’ with no hope of winning the election, they might learn something and actually find a candidate they like rather than a political party. The only potential problem I see is that up to this point most of Ron Paul’s supporters have been exclusively online. Its the actual voting that matters though.

MrLiberty | 1/3/2008, 1:29 pm EST

Funny, you want McCain gone because he is such a warmonger, yet nothing is said of the entire Democratic field, which, aside from Gravel and Kucinich, would be more than happy to put our troops in harms way for virtually any other reason than immediate national security. You are right that RonPaul is a better candidate than all other republicans beause of this, but he is also superior to the entire Democratic field because of this. And before you startdemanding anything from anyone, stand up nad sck around about HOW MUCH YOU HAVE DONE IN the past 12 months to make folks aware of his posi

Campbell | 1/3/2008, 1:24 pm EST

Americans have had enough of special interest and multi-national corporate candidates. Clinton, Obama, Huckabee and McCain are not what America needs.

America needs an American president.

Please don’t throw your vote away.

David | 1/3/2008, 1:24 pm EST

I like the analysis of the article. I agree in particular that if Romney wins tonight, he is the likely Republican nominee. There are some big Ron Paul supporters — it will be interesting to see if Paul really can make a strong showing tonight. If he does, it will make for some great entertainment over the coming month as the candidates battle it out.

Dallas | 1/3/2008, 1:23 pm EST

Uh, oh. The Paul Patrol is back, ruining another string with rhetoric. Take a closer look at your candidate. He’s got two or three good positions that draw all his supporters in. What about all the crazy s#%! he believes. Seriously, a medical doctor that denies the theory of evolution!

I would really like to see Gravel or Richardson win today. Since that most like won’t happen I would rather see Obama win the primary. Did anyone ever watch Futurama? I’m reminded of the voting episode where the voters choices are two clones, named Jack Johnson and John Jackson, who are essentially the same person with the same positions. I think that’s kind of where we’re at today.

George Kaplan | 1/3/2008, 1:22 pm EST

Does anyone think the rumours about Edwards’ cheating on his wife will hurt him today?

Are Iowans willing to put a man in office who might have disgraced his family?

Chris TX | 1/3/2008, 1:22 pm EST

Obama was wrong on Iraq. We should have gone, We have overstayed and the Iraqi government is using us as a crutch now. Hillary understands this.
Obama was wrong on healthcare. His healthcare plan leaves 15 million people without coverage… that’s alot of people.
Obama is a liar. Constantly attacking Hillary saying this and that. (He is only democrat that can beat republicans). Polls state that both Barack Obama AND Hillary Clinton have at least a 3% spread over all other republicans. (not to mention the attacks like the Bhutto assassination drawn back to Clinton’s vote on Iraq).
Obama is new, and it shows with his childlike mentallity (We’re not doing this again, it’s now or never). So… what you’re saying is that if you don’t get picked for my dodgeball team, you’re taking your big red ball and going home?

Obama says he can bring about change. There is no doubt in my mind this man wants change, but just as his “healthcare program”, he doesn’t “know” how to get there.

Hillary is known for walking on both sides of the aisles, working with democrats and republicans alike to get things done.

She knows what she’s doing, she’s been doing this for alot longer than Obama has. And personally, I feel pretty good about seeing Bill back in the White House.

another thing about Obama and Hillary.

Hillary is in support of NASA and wants to increase funding for future exploration / mars missions outside of the upcoming lunar missions.

Obama wants to cut NASA funding for a new education program…

Those who have jumped onto the Barack Obama bandwagon are in for a bumpy ride. I am 1 person who would much rather vote for McCain or Romney than Barak. A life long Democrat voting republican. *sigh*

Jimmy Cardwell | 1/3/2008, 1:20 pm EST

said by: read in between the lines

Clarification on Ron Paul’s protection of our “rights”–he wants to protect all except a woman’s right to choose. Half of the population is clearly not intelligent to choose what we do with our bodies.

Thanks Obama, for believing in my ability to make decisions.
—————— —————–
read in between the lines,

Making babies is not magic.
They figured out what caused it a long time ago.
Maybe you should consider more important things when picking the leader of our country.

A woman also has the right to choose to keep her legs together.

JimMontana | 1/3/2008, 1:19 pm EST

The Iowa caucus goers, I hope, are like me. My wife and I gave 60 hours a week for the last four years, down in the trenches working for national and local Democratic candidates. Here is what I see:
When the Christian right took over the Republican Party the secular “businessman Republicans” needed a new party to operate in. You guessed it, the Democratic Party. Clinton and Obama are acceptable candidates to these powers. Both will play ball with the corporate capitalist overlords whose goal is simple: cheap labor any way they can get it.
The Iowa caucus goers who have their eyes open know we need a true populist if we are going to save the middle class from extinction. That’s Edwards.

Randy | 1/3/2008, 1:16 pm EST

If Bush and Hillary are ’sane’, maybe we finally need a crazy president.

Go Ron Go!

Michael | 1/3/2008, 1:16 pm EST

Ron Paul is pro-life but will NOT try to pass legislation to ban abortion. Why do people fail to understand this simple fact? Because they haven’t done their research. Period. It’s a state issue, NOT a federal issue.

Scarlet_Fox | 1/3/2008, 1:14 pm EST

Further Clarification to Ron Paul. He is personally pro-life, and as he is a doctor I can see why. His stance on abortion is that it is a State’s rights issue, not a federal one, to make the decision on the legality/illegality of abortion. Why should the federal government dictate your morals?

Scarlet_Fox | 1/3/2008, 1:14 pm EST

Further Clarification to Ron Paul. He is personally pro-life, and as he is a doctor I can see why. His stance on abortion is that it is a State’s rights issue, not a federal one, to make the decide the legality/illegality of abortion. Why should the federal government dictate your morals?

just another a s s hole | 1/3/2008, 1:12 pm EST

Ed, don’t forget Ron Paul. He has oodles of integrity. He would have invented integrity if God had not actually bestowed it upon him.

Between the lines, Ron Paul might not accept your right to vacuum douche, but he thanks your for reducing things to that level. It’s much easier to gain influence among the lower orders when things are simplified for them.

Vince | 1/3/2008, 1:11 pm EST

The federal government that protects your right to choose can just as easily take it away. That’s why we have a federal republic. Leave the decision to the states, as the constitutions says.

Bob Brereton | 1/3/2008, 1:08 pm EST

Ron Paul is the only cadidate that has actually stated what would change.Others just say they are for change but dont state what that would actually be.
Ron Paul stands for America.
Seems to me he is the only choice.

Jimmy Cardwell | 1/3/2008, 1:06 pm EST

PulSamsara,

There seems to be some confusion as to what form of government is practiced in “The Republic of the United States of America”. The U.S. is a constitutional republic tempered by a representative democracy and is not a democracy, it has never been a democracy and I hope to God that it never becomes one.

Our founding fathers hated democracy and so do I.

Mike | 1/3/2008, 1:04 pm EST

Las Vegas thinks Dr. Paul has a better chance of becoming president than Mr. Edwards.

They may be on to something.

Ed | 1/3/2008, 1:02 pm EST

I’m from Illinois

Here in Illinois we are asking just one question about Obama.

Who is he…and where did he come from. He got elected here but we still can’t figure out who he is or what he has ever done for us.

read in between the lines | 1/3/2008, 1:00 pm EST

Clarification on Ron Paul’s protection of our “rights”–he wants to protect all except a woman’s right to choose. Half of the population is clearly not intelligent to choose what we do with our bodies.

Thanks Obama, for believing in my ability to make decisions.

Ed | 1/3/2008, 12:57 pm EST

Someone named Mike wrote, “Huck is a bigot. I hope he’s done after today.”

You must have spent a great deal of time and over worked all three of your brain cells to come up with that.

Mike Huckabee is the first person of real integrity that has come along in years. And this is a big deal and very unusual in the state of our political system which has morphed into something sick and twisted. In order to get elected you must tell everyone what they want to hear and once elected, the job is not about what’s good for the people but what will get you elected next time around.

Getting good legislation through our system is impossible…everyone wants their pork project attached, that is if you want their positive vote for your important legislation, we are at the point where it’s just not worth it. We need more men and women of character in our political system who will stand up to these crocks wasting our money and who will remember who he/she works for.

I believe Mike Huckabee to be the first man to come along since Ronald Regan who will not just follow the flow…but will do what is right for America no matter how it effects him personally.

RAUL | 1/3/2008, 12:57 pm EST

BARACK AND ROLL IN 2008. LETS BRING BRAINS TO THE WHITE HOUSE THEY HAVE BEEN MISSING FOR OVER 7 YEARS. OBAMA IS SMART, HAS GREAT CHARACTER, AND WILL BRING AMERICA BACK TO LEADERSHIP IN THE WORLD ON ISSUES. GO BARACK AND ROLL…

James | 1/3/2008, 12:56 pm EST

It’s so funny to hear the MSM try to minimize Ron Paul. Are you going to call John McCain “fringe” when Paul pwnds him later tonight? Please do so!

Tony Roberts | 1/3/2008, 12:55 pm EST

I do not care who wins on the Republican side provided it is not McCain. He has the same sense of entitlement, poor temperment, petulance and stridency as the current “decider.” A life long Dem., I actually like Romney. Please Please Please ABM (Anybody But McVain).

kindly | 1/3/2008, 12:54 pm EST

best outcome for ‘08–ron paul for president and an ALMOST veto proof democratic house and senate. then we’ll have some real issues debates laid before the public

Us | 1/3/2008, 12:53 pm EST

We are prejudiced!

George Kaplan | 1/3/2008, 12:52 pm EST

EDWARDS IS THE REAL HUCKSTER AMONG TODAY’S CANDIDATES:

He is willing to mislead the public about his Iraq policy. Remember 2013?

John Edwards claims to be the champion of the underprivliged, while he constructs a $6 million, 28,200 square foot home!

Edwards claims to be a champion of American manufacturing yet he supported NAFTA as of 2004, he voted in favor of the Andean trade agreement, he voted in favor of easing trade relations with China.

Andrew Meyer | 1/3/2008, 12:49 pm EST

Ron Paul will win in Iowa. Does that make every other Republican “not viable”? Let’s hope so.

donttasermeblog.blog spot. com

kelly | 1/3/2008, 12:47 pm EST

NO more Clinton dynasty, Mc Cain’s politics of fear, Edwards Phony tactics and corrupted Health Industry.

Also its time to end 20 years of Clinton/Bush political dynasty.

!!! ITS TIME FOR CHANGE !!!

BARACK OBAMA WAS RIGHT ON IRAQ.

BARACK OBAMA WAS RIGHT ON IRAN.

BARACK OBAMA WAS RIGHT ON PAKISTAN.

BARACK OBAMA HAS RIGHT JUDGEMENT FROM THE BEGINNING.

BARACK OBAMA’s JUDGEMENT TRIUMPHS OVER HILLARY’s WRONG EXPERIENCE.

Ken | 1/3/2008, 12:45 pm EST

Great article, and I actually laughed out loud at the “— shhh! — he’s the last white guy standing” comment. As an American (with brown skin), I’ve been saying that to myself all along. I think some Americans (with beige skin) may not be ready to cast a vote for a female or non-beige skin male as POTUS, and John Edwards would reap the benefit of the closed mindedness of that group of voters. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see what happens!

Tom | 1/3/2008, 12:45 pm EST

I think JOe Biden is the most experienced and honest candidate ruinning today. Good Luck Joe.

Tom | 1/3/2008, 12:45 pm EST

I think JOe Biden is the most experienced and honest candidate ruinning today. Good Luck Joe.

Shiv | 1/3/2008, 12:44 pm EST

Let’s hope Barack Obama and Dr Ron Paul with big tonight, and eventually win the nominations for their parties. If that happens, choosing between them would be a wonderful problem to have…for the first time, voting can be about choosing the better candidate, not about choosing the least repulsive one!

andyman | 1/3/2008, 12:44 pm EST

John Edwards will go all. the. way.

ray | 1/3/2008, 12:43 pm EST

Sure Romney could win, after all Hes got a cult following.

jdelkins | 1/3/2008, 12:43 pm EST

Nice article. Some of the people who commented here make me want to consider moving to Canada more than the 99 percent idiots that are running for office. Paul and Gravel!

Lifelong Iowan-Female-50+ | 1/3/2008, 12:42 pm EST

It’s not just the younger voters who are behind Obama..even those who were born before Watergate are backing him. Many of my peers– well-educated, hard-working, middle-aged Iowans — are caucusing for the first time to put him into the white house. We’ll see tonight and, further down the road, we hope to see President Barack Obama leading this country!

Lifelong Iowan-Female-50+ | 1/3/2008, 12:42 pm EST

It’s not just the younger voters who are behind Obama..even those who were born before Watergate are backing him. Many of my peers– well-educated, hard-working, middle-aged Iowans — are caucusing for the first time to put him into the white house. We’ll see tonight and, further down the road, we hope to see President Barack Obama leading this country!

cedieke,ca | 1/3/2008, 12:41 pm EST

hi roman,
you voted for Bush twice. That was a big mistake. This time you are supporting Ron Paul. I believe that is a big mistake to. If you do your research you will find that the democrates have far superior candidates.

Bill Cribben | 1/3/2008, 12:36 pm EST

Hilary Clinton does not like to lose . Let us hope she does finish a weak third. That will make a wounded sore sport willing to escalate the campaign to new levels of mudslinging and suddenly make the whole process interesting. Otherwise we are destined for an endless election season with a mealy mouthed conservative elitist (Romney) sputtering silliness versus a liberal elitist (Clinton) spewing sanctimony. Such a contest would be tantamount to disembowelment without anesthesia.

notley maddox | 1/3/2008, 12:33 pm EST

what a cheap shot at dr paul…. while on the one hand acknowledging that his candidacy is viable you implicitly throw the same mud that the mainstream media has been lobbing for months now… fringe… radical… no chance… blah blah blah

look at the fund raising. look at the early caucus votes. look at the rapid rise in profile and exposure. understand the desire for change and also don’t assume that every person who is dissatisfied with the current mess in washington shares your view that more of the fdr revolution is what, we as a country, need.

Right Again | 1/3/2008, 12:33 pm EST

You clearly understand Democratic politics, but have very little understanding of Republican politics. Huckabee will win and Romney will face a long uphill battle to get back in the race. A Huckabee win will help McCain to increase his margin of victory in New Hampshire and setup a showdown in South Carolina to establish the front runner going forward. Sound familiar. Hard to bet against Huckabee in South Carolina, but it is very hard to bet against McCain’s money and experience come Super Tuesday. Ron Paul’s message is a welcome talking point, but a viable candidacy is hard to imagine past Super Tuesday.

Jethro Bodine | 1/3/2008, 12:31 pm EST

PulSamsara. America is not a democracy. It’s a republic.

Ron Paul the people’s choice for 2008.

Jim | 1/3/2008, 12:30 pm EST

I find all of this speculation hilarious…………..NOBODY knows what will happen and why doesn’t everybody re-read this article of personal opinion predictions the day after the vote is out?

Good article | 1/3/2008, 12:29 pm EST

–As Edwards and friends spread fear across the Ob/gyn land, rates began to climb again. The rate is now 30.2 percent, a record high for the nation.–

More women choose C-Sections now on an individual basis for their own individual reasons - not because of John Edwards.

Great article!

NR1217 | 1/3/2008, 12:27 pm EST

Uh oh, by not massaging the facts you’ve freaked out the Ron Paulies. All the back woods “get-off-my-landers” are gonna come for you, bro.

The Cherry Coke News | 1/3/2008, 12:26 pm EST

An extremely un-informed article. Why did rolling stone hire you again? This sort of political slander is atypical of a rolling stone article.

Adam | 1/3/2008, 12:24 pm EST

I m afraid Obama wins the nomination becasue more than likely Romney would be president for at least 4 years!

Matt, MN | 1/3/2008, 12:24 pm EST

Nice article. It is great to read an opinion on the current hype that is going on. Look forward to the results I am sure there will be a surprise curve ball somewhere.

Sheik.Jabouti | 1/3/2008, 12:24 pm EST

Another prediction: Biden will beat Clinton, barely. Clinton 4th.

Adam | 1/3/2008, 12:24 pm EST

I m afraid Obama wins the nomination and more than likely Romney would be president for at least 4 years!

jonesy | 1/3/2008, 12:22 pm EST

There has to be a better way to pick a presidential candidate. How can the fellow who couldn’t carry his own state in the last election be on top in Iowa. Plus where’s his day job???? Hilary and Obama are busy in the Senate and can’t spend all their time shaking hands with everyone in Iowa. We need to be sure that more of the US has a say so in the choice of a candidate.

Adrian | 1/3/2008, 12:22 pm EST

You can keep Ron Paul of the news and broadcasts and etc etc etc. Don’t forget that people are the power and we do hope that Americans will wake up and see who’s who! Ron Paul never voted to raise taxes! Ron paul never voted to invade another country! Ron Paul cares about your liberty.

Ron Paul is the revolution!

Google Ron Paul

Ps: And this is not coming from a campagne worker , this comes for a regular person who fears about his future and his kids future in this country….

Thank you

Alex Encandar | 1/3/2008, 12:22 pm EST

Oh, and I don’t care which democrat wins, they are all (well, the top 3 anyways) so similar that I’m ok with any of them. Who I DO hope wins is Romney, because Huckabee is amazing and there’s no way Romney is compition for any of teh democrats.

goingtocaucus | 1/3/2008, 12:20 pm EST

Sandy, what makes you think anyone can caucus in Iowa? This just isn’t true.

Alex Encandar | 1/3/2008, 12:20 pm EST

Roman…you may NOT want to mention you voted for Bush twice, once maybe, but twice, that just shows you do NOT have the best choice in politicians.

Ron Paul seems ok, but I don’t believe this article is being biased in calling him a long shot, as it said the polls show him at 9%.

Ed - Costa Mesa, CA | 1/3/2008, 12:20 pm EST

I don’t quite understand what it is that the media gets out of minimizing Dr. Paul and continuing the status quo. I thought the news people thrive on shaking things up and reporting on the story you might not otherwise know. Dr. Paul is that story. His voting record and the simple truth that come out of his mouth EVERYTIME he speaks is what makes him special. He deserves far more respoect from the media.

Alex Encandar | 1/3/2008, 12:20 pm EST

Roman…you may NOT want to mention you voted for Bush twice, once maybe, but twice, that just shows you do NOT have the best choice in politicians.

Ron Paul seems ok, but I don’t believe this article is being biased in calling him a long shot, as it said the polls show him at 9%.

Justin | 1/3/2008, 12:19 pm EST

Calvin VA, Ron Paul is a joke that only the completly out of touch take seriously. Lose to Ron Paul, and our country is crazier than we thought.

Carl Zeiss | 1/3/2008, 12:19 pm EST

Perhaps BSE (mad-cow) is highly underestimated in America; or maybe it’s the fluoride…

brenda OK | 1/3/2008, 12:18 pm EST

Ron Paul will win
It will be nice to show the public media that they cannot control the voters

Jed Clampett | 1/3/2008, 12:18 pm EST

you would think that those that voted for Bush would have realized their facility for being duped and would just avoid voting altogether.

lets see | 1/3/2008, 12:17 pm EST

Huckabee is the man!

He not only has ideas but ways (and common sense) to work them….show me that with any other canidate..especially Obama and Clinton….I’ve never heard such day dreamers in my life! Anybody can stand up and say this is how it should be, but how are they gonna get us there.

Emlyn Addison | 1/3/2008, 12:15 pm EST

As a white South African expatriate I can say with some certainty that Obama’s stratospheric rise to popularity is no less unsurprising in a country at odds with itself like America as it was with Mandela’s ascendancy to the throne of popular opinion in the last days of Apartheid.

Faced with such overwhelming evidence of a country on the wrong path, Americans should be careful not to underestimate the resolve of their countrymen to alter that course.

This American will be casting his vote for “that skinny kid with the funny name”.

hmmm | 1/3/2008, 12:14 pm EST

Sounds like an another clueless democrat wrote this article….

hmmm | 1/3/2008, 12:13 pm EST

Sounds like an another clueless democrat wrote this article….

Levi | 1/3/2008, 12:13 pm EST

I think if Obama wins in Iowa, then he’s got the nomination and the Democrats will win in a landslide in November - because he’ll win by bringing out unprecedented numbers to caucus (and lots of independents and even some crossover Republicans too). That is a recipe for victory everywhere. As you point out, if Edwards wins by a big margin, then maybe even the Democrats aren’t ready for a change - a change in race or sex.
And Ron Paul has run an incredible campaign, but no, he is not a realistic candidate for president. Sorry Calvin.

Kyle | 1/3/2008, 12:13 pm EST

“Iowa is time for the Paul patrol to put up or shut up.” This statement misses the long term opportunity of the Ron Paul phenomenon. What if political leaders were expected to provide the same depth of reasoning to their positions the Dr. Paul provides for his? I discount any web article that does not encourage a robust debate of the issue presented by the author.

mike | 1/3/2008, 12:11 pm EST

Huck is a bigot. I hope he’s done after today.

Michael | 1/3/2008, 12:10 pm EST

You do realize that Ron Paul raised enough money this quarter to be top-tier, right? Why is it that biased articles such as these always conveniently shrug him off as a long-shot?

Annie Kaplan | 1/3/2008, 12:08 pm EST

Ambulance-Chasers anoymous, could you please site some sources for your claims regarding Edwards? Your name does little to add to your credibility.

longwalksinparis.blogspot.com | 1/3/2008, 12:08 pm EST

Surprise #6… Obama bombs in Iowa

longwalksinparis.blogspot.com | 1/3/2008, 12:07 pm EST

Surprise #6… Obama bombs in Iowa

Jim | 1/3/2008, 12:07 pm EST

“Lose to Ron Paul and you’re not a viable candidate. Period.”

We may be left with only one viable candidate then, Ron Paul.

Kate | 1/3/2008, 12:06 pm EST

Cant wait, Im hoping your right, thta Edwards runs away with it. He has the momentum, always building these last weeks. He has the strongest chance to win it it all, with a mandate for real change. GO John!1

Matt, Va | 1/3/2008, 12:03 pm EST

That was a just a good, fun, enjoyable article to read. Thank you for capturing the spirit of the thing and not over-dramatizing it into some existential evant.

Andrew Meyer | 1/3/2008, 12:02 pm EST

Ron Paul will win in Iowa. Does that make every other Republican “not viable”? Let’s hope so.

donttasermeblog.blogspot. com

PulSamsara | 1/3/2008, 12:02 pm EST

Sleepy ZZZZ - hey bud… as a reformed nihilist myself let me tell ya’ ‘things are lookin’ up !’
———————- —– ———
America is a Democracy - Not a Monarchy.
————— —– —————-
Nepotism does not equal experience.

The spin machine whipped together a machine candidate for a the past several years.
But as the lights grow more intense it’s the people who begin to decide. Not the Machine. - Barack Obama for President.
It’s Time America to Rise and Shine again.

Winston Webb | 1/3/2008, 11:59 am EST

“Lose to Ron Paul and you’re not a viable candidate. Period.”

I guess we can all scratch “Rudy” off of the GOP list, eh?

Sandy Beltinger | 1/3/2008, 11:59 am EST

ANYONE can vote in IOWA, I could drive up today and vote. It’s not a true picture.

Ambulance-chasers Anonymous | 1/3/2008, 11:59 am EST

If any folks in Iowa are considering voting for Edwards today. Please consider the following before you do.

Edwards specifically has made much of his fortune suing doctors for not performing C-sections, arguing that they help prevent cerebral palsy in children … Now doctors do C-sections “just to be safe,” meaning safe from lawsuits, though the procedure is not so safe for mothers.

Medical malpractice was his specialty, and he reportedly tried more than 60 such cases, winning more than $1 million in over half of those. Most involved Ob/gyns. Indeed, he was so feared, according to the Center for Public Integrity, “that doctors would settle cases for millions of dollars rather than face him at trial.”

Cesareans in the U.S. had begun dropping in the late 1980s, going as low as 22 percent of deliveries. As Edwards and friends spread fear across the Ob/gyn land, rates began to climb again. The rate is now 30.2 percent, a record high for the nation.

Calvin VA | 1/3/2008, 11:55 am EST

You just mentioned above… “Lose to Ron Paul and you’re not a viable candidate. Period”

Are you out of you mind. People are supposed to be the TRUE voice of the elected oficials. Yopu are an embarrasment to the media and your attempt to spread your biased propaganda.

zzzz. . . | 1/3/2008, 11:51 am EST

the big corporations will win no matter what; so why bother prognosticating. . . ?

ooo, let’s see Iowa voters. . .do you want to back the telecom industry or the defense industry or the energy cartel?

do you want to back war or war or kinda war or war?

the excitement never stops. . .not. . .

The Cherry Creek News | 1/3/2008, 11:42 am EST

An extremely well-considered article.

Post A Comment

Caution: Off-topic comments will be deleted

Name:

Comments: