Comments on: Does Iowa Matter?
CBS' Kathy Frankovic: The Caucuses Can Provide A Bounce, But They Don't Always Point To The Eventual Nominee
The only thing that matters is where the decimal point lands on the check to Diebold.- Reply to this comment
- In politics, Iowa matters. The questions is: Should it matter? Not really. It is unrepresentative of the nation, and its caucus system is bizarre.
- Reply to this comment
- No offense to Iowans but there opinions will not change mine one iota. The coverage of the media can be decribed as a "frenzy" trying to make it more important then it really is. I also note much more coverage on the democrats vice the republicans but that is no surprise.
- Reply to this comment
- WHO IS RON PAUL?
- Reply to this comment
- Seriously, why do these tiny, backwater states even matter?
A bunch of white farmers in Iowa have the pulse of America? This is a sick joke right
Change the system: Have California, New York, Florida, Texas, and then Michigan or Illinois in the first week of primaries. ( I do not live in any of these.) Then have 5 a week, one from each region, roughly, a week afterwords.
Why can two tiny, non-representive of the rest of the nation, make or break a candidicy? By the time I get to vote, it will be decided. Most people live in the 5 states I named. Have the polls open all week, with th eresults released on Saturday. From there you will have a much better, and more accurate numbers, per party. - Reply to this comment
- "many politicians have endorsed Romney"
not really oustide of the LDS beltway-
Oh there''s Larry Craig- oh but like I said the LDS beltway includes Idaho for sure... - Reply to this comment
- I''ll predict:
IOWA- Edwards & Huckabee
NH- Clinton & McCain
"Anything Could Happen In Iowa
Jeff Greenfield tells Harry Smith that this is the first presidential race he can remember where nobody could predict the outcome for either party." - Reply to this comment
- "Bring Back Hillary, Bring Back the Economy!!! Go Clintons ''''08!!!! :-)"
-Posted by metroduck75 at 12:52 PM : Jan 02, 2008
Not to shock you, but the consensus among economists is that the economic state of the 90''s was due to the internet boom, not anything Bill Clinton did. - Reply to this comment
- Interesting comment about Chuck Norris endorsing Mike Huckabee. Mr. Norris can endorse a candidate to promote his ideal independent of electability. Celebrities can say and do anything they want with minimal fear (even the Dixie Chicks made a come back).
On the other hand, when an elected official makes a political endorsement, they are putting their career on the line since a poor choice could cost them their office. When elected officials endorse Romney, they are making a carefully calculated commitment based upon what they think will really happen.
It doesn''t mean they are sure that person will win. Sometimes they endorse someone they don''t want to be on the bad side of if they did win. Romney would be a formidable president if elected, and quite a few people in public office want to be on the right side.
The fact that many politicians have endorsed Romney tells you something important about what they percieve about the elections. Ordinary folks are not as important as they are taught. Pulling the voting machine lever is not the same as pulling the levers of power.
The bottom line is that Romney is a very cunning and influential person in the world. Yes, being in the CFR is a prerequisite to power. Being wealthy and well connected is important. Projecting the right image to voters is necessary. But being a true man of the people who will fight against privilege and power is the death knell of any political campaign.
President Romney: get used to it. - Reply to this comment
- If you believe that White Anglo Saxon Protestants should rule the world, then Iowa and New Hampshire were made for you.
If you believe anything else, then you should undermine the influence of Iowa and New Hampshire in the the political process.
Iowa and New Hampshire represent the political spectrum of 19th century America. But its a constituency that carries a lot of influence because they own a lot of property. - Reply to this comment
Ex-NBA ref Tim Donaghy 



