Skip to main content

View Diary: Iowa: who the hell knows? (401 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  If polls match the caucus, its a no win/all win. (7+ / 0-)

    If the polling matches the polls and the three top candidates all come within a few points of each other, all will claim victory and move to NH.

    Edwards would be the loser in that case. He must win Iowa by more than the "margin of error" since he lacks money and organization after Iowa. HRC could be called the real winner if it's a tight, three way result.

    Polls are typically right so a three way result seems most on to NH.

    Totally agree that Iowa caucus system is bogus. No problem with Iowa going first. I like the idea that small states, Iowa and NH, where the voters get a lot of face time with candidates is a good thing. But Iowa needs to go to a democratic, secret ballot, one man, one vote primary.

    •  But it won't (2+ / 0-)

      because the rest of the vote currently distributed between the rest of the field will have to decide on one of the top three. A three-way tie is theoretically possible, of course, but it won't look like this poll.

      And btw, Iowa isn't the only small state.

      •  The stability of this race ... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Geotpf, Progressive Moderate

        Has been so surreal, that I'm starting to think a 3-way pileup is the most likely outcome.

        It's looking like a bad but exciting day at the airshow - the jets roll out of their turns and line up on each other, afterburners wide open ...

        The best fortress is to be found in the love of the people - Niccolo Machiavelli

        by al Fubar on Fri Dec 28, 2007 at 05:18:19 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  But it will. (0+ / 0-)

        because "the rest of the field" will split evenly among the top three per the polls.

        In fact, that's what we are seeing with tightening race among big three. Biden and Richardson are declining and Clinton, Edwards and Obama are increasing.

        Three equal lots of equally committed voters seems to be what the polls are telling us. That can easily translate to caucus results.

        The irony will be that Edwards was able to claim "victory" in Iowa with a close second in 2004 and not Obama and Clinton will can claim "victory" with close 2nd and 3rd.

    •  agree (0+ / 0-)

      I agree with the sentiments of your post, but keep in mind that the quirks of the caucus system make it more difficult for pollsters to accurately predict the final results than it is in a normal election.

      IIRC, polls didn't show Kerry as the likely winner in 2004 until just a few days before caucus night.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site