The winner of the Iowa caucus: Trump

#151
#151
tennvols77 said:
Seemingly been going on for a long time, and no problems until, last night.

And, last election shows, they are all important.
Click to expand...
No, Iowa is not important when deciding on a party nominee. Bob Dole won the Iowa caucuses in 1988. Tom Harkin won the Iowa caucuses in 1992. Marco Rubio basically split with Trump in 2016.
 
#152
#152
BowlBrother85 said:
No, the Democrats had thresholds to meet in order to be a part of the debates, but they haven't tried to keep anyone off the ballot.
Click to expand...
You mean this time right?
From Luth's article:
...while state Democrats skipped their contests in 1996 and 2012, with Bill Clinton and Barack Obama running for reelection....
 
#154
#154
C-south said:
Maybe they didn’t poll high enough or rake in enough cash. Isn’t that how the dims booted the blacks and Asian?
Click to expand...
That's not what happened. Trump strong armed his way into being completely uncontested because he was to fragile to let the public see votes go to another republican other than him.
 
#157
#157
BowlBrother85 said:
No, the Democrats had thresholds to meet in order to be a part of the debates, but they haven't tried to keep anyone off the ballot.
Click to expand...

“HAD “ thresholds. Until they got that fat check from Daddy war bucks Bloomberg.
 
#160
#160
McDad said:
LOL at your links, man.

Link 1 is about Michigan...even though there are Rs currently running against Trump.
Links 2-4 is about South Carolina, Kansas, Nevada, and Arizona. It's the same story carried by 3 different news sites.

None of them have to do with Iowa. The 3 sites with the same story even say that the practice is common for Rs and Ds.

And, I read a little further, the State Party leaders are discussing cancelling the primaries; not Trump.
Click to expand...
McDad said:
LOL at your links, man.

Link 1 is about Michigan...even though there are Rs currently running against Trump.
Links 2-4 is about South Carolina, Kansas, Nevada, and Arizona. It's the same story carried by 3 different news sites.

None of them have to do with Iowa. The 3 sites with the same story even say that the practice is common for Rs and Ds.

And, I read a little further, the State Party leaders are discussing cancelling the primaries; not Trump.
Click to expand...
Who said anything about Iowa?
Is the GOP trying to hide the fact that Trump has primary challengers?
But the Republicans seem to want to hide the fact that two former governors and a former congressman are challenging President Donald Trump’s re-nomination.

The GOP has held no official debates — and none is planned — though Business Insider, a financial news website, held what it billed as the first GOP debate last month. Two Trump foes, former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld and former Illinois Rep. Joe Walsh, took turns arguing why he should be impeached. On Sunday, the third GOP hopeful, former South Carolina governor and congressman Mark Sanford, disputed Walsh on CNN’s State of the Union, declaring it was important to “go through the process” before reaching a verdict.

Meanwhile, several state Republican parties are doing their best to snuff out any sign of disunity, even though it’s obvious, if Trump stays in office, he’ll be renominated, given his nearly 90% job approval among Republicans.
 
#163
#163
luthervol said:
That's not what happened. Trump strong armed his way into being completely uncontested because he was to fragile to let the public see votes go to another republican other than him.
Click to expand...

Yep, that's what happened alright....he strong armed his way. Yep. Trump has plenty of time to do that while running the country and doing trade deals w/other countries & other important things. What a dolt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MWR and Big Al Orange
#165
#165
McDad said:
You mean this time right?
From Luth's article:
...while state Democrats skipped their contests in 1996 and 2012, with Bill Clinton and Barack Obama running for reelection....
Click to expand...
Where there ex governors and/or congressman wishing to be included.
 
#166
#166
luthervol said:
Who said anything about Iowa? This thread is about Iowa. You and 69 discussed Iowa. Forgive me if I mistook your answer to 'hill's question to be about Iowa.
Is the GOP trying to hide the fact that Trump has primary challengers?
But the Republicans seem to want to hide the fact that two former governors and a former congressman are challenging President Donald Trump’s re-nomination.

The GOP has held no official debates — and none is planned — though Business Insider, a financial news website, held what it billed as the first GOP debate last month. Two Trump foes, former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld and former Illinois Rep. Joe Walsh, took turns arguing why he should be impeached. On Sunday, the third GOP hopeful, former South Carolina governor and congressman Mark Sanford, disputed Walsh on CNN’s State of the Union, declaring it was important to “go through the process” before reaching a verdict.

Meanwhile, several state Republican parties are doing their best to snuff out any sign of disunity, even though it’s obvious, if Trump stays in office, he’ll be renominated, given his nearly 90% job approval among Republicans. This refutes your own point about Trump cancelling the caucus process,
Click to expand...
 
#168
#168
  • Like
Reactions: Big Al Orange and 37L1
#170
#170
SpaceCoastVol said:
You really should worry about your own **** show.
Click to expand...

That’s been the problem for going on 4 years , they are so worried about what the Rs are or aren’t doing , they forgot to worry about what’s coming on like a freight train ... November election.
 
#171
#171
luthervol said:
Change where to were and the period to a question mark.
Click to expand...
You can edit your own post.

iu
 
#173
#173
luthervol said:
Change where to were and the period to a question mark.
Click to expand...
I don't know the answer to that question. I was only aware of Ds practicing the same technique with the same rationale because I read the article you posted. It is odd to me the author's invoke Trump's name because it is the state party officials making the decision in both cases (Rs and Ds).

If the answer to your question was in that article you linked, I didn't see it.
 
#175
#175
McDad said:
I don't know the answer to that question. I was only aware of Ds practicing the same technique with the same rationale because I read the article you posted. It is odd to me the author's invoke Trump's name because it is the state party officials making the decision in both cases (Rs and Ds).

If the answer to your question was in that article you linked, I didn't see it.
Click to expand...
You can't honestly believe that the state republican party officials act in a vacuum.
If a candidate runs unopposed, holding the primary is ludicrous and it should be cancelled.
If a candidate has "legitimate" opposition, not allowing them in the primary is cowardly and unfair to the public.
Obviously, it all boils down to what is considered "legitimate".
Ex governors instantly have legitimate credibility. Ex congressmen do as well, but possibly to a lesser degree (depending).
The three attempting to run against Trump were immediately cut off at the knees. As Trump wished and with full complicity from the republican party.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top