Great news from Iowa

The real winner was Ron Paul. He brought out a lot of voters that wouldn't have shown up otherwise. Romney was a big loser. LOL! He IS a big loser!

You are trying to rewrite the facts .....a record voter turnout occurred.

Where did you get your phony information that only 75,000 voted?

You are trying to rewrite the facts .....a record voter turnout occurred.

Where did you get your phony information that only 75,000 voted? Originally Posted by Whirlaway

from faux news

You are trying to rewrite the facts .....a record voter turnout occurred.

Where did you get your phony information that only 75,000 voted? Originally Posted by Whirlaway

the 2008 Iowa turnout was 119,000 this year was 122,000 and you call that a record turnout?? 3000 more votes a big deal- again what happened to the 150,000????

Another Wellendowed lie...........you did not get that information from Fox News.

You posted a link to a CNN story that doesn't support your phony claim that only 75,000 voted last night in Iowa....

Man up Wellendowed and just admit you had the wrong information; otherwise it looks like you are lying.

from faux news Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

Are you really as dumb as your post indicates?

What is your math skills if you don't understand that 122,000 is a record for voter turnout in a Republican Iowa caucus?

No one of signficance predicted 150,000 - you are drinking the Wasserman kool aid dude.

If you don't think

the 2008 Iowa turnout was 119,000 this year was 122,000 and you call that a record turnout?? 3000 more votes a big deal- again what happened to the 150,000???? Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

Are you really as dumb as your post indicates?

What is your math skills if you don't understand that 122,000 is a record for voter turnout in a Republican Iowa caucus?

No one of signficance predicted 150,000 - you are drinking the Wasserman kool aid dude.

If you don't think Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Jeez are you that stupid or in denial- here's the video: http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/pol...astellanos.cnn if you LISTEN between 30 seconds and 56 seconds both Conservatives Alex Castellanos and Erick Erickson discuss the low turnout in Iowa and what lies ahead in South Carolina.

LISTEN YOU MORON!!!!!
He clearly says they were expecting 150,000 the number who turned out was basically identical to 2008. Romney spent 7 times more than Santorum and only won by 8 votes.

THE MORON IN THIS THREAD IS YOU WELLENDOWED. YOU KEEP MAKING MORONIC CLAIMS THAT AREN'T TRUE, LIKE.....

1. Moronendowed claimed there wasn't a record turnout last night (fact check for morons: a record 122,500 people voted last night)

2. Moronendowed claimed only 75,000 people turned out to vote in Iowa yesterday (fact check for morons: a record 122,500 people voted in last night's caucus).

3. Moronendowed claims that a record turnout of 122,500 caucus goers isn't a record and is actually a low turn out - talk about Obamazombies ignorning the facts.

BTW; hanging your political viewpoints on CNN talking heads shows how shallow your mind is. You should have looked at local sources, the best being former Gov. Terry Branstead who correctly projected a record voter turnout.

I do have to ask, what is your problem with Bachmann? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Who wants a religious fanatic as president?

Oh and that nice tax plan she had: "Everyone needs to pay something".
Just google "Hunger Study 2010" and you'll see that this religious fanatic has the same as basically all republicans have:
Favor the rich and corporations and abuse the poor.

Favor the rich and corporations and abuse the poor. Originally Posted by waverunner234

That also happens to be the policy of the Democrats.

THE MORON IN THIS THREAD IS YOU WELLENDOWED. YOU KEEP MAKING MORONIC CLAIMS THAT AREN'T TRUE, LIKE.....

1. Moronendowed claimed there wasn't a record turnout last night (fact check for morons: a record 122,500 people voted last night)

2. Moronendowed claimed only 75,000 people turned out to vote in Iowa yesterday (fact check for morons: a record 122,500 people voted in last night's caucus).

3. Moronendowed claims that a record turnout of 122,500 caucus goers isn't a record and is actually a low turn out - talk about Obamazombies ignorning the facts.

BTW; hanging your political viewpoints on CNN talking heads shows how shallow your mind is. You should have looked at local sources, the best being former Gov. Terry Branstead who correctly projected a record voter turnout. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

You do know that both people in the video Conservatives Alex Castellanos and Erick Erickson are very staunch republicans who they themselves said that they were hoping for a turnout of 150,000- 28,000 less than what turned out. In 2008 119,000 turned out- so if you want to claim and boost that 3000 more people shhowed as your way of saying it was a huge record turn out than so be it. If I made $100,000 in 2008 selling a product I don't think I would brag if I sold and made $103,000 the added surplus was minimal- would you not say that if 119,000 voters turned out in 2008 and 122,000 turned out yesterday that it would not be wrong to say the the turn out was about the same????- what was the new record beaten by a merely 1.025% increase turnout are you freaking kidding me? go beat your chest WW a total of 1.025% more voters turned out than in 2008- yeah that's a serious wake up call to Obama. The winner wins by 8 votes- Romney has basically been campaigning since 2008 and got less votes than he got in 2008 and spent 7 times more than Santorum who was nearly last in every poll leading up to Iowa- if that doesn't tell you there's some problems with the GOP than I can't help you.

Last time then it will be too late for your dense head.......

1. Did a record turnout of voters occur last night in Iowa? Of course it did; and for Wellendowed to say otherwise displays his ignorance.

2. Was Wellendowed's original claim that only 75,000 voted a mis-statement of the facts? Yes

3. Why does Wellendowed continue to consider a record breaking vote turnout of 122,500 to be low? Because he is an Obamazombie.

As you can see from the one post Michelle Bachmann did not finish last. Here is what we can take away from this;

Romney actually got less votes this time than last time 30, 021 (2008) vs 30, 015 (last night) with a higher voter turnout and 10 million dollars spent. The man spent the last five years running for president and almost became an Iowa resident the last year.

Santorum was in single digits just two weeks ago and spent considerably less money.

Now if Perry and Bachmann drop out Santorum would pick up the lion's share of their supporters and he would lead over Romney.

Romney can only claim a technical victory as this caucus is non-binding but it is a victory without a satisfying taste. Santorum had the victory because he demonstrated the Romney can't get over 25%.

I do have to ask, what is your problem with Bachmann? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Bachmann is a dingbat; not only that she constanly gets her facts wrong onn a number of issues.

Wellendowed,

if the 2012 vote totals where higher than the previous 2008 vote totals and previous other totals, it broke ground as a new record.

if we go by percentages, obviously, the vote didn't break any records percentage wise.

you're obviously in a snippy mood which is fine by me.

The GOP establushment can breath a little easier that Ron Paul didn't win the Iowa caucus.

3rd place is not bad place to be.