PDA

View Full Version : Elections Santorum "wins" Iowa Caucus


dirk digler
01-19-2012, 11:09 AM
By 34 votes lol

(CNN) -- Rick Santorum finished the Iowa Republican caucuses 34 votes ahead of Mitt Romney, but results from several precincts are missing and the full actual results may never be known, according to a final certified tally released Thursday by the Iowa GOP.

The new numbers show 29,839 votes for Santorum and 29,805 votes for Romney, according to the party.

patteeu
01-19-2012, 11:59 AM
I read that. Good for him. But it sucks for him that the Iowa benefit is already all used up.

oldandslow
01-19-2012, 12:01 PM
I read that. Good for him. But it sucks for him that the Iowa benefit is already all used up.

It's always good to have an election and lose the votes and never really know who wins...

...and you all claim dems are incompentents.

patteeu
01-19-2012, 12:02 PM
It's always good to have an election and lose the votes and never really know who wins...

...and you all claim dems are incompentents.

Yeah, that is concerning. I haven't read/heard about what happened (other than the fact that votes were irretrievably lost from several locations). Have you?

dirk digler
01-19-2012, 12:02 PM
I read that. Good for him. But it sucks for him that the Iowa benefit is already all used up.

It won't help Santorum but this might hurt Romney

alnorth
01-19-2012, 12:28 PM
Romney likely still won this, but we'll never know. (the story about the vote discrepancy a week or two ago, Santorum was told there was two of them in 2 precincts, one that the media reported that went his way, and one that no one reported that canceled out that discrepancy and still gave Romney a single-digit win)

What probably happened here in this story is that the phoned-in totals, aside from those two precincts that were off, were all phoned in more-or-less correctly, but then after the results were phoned in, 6 or 7 geriatric senile morons thought that was the end of it, and they threw the tally sheets away, not allowing their precincts to be certified.

We don't have trained election officials or party members running these caucuses, the people vote for who will run the caucus, and out of almost 2 thousand precincts, the people were bound to vote for a few dumbasses who wouldn't save the sheets and mail them in.

mlyonsd
01-19-2012, 12:30 PM
It won't help Santorum but this might hurt RomneyHurt him how?

dirk digler
01-19-2012, 12:34 PM
Hurt him how?

take a little shine out of him being inevitable. Gingrich is now up in SC so if that holds instead of Romney winning 2 out of 3 he would be 1 out of 3

dirk digler
01-19-2012, 12:38 PM
Romney likely still won this, but we'll never know. (the story about the vote discrepancy a week or two ago, Santorum was told there was two of them in 2 precincts, one that the media reported that went his way, and one that no one reported that canceled out that discrepancy and still gave Romney a single-digit win)


Nope:

Iowa GOP Chairman Apparently Concedes He Owes Santorum An Apology

Tweets from journalists listening to an interview with GOP Iowa Chair Matt Strawn on local radio apparently show the official conceding that Rick Santorum is the winner and that heís owed an apology:


pattibrown (https://twitter.com/#%21/pattibrown/status/160049687947264001) Patti Brown Matt Strawn of RPI just said on WHO Radio that he #Santorum did WIN ##IAcaucus and that he owes Santorum an appology. @IowaGOP @IowaGOPer

AlexNBCNews (https://twitter.com/#%21/AlexNBCNews/status/160047924800258049) Alexandra Moe IA GOP Chairman Strawn on missing precints: Assuming that everything form 8 precincts stuck, it wouldnít have changed the fact Santorum won

mlyonsd
01-19-2012, 12:38 PM
take a little shine out of him being inevitable. Gingrich is now up in SC so if that holds instead of Romney winning 2 out of 3 he would be 1 out of 3Still holding out hope your buffoon doesn't have to debate Romney, huh? :p

alnorth
01-19-2012, 12:39 PM
Nope:

Yep.

he's the winner of the certified vote, only because several precincts, which apparently were slightly for Romney, couldn't be certified, likely because the idiots running those precincts didn't save the paperwork.

The certified result is crap.

edit: oh, just read that second tweet.

OK, well in that case, a lot of people failed in learning how to use a phone.

Direckshun
01-19-2012, 12:54 PM
Doesn't matter anyway, because Romney still spanked him in Iowa's pledged delegates.

Actual votes don't matter directly, what directly matters is winning pledged delegates.

Whether Santorum won or lost the vote, Romney still beats him in delegates.

BucEyedPea
01-19-2012, 01:38 PM
Doesn't matter anyway, because Romney still spanked him in Iowa's pledged delegates.

Actual votes don't matter directly, what directly matters is winning pledged delegates.

Whether Santorum won or lost the vote, Romney still beats him in delegates.

The delegates are all unbound.

orange
01-19-2012, 02:14 PM
"The Romney campaign is now calling Iowa a "virtual tie." The Santorum campaign, which blasted out an email Thursday with the subject "Santorum Wins Iowa!," hopes the media does not go along with the "tie" narrative.

"When Mitt Romney wins by eight, he wins," Gidley said. "When we win by 34, it's a virtual tie? Nice try."

Gidley then suggested a different narrative. "If we win by 34," he said, "it's a landslide.""

Hoover
01-19-2012, 02:17 PM
The vote totals from the 8 precincts are actually known. The only thing that is missing is the official forms that would be used to certify the vote. Santorum got 81 votes out of those precincts, Romney got 46.

orange
01-19-2012, 02:20 PM
The vote totals from the 8 precincts are actually known. The only thing that is missing is the official forms that would be used to certify the vote. Santorum got 81 votes out of those precincts, Romney got 46.

So Santorum actually won by 69* ? It's a tidal wave!





* 69 LMAO

BucEyedPea
01-19-2012, 02:24 PM
It's basically a statistical tie.

dirk digler
01-19-2012, 02:45 PM
Still holding out hope your buffoon doesn't have to debate Romney, huh? :p

If debating was what I was worried about I would not want Gingrich.

Though I hear if Gingrich gets the nominee Palin will be VP :D

orange
01-19-2012, 02:52 PM
If debating was what I was worried about I would not want Gingrich.

This is so true. When Gingrich debates, Gingrich wins.

Obama is a mediocre debater. Grand, sweeping speeches he can do, debates not so much. Edwards, Biden and Clinton all routinely trounced him last time around, notwithstanding his RonPaulesque supporters swarming polls. He held his own against McCain, but McCain is not a great debater, either.

Gingrich is a great debater. Standing ovations just don't happen. The sort that erase 13 point leads in a week.


p.s. Did a spellcheck for "speeches" - it's cool - but was intrigued by the suggestion for "RonPaulesque": "Nepalese" ???

Aries Walker
01-19-2012, 02:55 PM
Maybe it's time for Iowa to update their system.

BucEyedPea
01-19-2012, 03:06 PM
This is so true. When Gingrich debates, Gingrich wins.

Obama is a mediocre debater. Grand, sweeping speeches he can do, debates not so much. Edwards, Biden and Clinton all routinely trounced him last time around, notwithstanding his RonPaulesque supporters swarming polls. He held his own against McCain, but McCain is not a great debater, either.

Gingrich is a great debater. Standing ovations just don't happen. The sort that erase 13 point leads in a week.


p.s. Did a spellcheck for "speeches" - it's cool - but was intrigued by the suggestion for "RonPaulesque": "Nepalese" ???

That's because he relies on a teleprompter for those speeches most likely written by another.
A debate won't have that available.

dirk digler
01-19-2012, 03:07 PM
This is so true. When Gingrich debates, Gingrich wins.

Obama is a mediocre debater. Grand, sweeping speeches he can do, debates not so much. Edwards, Biden and Clinton all routinely trounced him last time around, notwithstanding his RonPaulesque supporters swarming polls. He held his own against McCain, but McCain is not a great debater, either.

Gingrich is a great debater. Standing ovations just don't happen. The sort that erase 13 point leads in a week.


p.s. Did a spellcheck for "speeches" - it's cool - but was intrigued by the suggestion for "RonPaulesque": "Nepalese" ???

I think towards the end of the 08 primary he was a very good debater and he handled Clinton pretty well. In the beginning he was awful though.

patteeu
01-19-2012, 04:00 PM
I think towards the end of the 08 primary he was a very good debater and he handled Clinton pretty well. In the beginning he was awful though.

This time he won't be armed with hope and change. He'll be saddled with a pretty divisive and unaccomished record instead.

mlyonsd
01-19-2012, 05:55 PM
Though I hear if Gingrich gets the nominee Palin will be VP :DI'm willing to go double or nothing any day. :thumb:

orange
01-19-2012, 08:14 PM
Standing ovations just don't happen.

Ooops.

BigChiefFan
01-19-2012, 11:16 PM
I've heard all kinds of bogus crap transpired, which is sounding more like voter fraud occured. Ricky, didn't even come close to winning, nor did Mitty. Rove pulled rank and duped John Q. Public, again.

patteeu
01-19-2012, 11:21 PM
I've heard all kinds of bogus crap transpired, which is sounding more like voter fraud occured. Ricky, didn't even come close to winning, nor did Mitty. Rove pulled rank and duped John Q. Public, again.

Good lord. Stop listening to the other guys at the bathhouse.

BucEyedPea
01-19-2012, 11:35 PM
I've heard all kinds of bogus crap transpired, which is sounding more like voter fraud occured. Ricky, didn't even come close to winning, nor did Mitty. Rove pulled rank and duped John Q. Public, again.
According to this Paul has 7 delegates from Iowa that say they won't vote for Santorum or Romney but Ron Paul.
Remember these delegates are unbound. Also when Super Tuesday comes, if a candidate does not get 50% of the vote it doesn't remain winner-take-all. Delegates will be awarded by Congressional districts.

It does make you wonder about what's going on though. When it's really a close race, really more like a tie, this stuff happens.

Reality Check explains and reports it.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/8sb4ksRyvXA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

dirk digler
01-20-2012, 11:26 AM
take a little shine out of him being inevitable. Gingrich is now up in SC so if that holds instead of Romney winning 2 out of 3 he would be 1 out of 3

Apparently the shine is already off. According to gallup Romney's numbers are collapsing nationally.

orange
01-20-2012, 11:44 AM
CHARLESTON, S.C. -- One of Mitt Romney's top surrogates, former New Hampshire Gov. John Sununu, began the process Friday morning of managing expectations in the event of a possible Romney loss to Newt Gingrich in Saturday's South Carolina primary.

Sununu predicted that the GOP nomination fight will run through every primary and caucus state, all the way to the summer.

"I think you're going to see the same kind of long slog that you saw in '76, with [Gerald] Ford and [Ronald] Reagan, that it took the whole thing to win," Sununu told reporters.

"This is a long slog," Sununu said. "[Romney]'s never suggested one or two or three primaries or caucuses would make the difference. The whole campaign has been designed to go through the long slog."

Asked what Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts, will need to do if Gingrich beats him in South Carolina, Sununu responded, "He has to do what they intended to do from the beginning: slog along."

read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/20/mitt-romney-south-carolina-primary_n_1218766.html