Kerry Wins the Iowa Caucus [Archive]

Theodore Kurita

19th January 2004, 08:32 PM

What's next for Kerry.

Dick Gephart is dropping out of the Race.

John Edward's was close to winning Iowa. He surged from incredible lows to extremely high highs for certain.

Kerry will be competing against all of this plus:

Wesley Clark

and

Joe Lieberman

and

various other candidates who are still grabbing onto single digits (i.e. Sharpton, Braun, Kucinich)

Who do you think is going to win the New Hampshire Caucus?

clk

19th January 2004, 08:39 PM

Braun dropped out. CyberShaman told her to do it.

Otther

19th January 2004, 08:39 PM

Braun's been out of the race for like a week. She endorsed Dean.

Just so ya know.

Edit: Hehe... you beat me clk. At least the timestamp is the same.

The Central Scrutinizer

19th January 2004, 08:39 PM

I voted for Sharpton because he makes me laugh!

clk

19th January 2004, 08:40 PM

Originally posted by Otther
Braun's been out of the race for like a week. She endorsed Dean.

Just so ya know.

Haha, I beat you to it ;)

Otther

19th January 2004, 08:43 PM

Yes, but mine was more informative. I think that gives me at least 60 seconds worth of extra points.

aerocontrols

19th January 2004, 08:55 PM

Also, New Hampshire is a primary election, not a caucus.

aerocontrols

19th January 2004, 08:57 PM

Also, you left off John Edwards, who just took second in Iowa.

Luke T.

19th January 2004, 08:59 PM

The democratic candidates are going to start slapping Kerry around, like they did Dean. Dean isn't out of it yet, but he will be soon.

Kerry has big money troubles. You don't hear much about it, but he does. He refused federal matching funds. He needs to win big in N.H., or he loses the soft money. The South is next and he's a Yankee with the initials JFK. He needs to ditch Teddy Kennedy the second he leaves New Hampshire.

Some of N.H. will depend on who Gephardt endorses. New England is big labor country, and Gephardt has them all in his pocket.

Kerry showed some class during his speech this evening, taking some time to honor Gephardt, but you can't help wondering if he was fishing for an endorsement.

John Edwards is a good looking guy. The handsomest of the bunch. This will go far in the South, making the ladies swoon. Especially since he is from the South. But he doesn't have the political capital to make it.

Lieberman is Jewish. This will doom him in the South, despite him being the biggest pro-defense candidate.

Lieberman and Clark both screwed up by writing off Iowa. I know they didn't have a chance there, but you can't take any shortcuts.

Lieberman will do rather well in New Hampshire, probably the best he's going to do anywhere. After that, it is all downhill.

Dean is from Vermont. His machine will do well in New Hampshire. Enough to motivate him to keep going.

I think it will be a squeaker between Kerry, Dean and Lieberman, with Kerry the winner.

Gephardt will endorse Kerry.

corplinx

19th January 2004, 09:02 PM

I predicted Dean would win. I was wrong (for the record). I am really surprised by the strong showing Kerry and Edwards made. Edwards' disproportionate percentage of women voters reminds me than not all primary voters have the country at heart. (dont get mad at me, I am sure men do the same thing for female candidates they find attractive and young looking)

All I can say is, good for John Kerry. I disagree with him on his ANWAR position but I think he would make a capable president. I am glad to see he thoroughly schlacked Dean and his camp of bitter reactionaries.

corplinx

19th January 2004, 09:04 PM

Hrm. Will having Lieberman and Clark in the New Hampshire race dither Kerry's vote? I think Dean might have a shot at taking the primary if he stands out again the more hawkish Clark/Kerry/Lieb.

Jocko

19th January 2004, 09:12 PM

I'm torn. First Dean loses (and yes, a distant 3rd is a loss where he's concerned)... I guess the ol' Harkin political machine isn't what I remember from my University of Iowa days. Then Lieberman gets the front-page endorsement of the only statewide newspaper in NH. Lotta variables here.

Two contradictory sets of circumstances exist: Kerry should steamroll through NH without breaking a sweat. Only a week till the primary, he's a local, and he's riding "Big Mo" ((C)2000 John McCain Prods.)... should be a no-brainer.

Then there's the NH Contrarian Factor. Without digging around for actual facts, I can't remember the last candidate who won both Iowa and NH, from either party. NH has a long history of knocking down the Iowa winner, as if they want to prove they're smarter than the Iowans by siding with a different candidate.

In other words, I thought an Iowa win was an automatic disqualification from winning NH. Kerry should win, yet he can't win. It makes the head spin. I guess my pick would be a surprise victory by write-in candidate Nelson Rockefeller (deceased).

Luke T.

19th January 2004, 09:17 PM

Originally posted by Jocko
NH has a long history of knocking down the Iowa winner...

Because they have a resentment at not being the first primary/caucus any more. :D

Jocko

19th January 2004, 09:17 PM

Originally posted by corplinx
Hrm. Will having Lieberman and Clark in the New Hampshire race dither Kerry's vote? I think Dean might have a shot at taking the primary if he stands out again the more hawkish Clark/Kerry/Lieb.

NH has been painted for months as the Dean vs. Clark showdown, and I don't know how much importance Kerry can garner in one week before the primary.

BTW, did anyone see Bob Dole giving Clarke a hard time on Larry King tonight? I've never seen a one-armed man make a general squirm like that before. You could tell Dole was enjoying it, too. Clark went down like a drunk tri-delt. Should be a fun campaign.

Luke T.

19th January 2004, 09:23 PM

Originally posted by Jocko

BTW, did anyone see Bob Dole giving Clarke a hard time on Larry King tonight? I've never seen a one-armed man make a general squirm like that before. You could tell Dole was enjoying it, too. Clark went down like a drunk tri-delt. Should be a fun campaign.

Oh, man, I wish I had known that was gonna be on. Well, maybe a transcript on CNN's web site tomorrow. I hope so.

Jocko

19th January 2004, 09:32 PM

Originally posted by Luke T.

Oh, man, I wish I had known that was gonna be on. Well, maybe a transcript on CNN's web site tomorrow. I hope so.

It only lasted a few minutes, but it started when Dole referred to Clark as "Colonel." Clark went from zero to psycho in three seconds flat. I can't believe that guy's going to survive his first one-on-one debate with a sensitive ego like that.

Dole... always proving that the Dark Side is the funny side. Damn I wish he'd run again.

Supercharts

19th January 2004, 09:38 PM

Kerry is the strongest Democrat to oppose GWB.
Even I, a staunch GWB supporter, would not be disappointed with Kerry winning in November.
He's smart, articulate and a patriot.
Dean is for the children. The 'kids' lost.
Brutal but realistic.
Teresa is happy because she doesn't have to shell out her millions. GWB has to be worried. James Carville is crying in the guest room. Mary Matlin & Laura Ingrahm are walking on air but for the wrong reasons.
Dean lost as we all knew he would.
But GWB has to be scared right now. This is going to be a real race.
Once Sharpton leaves the race & Ghephart follows [I suspect around 2 PM for max TV exposure and throws his support ((& Labor)) to Kerry] things will really tighten up.
Ms. Braun may be the smartest candidate - she tosses her 0% electors to Dean and Dean pays her campagn debts plus she gets $20K/month to be an "advisor" to Dead-in-the water Dean.
This is so funny. Now it's up to the dairy farmers in N.H.
Al Gore is so marginalized right now he is irrelevent politically.
Woo woo!
What's Ross Perot up to? Anyone know? Care? And then there's the "Nadar" factor - there's a fair amount of votes to toss away.

shuize

19th January 2004, 09:47 PM

Originally posted by Luke T.

Oh, man, I wish I had known that was gonna be on. Well, maybe a transcript on CNN's web site tomorrow. I hope so.

If you find a transcript, please post a link.

peptoabysmal

19th January 2004, 09:47 PM

Interesting results in Iowa.

Did this have anything to do with it?
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/19/politics/main594091.shtml

Troll

19th January 2004, 09:55 PM

Especially those in the states of the ones running.

Does Gephart losing again and stepping down influence, in anyway, voting for him in any other office, such as re-elceting him senator? Does this affect Dean as governor?

If Kerry wins the nomination and loses against Bush, would you try to find another democrat choice to replace him as senator for a potential presidential run later?

I'm just trying to get a grasp on loyalty to the team as it were. Not trying to be insulting. I've been a Cowboys fan since 1974 and have remained faithful to the team ever since. So I know how it feels to support someone that has a chance, has no chance, and that sucks beyond hope. But teams change players and coaches while keeping the strongest players of a losing team and then lose the stronger players and pull in a new coach. I just want to know if a player is about to lose their job, or if they stay in hopes of a better coach.

specious_reasons

19th January 2004, 11:05 PM

Originally posted by Luke T.
John Edwards is a good looking guy. The handsomest of the bunch. This will go far in the South, making the ladies swoon. Especially since he is from the South. But he doesn't have the political capital to make it.

You're knocking on Edwards. I'll bet he win NH, because the focus has been on Dean and Kerry, and he's been running a clean campaign (according to the news) all this time.

Besides Iowa is about who can't make it. It's the first gauntlet. Dean, Kerry and Edwards are all still viable candidates. Dean is looking weaker now because of his lackluster 3rd, but he survived.

aerocontrols

20th January 2004, 05:35 AM

Audio:

Dean calmly explains (http://www.drudgereport.com/dean.mp3) why the American middle isn't going to vote for him.

Tricky

20th January 2004, 05:36 AM

This could get very interesting. The last two Democratic presidents have been dark horses in the primaries. Who ever heard of Clinton before 1992? Jimmy Carter before 1976? It appears that dark horses fare far better in the November election than "established" candidates, like Mondale or Dukakis. These primaries take on a life of their own, once a candidate has shown he can win some of the preliminary rounds.

This means that Kerry has a very good chance of being our next president. Maybe even Edwards.

aerocontrols

20th January 2004, 05:57 AM

Tricky

20th January 2004, 06:25 AM

Originally posted by aerocontrols
I find it odd that you think that the second paragraph follows from the first. Senators Edwards and Kerry are very much establishment candidates. Of the original field, the three most establishment candidates were Gephardt, Kerry, and Edwards, in that order.
LOL. Isn't it amazing what a difference of a few letters will do?

Yes, Kerry and Edwards may be establishment candidates, but not established candidates. I think they probably had a lot less name recognition by the general public than Gephardt, Dean, Lieberman or Sharpton. For some reason, in national politics, folks like politicians they don't know better than the ones they do. I wonder why that is?:D

Luke T.

20th January 2004, 06:31 AM

Originally posted by Troll
Does Gephart losing again and stepping down influence, in anyway, voting for him in any other office, such as re-elceting him senator?

Gephardt is a Representative, not a Senator. And chances are he will not run for office again. I think he is totally done. He's going home. Now is a good time since the Democrats won't get back the House anyway.

Luke T.

20th January 2004, 06:32 AM

Originally posted by aerocontrols

I agree with your first paragraph.

I find it odd that you think that the second paragraph follows from the first. Senators Edwards and Kerry are very much establishment candidates. Of the original field, the three most establishment candidates were Gephardt, Kerry, and Edwards, in that order.

I believe Edwards has only been in office for one term. Dean has been Governor longer than that.

Luke T.

20th January 2004, 06:33 AM

Originally posted by aerocontrols
Audio:

Dean calmly explains (http://www.drudgereport.com/dean.mp3) why the American middle isn't going to vote for him.

During that part of his speech, I shouted out, "IT'S A WWF SMACKDOWN!!!" :D

Luke T.

20th January 2004, 06:34 AM

Originally posted by specious_reasons

You're knocking on Edwards. I'll bet he win NH, because the focus has been on Dean and Kerry, and he's been running a clean campaign (according to the news) all this time.

Besides Iowa is about who can't make it. It's the first gauntlet. Dean, Kerry and Edwards are all still viable candidates. Dean is looking weaker now because of his lackluster 3rd, but he survived.

The best Edwards can hope for is to be Kerry's VP running mate. A New Englander and a Southerner combination.

aerocontrols

20th January 2004, 06:55 AM

Originally posted by Luke T.

During that part of his speech, I shouted out, "IT'S A WWF SMACKDOWN!!!" :D

He does sound like he's about to ask "Whatcha goin' do?"

Check the remix (http://right-magazine.com/dean_goes_nuts_remix.mp3)

;)

Luke T.

20th January 2004, 07:16 AM

Originally posted by shuize

If you find a transcript, please post a link.

The only available LKL transcript from yesterday is this one. (http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0401/20/lkl.00.html) No Clark. McGovern, Harkin, and others, but no Clark.

Luke T.

20th January 2004, 07:17 AM

Originally posted by aerocontrols

He does sound like he's about to ask "Whatcha goin' do?"

Check the remix (http://right-magazine.com/dean_goes_nuts_remix.mp3)

;)

That is amazing. It hasn't even been 12 hours, and someone has made this. Incredible.

Theodore Kurita

20th January 2004, 04:10 PM

Sorry.

I meant to add John Edwards, but it was late, and have been running on fumes the past few days.

I have been working on a massive research paper that is due this Thrusday... GAHHH!

Oh, and mods, edit the poll so John Edwards is in it.

Thank you.

peptoabysmal

20th January 2004, 10:47 PM

Originally posted by Tricky
This could get very interesting. The last two Democratic presidents have been dark horses in the primaries. Who ever heard of Clinton before 1992? Jimmy Carter before 1976? It appears that dark horses fare far better in the November election than "established" candidates, like Mondale or Dukakis. These primaries take on a life of their own, once a candidate has shown he can win some of the preliminary rounds.

This means that Kerry has a very good chance of being our next president. Maybe even Edwards.

LOL. This means Kerry has a chance to win the nomination for Democratic candidate. None of the Democrats have a snowball's chance in Hell of being president for another five years.

I was unimpressed by Bush's State of the Union address when I heard it tonight (1/20/2004). But, analyzing it later; I can see that Bush is taking dead aim at the fence sitters, the votes that control the election. You and I already know how we're going to vote.

Bush might upset conservatives right now, but they will still vote for him over the Democrat choices. Bush is making a play for the elderly and the Latino vote, something that has been ignored by Democrats for the last few years. The Democrats have been too focused on the poor, the black and the ugly (war) to pay attention to other groups.

In other words, it may seem that Bush is losing his conservative base, but quite the opposite is happening; the Democrats are losing ground with their own special interest voting blocks and Bush is right there to take advantage of it.

It's going to be an interesting year in politics.