On 1/17/24 10:24 AM, ScottW wrote:
On Tuesday, January 16, 2024 at 10:37:28 AM UTC-8, mINE109 wrote:
On 1/16/24 12:11 PM, ScottW wrote:
On Tuesday, January 16, 2024 at 8:09:49 AM UTC-8, mINE109 wrote:
On 1/15/24 11:15 PM, Fascist Flea wrote:
Somehow, MAGA-ism has been weaponized. Like anthrax, maybe.
It's swept through Iowa, laying waste to the wispy tendrils of Reality >>>>> that may have survived the first round of Dumpsterism.
Is it possible that Putin's or Xi's mad scientists leapfrogged
our cyberdefenses to manipulate the poor, dumb Iowans into
voting to destroy America?
Discount headlines touting a big win or a "landslide." Barely half the >>>> vote in a very conservative low turnout Iowa is not a sign of strength >>>> in an event that previously went to Cruz, Santorum and Huckabee.
Silly dem talking point. No one has ever cracked 50% in a first in the nation crowded field
caucus. But you keep lying to yourself. It's all you can do.
What am I lying about? Previous winners? Trump's margin of victory?
Those times incumbents ran unopposed were effectively 100% of the vote.
When did the parties host a caucus with incumbents running unopposed?
Parties have cancelled caucuses in support of incumbents. Other times incumbents had no serious competition, such as Obama's 98% win in 2008.
In this year's Republican caucus is different as Trump is effectively an incumbent, therefore not a "first in the nation" event meant to identify
front runners. However, in the scenario you brought up, a "crowded field caucus," Trump lost to Cruz in 2016.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)