I'm surprised no one has posted about the Ames Straw Poll. This forum is slipping. I expect good horse-race conversation here, regardless of which party is in the midst of a primary season. Cain, Gingrich, Santorum, Huntsman and especially Pawlenty are done. They might hang around a while but they're done. Paul will stay in ad infinitum, but only to make a point on a national stage -- he's not the kind of candidate that threatens to win. That leaves Romney, Bachmann and Perry, as I believe I predicted some time ago (though it's not like that was difficult to predict). Perry will be the frontrunner any minute now. He's the only candidate that can create a coalition of the GOP establishment, the Tea Party, social conservatives, fiscal conservatives and the religious right. Of those groups, Romney is only a winner with fiscal conservatives and the establishment. And neither is especially crazy about him. His aura of inevitability is his only great asset and that will be gone now that Perry's in and Bachmann's leading in Iowa. Romney is the frontrunner in NH and NV, but where is his path to the nomination? Is he going to blow off Iowa and South Carolina (where he's less likely to win than in Iowa) and still be perceived as the frontrunner? That sounds a lot like Giuliani's 2008 strategy to me: a national frontrunner with no serious path to the nomination. And Bachmann is no more likely to get past the establishment power-brokers, or the sane wing of the GOP, than Howard Dean (or Jerry Brown) was able to do the same in the Democratic party primaries. It's ironic to me that Bachmann's people have said they're modeling their campaign on Dean's since it is so sure to have the same results. Perry will be the nominee as I've been saying for a pretty long time now. As I've said before the only thing that's likely to stop him is the extremely unlikely entrance of Jeb Bush.
My comment is it's a joke of democracy for a straw poll in Ames, Iowa to have this kind of impact on choosing a nominee for president.
LMAO, Bachmann won Iowa? After getting DESTROYED in the last debate? Thank god no one cares about Iowa. Pawlenty slapped her down, surely the people of Iowa were watching the debate being held in Iowa???
See my post above, 100% agree with you. Bachmann winning shows just how much a straw poll in Iowa DOESN'T matter.
That is also true, I suppose. But putting a significant part of the primary process in the hands of small town, heartland Americans -- and creating a situation wherein candidates rise or fall according to their success with good old-fashioned door knocking and other sorts of retail politics, as opposed to expensive TV ad buys and national debates -- is not exactly at odds with a national identity most Americans like to believe in. It doesn't get much more grass roots than starting the process in a state so small that candidates actually have to meet the voters and talk to them personally. I agree though that the Ames straw poll is pretty bizarre and is not exactly a great model in itself.
They did indeed watch it and by a pretty big majority they judged Bachmann to have been the winner of that particular tangle.
Like it or not, the straw poll has reliably been a predictor of success in the Iowa caucus. And that does matter.
Iowa doesn't mean **** though, what does it have, 7 electoral votes? It's also gone D 4 of the last 5 presidential elections.
dont know what that is. But the fact is, the Tea party vote will go to Bachman and Ron Paul. There is a reason why Debra Medina got 20% of the vote in the gubernatorial election with little to no money at all.
Iowa does mean ****. It actually means tons of ****. It means momentum in the upcoming states and in the national view as well, it means increased fundraising, it reshuffles the field. Iowa could hardly matter more, to any race for the nomination, regardless of party. Iowa doesn't have a great track record for picking the winner, but it has a profound and iron-clad record for affecting the trajectory of any race. There are nine candidates now that are polling above 2%. Of those, only three (okay, plus Ron Paul regardless of his finish) really get to move on to NH with any credibility. The others won't be able to raise the funds to continue. That leaves, for all intents and purposes, 4/9 candidates standing. I'd call the winnowing of the field by half or more a significant event. More significantly, without Iowa, Bachmann wouldn't really have been a factor. With a clear win there, she will have to be seriously considered to be a contender and that means all-important donations. Iowa always changes the game.
A tip jar bet means that we make a bet and the loser has the privilege of donating to the clutchfans tip jar. Perry is already popular with the tea party. He will become more so when he becomes a leader in the race. Also, what effect do you think Palin's probable endorsement of Perry will have on tea party voters? Because she will endorse someone. And it won't be Bachmann, Romney or Paul. I predict that a plurality of the tea party will be supporting Perry after SC if not before.
the tea party would have kept her as a factor for several more months without a win here. They still have Romney, Bachmann, Perry, Paul and to a lesser extent Pawlenty and Palin if and when she decides to run. Bachmann will absolutely not win the nomination, she was never going to, and Iowa did not change that.
How is Perry popular with the tea party? I would seriously question the credibility of someone from the tea party if they vote Perry. Like I said Perry will divide the votes between Romney and the establishment republicans. But Perry will not steal any votes from Ron Paul. He might steal some from Bachman but no Ron Paul supporter will ever switch to perry.
