Iowa caucuses one day removed and the leftist dolts are already making
excuses. I expect they will get even more loony (if you can believe
that's possible) as we get closer to Trump being the nominee.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/iowa-results-show-weakness-donald-trump-democrat-governor-claims
--
"There are none so blind as liberals who will not see"

In article <uo67m3$1gepp$1@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
>
> Iowa caucuses one day removed and the leftist dolts are already making
> excuses. I expect they will get even more loony (if you can believe
> that's possible) as we get closer to Trump being the nominee.
>
> https://www.foxnews.com/politics/iowa-results-show-weakness-donald-trump-democrat-governor-claims

Excuses? I didn't bother to read the Fakes News article because I
don't think any excuses are necessary. It was a bad day for #45. Out of
a population of over 3 million people around 110,000 cared enough about
this event to show up. And out of those people around 49% voted against
#45. If you add the 49% of Republicans who don't want #45 to the 95% of
Democrats who don't want #45 it doesn't add up to anywhere close a
majority for the orange asshole.

TB

Technobarbarian wrote:
> In article <uo67m3$1gepp$1@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
>>
>> Iowa caucuses one day removed and the leftist dolts are already making
>> excuses. I expect they will get even more loony (if you can believe
>> that's possible) as we get closer to Trump being the nominee.
>>
>> https://www.foxnews.com/politics/iowa-results-show-weakness-donald-trump-democrat-governor-claims
>
> Excuses? I didn't bother to read the Fakes News article because I
> don't think any excuses are necessary. It was a bad day for #45. Out of
> a population of over 3 million people around 110,000 cared enough about
> this event to show up. And out of those people around 49% voted against
> #45. If you add the 49% of Republicans who don't want #45 to the 95% of
> Democrats who don't want #45 it doesn't add up to anywhere close a
> majority for the orange asshole.

Sounds like spaghetti math to me.

--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.

On 1/16/2024 10:58 AM, Technobarbarian wrote:
> In article <uo67m3$1gepp$1@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
>>
>> Iowa caucuses one day removed and the leftist dolts are already making
>> excuses. I expect they will get even more loony (if you can believe
>> that's possible) as we get closer to Trump being the nominee.
>>
>> https://www.foxnews.com/politics/iowa-results-show-weakness-donald-trump-democrat-governor-claims
>
> Excuses? I didn't bother to read the Fakes News article because I
> don't think any excuses are necessary. It was a bad day for #45. Out of
> a population of over 3 million people around 110,000 cared enough about
> this event to show up. And out of those people around 49% voted against
> #45. If you add the 49% of Republicans who don't want #45 to the 95% of
> Democrats who don't want #45 it doesn't add up to anywhere close a
> majority for the orange asshole.
>
> TB

Trump came within one vote of winning every every county in the state. I
would call that a landslide.

You better be careful though. If one of those lunatic liberal politician
blow buddies of yours steps in dog shit, given you are following in
their footsteps, you will need to clean your shoes as well.
--
"There are none so blind as liberals who will not see"

On 1/16/2024 1:58 PM, George.Anthony wrote:
> On 1/16/2024 10:58 AM, Technobarbarian wrote:
>> In article <uo67m3$1gepp$1@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
>>>
>>> Iowa caucuses one day removed and the leftist dolts are already making
>>> excuses. I expect they will get even more loony (if you can believe
>>> that's possible) as we get closer to Trump being the nominee.
>>>
>>> https://www.foxnews.com/politics/iowa-results-show-weakness-donald-trump-democrat-governor-claims
>>
>>       Excuses? I didn't bother to read the Fakes News article because I
>> don't think any excuses are necessary. It was a bad day for #45. Out of
>> a population of over 3 million people around 110,000 cared enough about
>> this event to show up. And out of those people around 49% voted against
>> #45. If you add the 49% of Republicans who don't want #45 to the 95% of
>> Democrats who don't want #45 it doesn't add up to anywhere close a
>> majority for the orange asshole.
>>
>> TB
>
> Trump came within one vote of winning every every county in the state. I
> would call that a landslide.
>
> You better be careful though. If one of those lunatic liberal politician
> blow buddies of yours steps in dog shit, given you are following in
> their footsteps, you will need to clean your shoes as well.

By the way, how many of those three million people are of voting age and
how many are registered republicans?
--
"There are none so blind as liberals who will not see"

George.Anthony wrote:
> On 1/16/2024 1:58 PM, George.Anthony wrote:
>> On 1/16/2024 10:58 AM, Technobarbarian wrote:
>>> In article <uo67m3$1gepp$1@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
>>>>
>>>> Iowa caucuses one day removed and the leftist dolts are already
>>>> making
>>>> excuses. I expect they will get even more loony (if you can believe
>>>> that's possible) as we get closer to Trump being the nominee.
>>>>
>>>> https://www.foxnews.com/politics/iowa-results-show-weakness-donald-trump-democrat-governor-claims
>>>>
>>>
>>>       Excuses? I didn't bother to read the Fakes News article
>>> because I
>>> don't think any excuses are necessary. It was a bad day for #45.
>>> Out of
>>> a population of over 3 million people around 110,000 cared enough
>>> about
>>> this event to show up. And out of those people around 49% voted
>>> against
>>> #45. If you add the 49% of Republicans who don't want #45 to the
>>> 95% of
>>> Democrats who don't want #45 it doesn't add up to anywhere close a
>>> majority for the orange asshole.
>>>
>>> TB
>>
>> Trump came within one vote of winning every every county in the
>> state. I would call that a landslide.
>>
>> You better be careful though. If one of those lunatic liberal
>> politician blow buddies of yours steps in dog shit, given you are
>> following in their footsteps, you will need to clean your shoes as
>> well.
>
> By the way, how many of those three million people are of voting age
> and how many are registered republicans?

https://independentvoterproject.org/voter-stats/ia

--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.

On 1/16/2024 1:59 PM, George.Anthony wrote:
> On 1/16/2024 1:58 PM, George.Anthony wrote:
>> On 1/16/2024 10:58 AM, Technobarbarian wrote:
>>> In article <uo67m3$1gepp$1@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
>>>>
>>>> Iowa caucuses one day removed and the leftist dolts are already making
>>>> excuses. I expect they will get even more loony (if you can believe
>>>> that's possible) as we get closer to Trump being the nominee.
>>>>
>>>> https://www.foxnews.com/politics/iowa-results-show-weakness-donald-trump-democrat-governor-claims
>>>
>>>       Excuses? I didn't bother to read the Fakes News article because I
>>> don't think any excuses are necessary. It was a bad day for #45. Out of
>>> a population of over 3 million people around 110,000 cared enough about
>>> this event to show up. And out of those people around 49% voted against
>>> #45. If you add the 49% of Republicans who don't want #45 to the 95% of
>>> Democrats who don't want #45 it doesn't add up to anywhere close a
>>> majority for the orange asshole.
>>>
>>> TB
>>
>> Trump came within one vote of winning every every county in the state.
>> I would call that a landslide.
>>
>> You better be careful though. If one of those lunatic liberal
>> politician blow buddies of yours steps in dog shit, given you are
>> following in their footsteps, you will need to clean your shoes as well.
>
> By the way, how many of those three million people are of voting age and
> how many are registered republicans?

The boob must not understand how a caucus works. Here's a quote from
the far right Associated Press

<https://apnews.com/article/trump-iowa-caucus-haley-desantis-cold-voting-begins-0af10f1ba21d488af54776b2c8d4028c>

"Former President Donald Trump scored a record-setting win"

"In what was the lowest-turnout caucus in a quarter-century,
participants endured life-threatening cold and dangerous driving
conditions to meet in hundreds of schools, churches and community
centers across the state. But those who ventured out delivered a roughly
30-point win for Trump that smashed the record for a contested Iowa
Republican caucus with a margin of victory exceeding Bob Dole’s nearly
13-percentage-point victory in 1988. "

It's over. He's not only gonna be the next GOP nominee, he'll be the
next POTUS!!

--
Stand With Israel!
NOTE: If you use Google Groups I don't see you,
unless you're whitelisted and that's doubtful.

On 1/16/2024 4:11 PM, sticks wrote:
> On 1/16/2024 1:59 PM, George.Anthony wrote:
>> On 1/16/2024 1:58 PM, George.Anthony wrote:
>>> On 1/16/2024 10:58 AM, Technobarbarian wrote:
>>>> In article <uo67m3$1gepp$1@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
>>>>>
>>>>> Iowa caucuses one day removed and the leftist dolts are already making
>>>>> excuses. I expect they will get even more loony (if you can believe
>>>>> that's possible) as we get closer to Trump being the nominee.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.foxnews.com/politics/iowa-results-show-weakness-donald-trump-democrat-governor-claims
>>>>
>>>>       Excuses? I didn't bother to read the Fakes News article because I
>>>> don't think any excuses are necessary. It was a bad day for #45. Out of
>>>> a population of over 3 million people around 110,000 cared enough about
>>>> this event to show up. And out of those people around 49% voted against
>>>> #45. If you add the 49% of Republicans who don't want #45 to the 95% of
>>>> Democrats who don't want #45 it doesn't add up to anywhere close a
>>>> majority for the orange asshole.
>>>>
>>>> TB
>>>
>>> Trump came within one vote of winning every every county in the
>>> state. I would call that a landslide.
>>>
>>> You better be careful though. If one of those lunatic liberal
>>> politician blow buddies of yours steps in dog shit, given you are
>>> following in their footsteps, you will need to clean your shoes as well.
>>
>> By the way, how many of those three million people are of voting age
>> and how many are registered republicans?
>
> The boob must not understand how a caucus works.  Here's a quote from
> the far right Associated Press
>
> <https://apnews.com/article/trump-iowa-caucus-haley-desantis-cold-voting-begins-0af10f1ba21d488af54776b2c8d4028c>
>
> "Former President Donald Trump scored a record-setting win"
>
> "In what was the lowest-turnout caucus in a quarter-century,
> participants endured life-threatening cold and dangerous driving
> conditions to meet in hundreds of schools, churches and community
> centers across the state. But those who ventured out delivered a roughly
> 30-point win for Trump that smashed the record for a contested Iowa
> Republican caucus with a margin of victory exceeding Bob Dole’s nearly
> 13-percentage-point victory in 1988. "
>
> It's over.  He's not only gonna be the next GOP nominee, he'll be the
> next POTUS!!
>
Senor Smoke has to be one of the most clueless individuals on the
planet. That or he is totally blind to reality. Again, I refer to my tag
line.
--
"There are none so blind as liberals who will not see"

In article <uo6n7q$1jb1i$2@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
>
> On 1/16/2024 1:58 PM, George.Anthony wrote:
> > On 1/16/2024 10:58 AM, Technobarbarian wrote:
> >> In article <uo67m3$1gepp$1@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
> >>>
> >>> Iowa caucuses one day removed and the leftist dolts are already making
> >>> excuses. I expect they will get even more loony (if you can believe
> >>> that's possible) as we get closer to Trump being the nominee.
> >>>
> >>> https://www.foxnews.com/politics/iowa-results-show-weakness-donald-trump-democrat-governor-claims
> >>
> >>       Excuses? I didn't bother to read the Fakes News article because I
> >> don't think any excuses are necessary. It was a bad day for #45. Out of
> >> a population of over 3 million people around 110,000 cared enough about
> >> this event to show up. And out of those people around 49% voted against
> >> #45. If you add the 49% of Republicans who don't want #45 to the 95% of
> >> Democrats who don't want #45 it doesn't add up to anywhere close a
> >> majority for the orange asshole.
> >>
> >> TB
> >
> > Trump came within one vote of winning every every county in the state. I
> > would call that a landslide.
> >
> > You better be careful though. If one of those lunatic liberal politician
> > blow buddies of yours steps in dog shit, given you are following in
> > their footsteps, you will need to clean your shoes as well.
>
> By the way, how many of those three million people are of voting age and
> how many are registered republicans?

lqtm What difference would it make? You're too damn dumb to be
embarassed. He's the former President of the United States. He has name
recognition up his orange whazoo. He's supposedly the leader of the
Republican party. Two of his PACs spent a combined total of over $200
for every vote he got. And the former leader of the free world can
barely eke out a simple majority from his own party. Oh yeah, this just
has "Good News" written all over it.

TB

On 1/16/2024 5:13 PM, Technobarbarian wrote:
> In article <uo6n7q$1jb1i$2@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
>>
>> On 1/16/2024 1:58 PM, George.Anthony wrote:
>>> On 1/16/2024 10:58 AM, Technobarbarian wrote:
>>>> In article <uo67m3$1gepp$1@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
>>>>>
>>>>> Iowa caucuses one day removed and the leftist dolts are already making
>>>>> excuses. I expect they will get even more loony (if you can believe
>>>>> that's possible) as we get closer to Trump being the nominee.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.foxnews.com/politics/iowa-results-show-weakness-donald-trump-democrat-governor-claims
>>>>
>>>>       Excuses? I didn't bother to read the Fakes News article because I
>>>> don't think any excuses are necessary. It was a bad day for #45. Out of
>>>> a population of over 3 million people around 110,000 cared enough about
>>>> this event to show up. And out of those people around 49% voted against
>>>> #45. If you add the 49% of Republicans who don't want #45 to the 95% of
>>>> Democrats who don't want #45 it doesn't add up to anywhere close a
>>>> majority for the orange asshole.
>>>>
>>>> TB
>>>
>>> Trump came within one vote of winning every every county in the state. I
>>> would call that a landslide.
>>>
>>> You better be careful though. If one of those lunatic liberal politician
>>> blow buddies of yours steps in dog shit, given you are following in
>>> their footsteps, you will need to clean your shoes as well.
>>
>> By the way, how many of those three million people are of voting age and
>> how many are registered republicans?
>
> lqtm What difference would it make? You're too damn dumb to be
> embarassed. He's the former President of the United States. He has name
> recognition up his orange whazoo. He's supposedly the leader of the
> Republican party. Two of his PACs spent a combined total of over $200
> for every vote he got. And the former leader of the free world can
> barely eke out a simple majority from his own party. Oh yeah, this just
> has "Good News" written all over it.
>
> TB

Hey dumb ass, he beat both of his closest rivals by 30 points. I don't
call that eking out a win. Are you really that dumb or do you just play
dumb on the internet?
--
"There are none so blind as liberals who will not see"

On 1/16/2024 7:09 PM, George.Anthony wrote:
> On 1/16/2024 5:13 PM, Technobarbarian wrote:
>> In article <uo6n7q$1jb1i$2@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
>>>
>>> On 1/16/2024 1:58 PM, George.Anthony wrote:
>>>> On 1/16/2024 10:58 AM, Technobarbarian wrote:
>>>>> In article <uo67m3$1gepp$1@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Iowa caucuses one day removed and the leftist dolts are already
>>>>>> making
>>>>>> excuses. I expect they will get even more loony (if you can believe
>>>>>> that's possible) as we get closer to Trump being the nominee.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.foxnews.com/politics/iowa-results-show-weakness-donald-trump-democrat-governor-claims
>>>>>
>>>>>        Excuses? I didn't bother to read the Fakes News article
>>>>> because I
>>>>> don't think any excuses are necessary. It was a bad day for #45.
>>>>> Out of
>>>>> a population of over 3 million people around 110,000 cared enough
>>>>> about
>>>>> this event to show up. And out of those people around 49% voted
>>>>> against
>>>>> #45. If you add the 49% of Republicans who don't want #45 to the
>>>>> 95% of
>>>>> Democrats who don't want #45 it doesn't add up to anywhere close a
>>>>> majority for the orange asshole.
>>>>>
>>>>> TB
>>>>
>>>> Trump came within one vote of winning every every county in the
>>>> state. I
>>>> would call that a landslide.
>>>>
>>>> You better be careful though. If one of those lunatic liberal
>>>> politician
>>>> blow buddies of yours steps in dog shit, given you are following in
>>>> their footsteps, you will need to clean your shoes as well.
>>>
>>> By the way, how many of those three million people are of voting age and
>>> how many are registered republicans?
>>
>>       lqtm What difference would it make? You're too damn dumb to be
>> embarassed. He's the former President of the United States. He has name
>> recognition up his orange whazoo. He's supposedly the leader of the
>> Republican party. Two of his PACs spent a combined total of over $200
>> for every vote he got. And the former leader of the free world can
>> barely eke out a simple majority from his own party. Oh yeah, this just
>> has "Good News" written all over it.
>>
>> TB
>
> Hey dumb ass, he beat both of his closest rivals by 30 points. I don't
> call that eking out a win. Are you really that dumb or do you just play
> dumb on the internet?

Don't forget that FuckJoeBiden certainly didn't win Iowa in 2020. Pete
ButtPlug did! Ha. Joe didn't even come in 2nd or 3rd. The only one he
beat was Amy Klobuchar, and just barely at that.

<https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/02/04/us/elections/results-iowa-caucus.html>

It wasn't until James Clyburn came to his rescue for the party since it
was looking like they would actually have Socialist Bernie Sanders as
the nominee unless they sabotaged his campaign. So, they did!

<https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/remember-when-bernie-sanders-was-his-way-democratic-nomination-n1179851>

--
Stand With Israel!
NOTE: If you use Google Groups I don't see you,
unless you're whitelisted and that's doubtful.

In article <uo79bg$1m7c0$2@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
> Hey dumb ass, he beat both of his closest rivals by 30 points. I don't
> call that eking out a win. Are you really that dumb or do you just play
> dumb on the internet?
>

Unfortunately for him, he won't be running against any of those
losers in the general election, where he has never won the popular vote.

But hey, I stumbled on half an answer to your dumbassed
questions. After spending millions of other people's dollars he got the
got the vote of 2.7% of the registered voters in Iowa.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100218601498

TB

In article <MPG.4010d630122444109896b0@reader80.eternal-september.org>,
technobarbarian@gmail.com says...
>
> In article <uo79bg$1m7c0$2@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
> > Hey dumb ass, he beat both of his closest rivals by 30 points. I don't
> > call that eking out a win. Are you really that dumb or do you just play
> > dumb on the internet?
> >
>
>
> Unfortunately for him, he won't be running against any of those
> losers in the general election, where he has never won the popular vote.
>
> But hey, I stumbled on half an answer to your dumbassed
> questions. After spending millions of other people's dollars he got the
> got the vote of 2.7% of the registered voters in Iowa.
>
> https://www.democraticunderground.com/100218601498
>
> TB

It's also worth noting that this means that around 2.6% of the
registered voters in Iowa went out in bad weather to vote against #45.
Yeah, this is a yuge win.

TB

On 1/16/2024 3:13 PM, Technobarbarian wrote:
> In article <uo6n7q$1jb1i$2@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
>>
>> On 1/16/2024 1:58 PM, George.Anthony wrote:
>>> On 1/16/2024 10:58 AM, Technobarbarian wrote:
>>>> In article <uo67m3$1gepp$1@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
>>>>>
>>>>> Iowa caucuses one day removed and the leftist dolts are already making
>>>>> excuses. I expect they will get even more loony (if you can believe
>>>>> that's possible) as we get closer to Trump being the nominee.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.foxnews.com/politics/iowa-results-show-weakness-donald-trump-democrat-governor-claims
>>>>
>>>>       Excuses? I didn't bother to read the Fakes News article because I
>>>> don't think any excuses are necessary. It was a bad day for #45. Out of
>>>> a population of over 3 million people around 110,000 cared enough about
>>>> this event to show up. And out of those people around 49% voted against
>>>> #45. If you add the 49% of Republicans who don't want #45 to the 95% of
>>>> Democrats who don't want #45 it doesn't add up to anywhere close a
>>>> majority for the orange asshole.
>>>>
>>>> TB
>>>
>>> Trump came within one vote of winning every every county in the state. I
>>> would call that a landslide.
>>>
>>> You better be careful though. If one of those lunatic liberal politician
>>> blow buddies of yours steps in dog shit, given you are following in
>>> their footsteps, you will need to clean your shoes as well.
>>
>> By the way, how many of those three million people are of voting age and
>> how many are registered republicans?
>
> lqtm What difference would it make? You're too damn dumb to be
> embarassed. He's the former President of the United States. He has name
> recognition up his orange whazoo. He's supposedly the leader of the
> Republican party. Two of his PACs spent a combined total of over $200
> for every vote he got. And the former leader of the free world can
> barely eke out a simple majority from his own party. Oh yeah, this just
> has "Good News" written all over it.
>
> TB

He was also in court today about to lose another 10 million
smackaroonies. HawHawHaw!

On 1/16/2024 8:35 PM, Technobarbarian wrote:
> In article <MPG.4010d630122444109896b0@reader80.eternal-september.org>,
> technobarbarian@gmail.com says...
>>
>> In article <uo79bg$1m7c0$2@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
>>> Hey dumb ass, he beat both of his closest rivals by 30 points. I don't
>>> call that eking out a win. Are you really that dumb or do you just play
>>> dumb on the internet?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Unfortunately for him, he won't be running against any of those
>> losers in the general election, where he has never won the popular vote.
>>
>> But hey, I stumbled on half an answer to your dumbassed
>> questions. After spending millions of other people's dollars he got the
>> got the vote of 2.7% of the registered voters in Iowa.
>>
>> https://www.democraticunderground.com/100218601498
>>
>> TB
>
> It's also worth noting that this means that around 2.6% of the
> registered voters in Iowa went out in bad weather to vote against #45.
> Yeah, this is a yuge win.
>
> TB

Again I say, " Are you really that dumb or do you just play
dumb on the internet?".
--
"There are none so blind as liberals who will not see"

In article <uo6n7q$1jb1i$2@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
>
> On 1/16/2024 1:58 PM, George.Anthony wrote:
> > On 1/16/2024 10:58 AM, Technobarbarian wrote:
> >> In article <uo67m3$1gepp$1@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
> >>>
> >>> Iowa caucuses one day removed and the leftist dolts are already making
> >>> excuses. I expect they will get even more loony (if you can believe
> >>> that's possible) as we get closer to Trump being the nominee.
> >>>
> >>> https://www.foxnews.com/politics/iowa-results-show-weakness-donald-trump-democrat-governor-claims
> >>
> >>       Excuses? I didn't bother to read the Fakes News article because I
> >> don't think any excuses are necessary. It was a bad day for #45. Out of
> >> a population of over 3 million people around 110,000 cared enough about
> >> this event to show up. And out of those people around 49% voted against
> >> #45. If you add the 49% of Republicans who don't want #45 to the 95% of
> >> Democrats who don't want #45 it doesn't add up to anywhere close a
> >> majority for the orange asshole.
> >>
> >> TB
> >
> > Trump came within one vote of winning every every county in the state. I
> > would call that a landslide.
> >
> > You better be careful though. If one of those lunatic liberal politician
> > blow buddies of yours steps in dog shit, given you are following in
> > their footsteps, you will need to clean your shoes as well.
>
> By the way, how many of those three million people are of voting age and
> how many are registered republicans?

I got to wondering about the precise numbers. They don't make the
orange dumbass look any better, but they *might* help the mathmatically
impaired to understand what just happened.

"Iowa Caucuses drew 15% of state's registered Republicans"

https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/cauc
us/2024/01/16/iowa-caucus-turnout-registered-republicans-15-percent-
cold-weather-snow-donald-trump-expectations/72067396007/

Despite knowing in advance that their candidate would win, 56,260
registered Republicans went out in freezing weather to vote for #45.
That is just barely 51% of the people who voted.

Despite knowing in advance that their candidate would lose,
54,038 people went out in freezing to vote against #45. That's 49
percent of the people who voted. The supposed leader of the Republican
party was only endorsed by 51% of his supposed followers. The numbers
aren't likely to get any better when you add in people who aren't
retrumplicans.

TB

Technobarbarian wrote:
> In article <uo6n7q$1jb1i$2@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
>>
>> On 1/16/2024 1:58 PM, George.Anthony wrote:
>>> On 1/16/2024 10:58 AM, Technobarbarian wrote:
>>>> In article <uo67m3$1gepp$1@dont-email.me>, ganthony@gmail.org says...
>>>>>
>>>>> Iowa caucuses one day removed and the leftist dolts are already making
>>>>> excuses. I expect they will get even more loony (if you can believe
>>>>> that's possible) as we get closer to Trump being the nominee.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.foxnews.com/politics/iowa-results-show-weakness-donald-trump-democrat-governor-claims
>>>>
>>>>       Excuses? I didn't bother to read the Fakes News article because I
>>>> don't think any excuses are necessary. It was a bad day for #45. Out of
>>>> a population of over 3 million people around 110,000 cared enough about
>>>> this event to show up. And out of those people around 49% voted against
>>>> #45. If you add the 49% of Republicans who don't want #45 to the 95% of
>>>> Democrats who don't want #45 it doesn't add up to anywhere close a
>>>> majority for the orange asshole.
>>>>
>>>> TB
>>>
>>> Trump came within one vote of winning every every county in the state. I
>>> would call that a landslide.
>>>
>>> You better be careful though. If one of those lunatic liberal politician
>>> blow buddies of yours steps in dog shit, given you are following in
>>> their footsteps, you will need to clean your shoes as well.
>>
>> By the way, how many of those three million people are of voting age and
>> how many are registered republicans?
>
> I got to wondering about the precise numbers. They don't make the
> orange dumbass look any better, but they *might* help the mathmatically
> impaired to understand what just happened.
>
> "Iowa Caucuses drew 15% of state's registered Republicans"
>
> https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/cauc
> us/2024/01/16/iowa-caucus-turnout-registered-republicans-15-percent-
> cold-weather-snow-donald-trump-expectations/72067396007/
>
> Despite knowing in advance that their candidate would win, 56,260
> registered Republicans went out in freezing weather to vote for #45.
> That is just barely 51% of the people who voted.
>
> Despite knowing in advance that their candidate would lose,
> 54,038 people went out in freezing to vote against #45. That's 49
> percent of the people who voted. The supposed leader of the Republican
> party was only endorsed by 51% of his supposed followers. The numbers
> aren't likely to get any better when you add in people who aren't
> retrumplicans.

This, from the NYT:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
...
The first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses delivered him a sweeping victory
...
Not only did he win in a landslide anyway, but his 30-point margin of
victory set a record for a contested Iowa Republican caucus.
...
In county after county across the Iowa countryside, Trump obtained
more than 60 percent of the vote — and sometimes 70 percent — with his
rivals languishing in the teens or single digits.
...
------------------------------------------------------------------
https://messaging-custom-newsletters.nytimes.com/dynamic/render?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20240116&instance_id=112632&nl=the-morning&paid_regi=2&productCode=NN&regi_id=70663888&segment_id=155440&te=1&user_id=86978059d95a9105c5d08ceea5446896&uri=nyt%3A%2F%2Fnewsletter%2F288abd64-f3b9-55a1-bb4b-96ea6caae0c9

--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.

In article <47YpN.220583$PuZ9.37133@fx11.iad>, redydog@rye.net says...
> This, from the NYT:
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> ...
> The first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses delivered him a sweeping victory
> ...
> Not only did he win in a landslide anyway, but his 30-point margin of
> victory set a record for a contested Iowa Republican caucus.
> ...
> In county after county across the Iowa countryside, Trump obtained
> more than 60 percent of the vote ? and sometimes 70 percent ? with his
> rivals languishing in the teens or single digits.
> ...
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> https://messaging-custom-newsletters.nytimes.com/dynamic/render?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20240116&instance_id=112632&nl=the-morning&paid_regi=2&productCode=NN&regi_id=70663888&segment_id=155440&te=1&user_id=86978059d95a9105c5d08ceea5446896&uri=nyt%3A%2F%2Fnewsletter%2F288abd64-f3b9-55a1-bb4b-96ea6caae0c9
>
>

"This, from the NYT:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
....
The first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses delivered him a sweeping victory
....
Not only did he win in a landslide anyway, but his 30-point margin of
victory set a record for a contested Iowa Republican caucus.
....
In county after county across the Iowa countryside, Trump obtained
more than 60 percent of the vote ? and sometimes 70 percent ? with his
rivals languishing in the teens or single digits.
....
------------------------------------------------------------------
https://messaging-custom-newsletters.nytimes.com/dynamic/render?
campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20240116&instance_id=112632&nl=the-
morning&paid_regi=2&productCode=NN&regi_id=70663888&segment_id=155440
&te=1&user_id=86978059d95a9105c5d08ceea5446896&uri=nyt%3A%2F%
2Fnewsletter%2F288abd64-f3b9-55a1-bb4b-96ea6caae0c9

"Shake-Up by a Desperate DeSantis Opens Wider Path for Haley in New
Hampshire

Ron DeSantis?s super PAC began layoffs on the same day he signaled he
would largely bypass New Hampshire?s primary election and train his
efforts on South Carolina."

"Since December, Ms. Haley and her allies have pointed to the
possibility of a one-on-one race in New Hampshire as an opportunity for
an outright victory there.

Internal polling conducted last month in the state by Americans for
Prosperity Action, a super PAC founded by the billionaire Koch family
that is backing Ms. Haley?s campaign, found that in a full field of
Republican candidates, she trailed Mr. Trump by 45 percent to 32
percent.

But in a head-to-head matchup between Ms. Haley and Mr. Trump, without
Mr. DeSantis, Vivek Ramaswamy or Chris Christie ? both of whom have
since left the race ? the polling found Ms. Haley in a statistical tie
with Mr. Trump, 48 percent to 45 percent."

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/17/us/politics/desantis-layoffs-super-
pac.html?
utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAQ9Y397rra5vKOAR
iVkaP2-
PiO9o0BKg8IACoHCAowjuuKAzCWrzw&utm_content=rundown&gaa_at=g&gaa_n=AZsHK_
mea01h1Gl2SuR8wxGzJy9VdZobrxQz7
_e7qqSs7qlnwBp3IOVo0QLTEGso22qLzGjv0MydPu4RKCzGEn8hCbQ%3D&gaa_ts=
65a8836d&gaa_sig=u2IDMTsO3Nfoa2CjcRXNQmBqVb33EhjNBeAmVYsRDSJzft3iSqIQvnI
CUag5kOtSs8CLJnDMKPFwko-xhrpmqA%3D%3D

From this point on, going forward, it's very charitable to say
that the former president't support in his own party is "soft".

TB

On 1/17/2024 7:27 PM, Technobarbarian wrote:
> In article <47YpN.220583$PuZ9.37133@fx11.iad>, redydog@rye.net says...
>> This, from the NYT:
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ...
>> The first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses delivered him a sweeping victory
>> ...
>> Not only did he win in a landslide anyway, but his 30-point margin of
>> victory set a record for a contested Iowa Republican caucus.
>> ...
>> In county after county across the Iowa countryside, Trump obtained
>> more than 60 percent of the vote ? and sometimes 70 percent ? with his
>> rivals languishing in the teens or single digits.
>> ...
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> https://messaging-custom-newsletters.nytimes.com/dynamic/render?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20240116&instance_id=112632&nl=the-morning&paid_regi=2&productCode=NN®i_id=70663888&segment_id=155440&te=1&user_id=86978059d95a9105c5d08ceea5446896&uri=nyt%3A%2F%2Fnewsletter%2F288abd64-f3b9-55a1-bb4b-96ea6caae0c9" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://messaging-custom-newsletters.nytimes.com/dynamic/render?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20240116&instance_id=112632&nl=the-morning&paid_regi=2&productCode=NN&regi_id=70663888&segment_id=155440&te=1&user_id=86978059d95a9105c5d08ceea5446896&uri=nyt%3A%2F%2Fnewsletter%2F288abd64-f3b9-55a1-bb4b-96ea6caae0c9
>>
>>
>
> "This, from the NYT:
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> ...
> The first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses delivered him a sweeping victory
> ...
> Not only did he win in a landslide anyway, but his 30-point margin of
> victory set a record for a contested Iowa Republican caucus.
> ...
> In county after county across the Iowa countryside, Trump obtained
> more than 60 percent of the vote ? and sometimes 70 percent ? with his
> rivals languishing in the teens or single digits.
> ...
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> https://messaging-custom-newsletters.nytimes.com/dynamic/render?
> campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20240116&instance_id=112632&nl=the-
> morning&paid_regi=2&productCode=NN&regi_id=70663888&segment_id=155440
> &te=1&user_id=86978059d95a9105c5d08ceea5446896&uri=nyt%3A%2F%
> 2Fnewsletter%2F288abd64-f3b9-55a1-bb4b-96ea6caae0c9
>
> "Shake-Up by a Desperate DeSantis Opens Wider Path for Haley in New
> Hampshire
>
> Ron DeSantis?s super PAC began layoffs on the same day he signaled he
> would largely bypass New Hampshire?s primary election and train his
> efforts on South Carolina."
>
> "Since December, Ms. Haley and her allies have pointed to the
> possibility of a one-on-one race in New Hampshire as an opportunity for
> an outright victory there.
>
> Internal polling conducted last month in the state by Americans for
> Prosperity Action, a super PAC founded by the billionaire Koch family
> that is backing Ms. Haley?s campaign, found that in a full field of
> Republican candidates, she trailed Mr. Trump by 45 percent to 32
> percent.
>
> But in a head-to-head matchup between Ms. Haley and Mr. Trump, without
> Mr. DeSantis, Vivek Ramaswamy or Chris Christie ? both of whom have
> since left the race ? the polling found Ms. Haley in a statistical tie
> with Mr. Trump, 48 percent to 45 percent."
>
> https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/17/us/politics/desantis-layoffs-super-
> pac.html?
> utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAQ9Y397rra5vKOAR
> iVkaP2-
> PiO9o0BKg8IACoHCAowjuuKAzCWrzw&utm_content=rundown&gaa_at=g&gaa_n=AZsHK_
> mea01h1Gl2SuR8wxGzJy9VdZobrxQz7
> _e7qqSs7qlnwBp3IOVo0QLTEGso22qLzGjv0MydPu4RKCzGEn8hCbQ%3D&gaa_ts=
> 65a8836d&gaa_sig=u2IDMTsO3Nfoa2CjcRXNQmBqVb33EhjNBeAmVYsRDSJzft3iSqIQvnI
> CUag5kOtSs8CLJnDMKPFwko-xhrpmqA%3D%3D
>
> From this point on, going forward, it's very charitable to say
> that the former president't support in his own party is "soft".
>
> TB
>

You need to put away your shovel.
--
"There are none so blind as liberals who will not see"