How much did the Iowa results skew the election?

[dansolo]

I believe that if the Iowa results were a close contest between Dean, Kerry, Edwards, and Gephardt, that the primaries would be very different. Putting aside the scream, which was a complete media misrepresentation, if Kerry hadn't gotten such a decisive victory, then I don't think he would have gotten as much momentum, and positive coverage. What bothers me the most is the lack of support that Gephardt got in Iowa. I expected that he would have gotten 20% locked, and probably 10% leaning towards him in Iowa. I know that the media story was that Gephardt lost out becuase of his negative ads. I don't believe it. I believe that most of Gephardt's support went to Kerry, not because they supported him, but because they wanted to knock out Dean. And with the results of Iowa, combined with the fortuitous circumstance of "the scream" and the media echo chamber, they were able to succeed.

[Zynx]

1. They gave Kerry momentum that is impossible to reverse in a week.

The momentum Kerry got lasted into NH and there wasn't enough time to turn it around because of the tight scheduel.

[YouMustBeKiddingMe]

2. LOL! You guys just kill me sometimes

If Kerry didn't win and Dean didn't do so poorly, the results would be a lot different. Okay. LOL!

[dansolo]

3. But that's counter to the assertions that are made here

I didn't say anything about Dean. He could have still ended up with 18%. What I am curious about was the mass defection of the Gephardt people over to Kerry. The Kerry folk here are saying that Kerry's wins are a result of his popularity. But if that was the case, then different results in Iowa would have made no difference.

[YouMustBeKiddingMe]

5. I don't understand your point

You say you didn't say anything about Dean? Your initial post was all about Dean.

I'm not at all confused about why Gephardt people went to Kerry. Dean went negative and nasty on Gephardt and Gephardt responded -- they both paid for that at the polls. Dean certainly did not endear himself to Gephardt supporters. I'm not saying that is the only reason Gephardt people prefer Kerry over Dean either.

I don't understand your last two sentences. Kerry's wins are the results of his popularity? A benign statement. Wins are the results of the most votes. If Dean were winning he would be the most popular with the voters. What's your point?

"But if that were the case the different results in Iowa would have made no difference?" I have no idea what you're getting at with this comment.

[Upfront]

4. To much!