XemaSab
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-24-07 12:10 PM
Original message |
| In 1992, Clinton got 3% of the votes in the Iowa Caucus and 25% in New Hampshire |
|
Third and second, respectively.
Dukakis came in third in Iowa, but first in New Hampshire.
Mondale came in first in Iowa, but second in New Hampshire.
Let this be a lesson to us all: a mediocre showing in one of the first states is NOT the kiss of death as far as winning the nomination goes.
If Obama, Edwards, or Clinton comes in third in either state, it's not over.
|
| ElizabethDC
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-24-07 12:13 PM
Response to Original message |
| 1. Clinton didn't compete in Iowa in '92 since Harkin was running for president |
|
so it's a bit of a different situation.
|
| DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-24-07 12:13 PM
Response to Original message |
| 2. Clinton Didn't Seriously Contest IA In 92 Because Harkin Was Running |
|
And Tsongas was the senator from the neighboring state...
|
| wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-24-07 12:19 PM
Response to Original message |
| 3. Don't forget Hillary's California effect on Iowa... |
| XemaSab
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-24-07 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
| 5. I don't get what you're saying. |
| wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-24-07 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
| 6. The Clinton GOTV efforts in CA are staggering... |
|
..especially the absentee ballots. Hillary is leading big in CA and the morning of the Iowa caucuses results from the absentte ballots in CA will already be making the news
|
| Debi
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-24-07 12:20 PM
Response to Original message |
| 4. In 2004 Wes Clark chose not to run in Iowa - how'd he do in later states? |
|
in 2000 bat-shit-insane McCain chose to ignore Iowa - how'd he do later on down the road?
It's a different atmosphere than in 1992 and nothing can compare to it.
+++++++++++++++++
However, I think that each of the 'big three' candidates have enough money and solid support in states after Iowa/New Hampshire that they'd have to finish outside of 1-2-3 to have it spell doom and gloom for their campaigns.
I think all three of them can rotate wins in each of the four first states and still perform admirably on February 5th.
Only a big stumble could unseat them (a fourth or fifth place finish - a scandal - foolishly spending ALL their money on one of the early states w/out considering what happens one week after).
JMO
|
| jcrew2001
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-24-07 02:07 PM
Response to Original message |
| 7. If History can repeat for Hillary - I hope this comes true |
|
A 3rd place and 2nd place finish in Iowa and NH would be terrific.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts)     |
Wed Apr 24th 2024, 10:52 PM
Response to Original message |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
