Bachmann 4823, Paul 4671, Pawlenty 2293, Santorum 1657, Cain 1456, Perry 718, Romney 567...

[underpants]

Bachmann 4823, Paul 4671, Pawlenty 2293, Santorum 1657, Cain 1456, Perry 718, Romney 567, Gingrich 385, Huntsman 69, McCotter 35

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4960300&mesg_id=4960301

[RagAss]

1. Farewell...Romney.

[polichick]

2. Romney didn't participate.

[CakeGrrl]

3. Yes he did. Perry wasn't there. -nt

[polichick]

4. Nope...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/09/mitt-romney-iowa-straw-poll_n_874598.html

[CakeGrrl]

7. Ah. Got it mixed up with the debate. -nt

[BackToThe60s]

5. Romney didn't actively campaign

He knew damn well it wasn't his territory or demographic.

[underpants]

18. Well he did go to to Iowa

but yes he didn't actively participate. He went though so it was the typical Romney "I am here but it doesn't really count"

[RyanPsych]

13. Because the Ames Straw Poll (or Iowa caucas in general) has ever predicted anything...

If Iowa was predictive of anything- we would have had Pat Robertson as the GOP canidate back in 1988, and Mitt Romney would have run against Obama.

All it serves is to underscore both how irrelevent Iowa is, and how insane the Republicans who live there are.

[Honeycombe8]

6. Pawlenty had a decent showing. Interesting. Say goodbye to Backman and Paul.

Because they ended up 1st & 2nd in IA straw poll, that means they won't win the nomination. I think I heard on TV that whoever wins the IA GOP caucus, loses the nomination.

Makes me wonder why the parties start in Iowa. It seems ridiculous to me.

[StevieM]

8. I think the results are mixed over the years.

In 1976 Jimmy Carter won Iowa and that enabled him to come from out of nowhere to win New Hampshire and, ultimately, the Democratic nomination and then the Presidency.

In 1980 Ronald Reagan lost Iowa to George HW Bush, but won the GOP nomination, and then the White House.

In 1984 Walter Mondale won Iowa and then the nomination. Gary Hart came in second in 84, which propelled him to victory in New Hampshire and he then became the alternative to Mondale in the nomination battle, which made him the early front runner for 88, before a scandal destroyed his campaign.

In 1988 George HW Bush and Michael Dukakis both came in third in Iowa, before charging back to win New Hampshire and, ultimately, their parties' nominations.

In 1996 Bob Dole won Iowa, which enabled him to survive a New Hampshire loss to Pat Buchanan and win his party's nomination.

In 2000 Al Gore blew out Bill Bradley in Iowa, which enabled him to slip by Bradley in New Hampshire and then sweep on Super Tuesday. George W Bush won in Iowa, which allowed him to get crushed by John McCain in New Hampshire and still hold on to win the GOP nomination.

In 2004 John Kerry won in Iowa, which propelled him past Howard Dean to win in New Hampshire and then led to his capturing the Democratic nomination.

In 2008 John McCain came in fourth in Iowa, but still came back to win the GOP nomination. On the Democratic side, Barack Obama won the Iowa caucuses, which gave a huge boost to his campaign and ultimately led to his winning his party's nomination after a historic cross-country battle with Hillary Clinton.

So Iowa has been very significant over the years IMO. A few times it wound up not mattering, but the same can be said of New Hampshire.

[Honeycombe8]

22. I was speaking of the GOP. So you post reinforces what I've heard.

No one who has won the IA caucus has won the GOP nomination, is what I heard.

Your post focuses on LOSERS who won the nomination, rather than caucus winners who lost the nomination, but your post still has examples, in a way, since the loser of the IA caucus that year was not the winner and therefore not the nominee:
Won nomination/lost caucus:
Reagan
Papa Bush
McCain

I'll add...won caucus/lost nomination:
Huckabee

Exception:
Bob Dole (but only after he signed the Norquist pledge, who then helped him win the nomination...previously Dole lost because he wouldn't sign the pledge, according to pledge-lovers)

[underpants]

19. StevieM is right. McCain came in 2d to last in 20007 with 101 votes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ames_Straw_Poll#August_13.2C_2011

[pansypoo53219]

9. how did rick parry do?

nt

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

10. I suspect a good number of the Perry write-ins are actually for Parry

but counted by officials as being for the Bush III campaign

[Hippo_Tron]

12. Haha, good point!

[underpants]

20. it is up to the individual canvasser

“We’re treating the straw poll as if it were any other election,” said Erin Rapp, Communications Director for the Iowa Secretary of State, the department overseeing straw poll write-in votes. “Basically, it’s up to the individual canvasser to determine the voter’s intent. You know, there could be variations of spelling in terms of name, but it’s really up to the official.”



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/08/13/colberts-ads-advocate-rick-parry-write-in-create-a-straw-poll-mess/#ixzz1V0P5gL00

[Fearless]

15. +1000

[Historic NY]

11. Where's the eye of Newt.??

[underpants]

17. He got 385 votes

pretty sad. Newt should be done now.

[Historic NY]

21. with his expensive tastes he'd better

[ShadowLiberal]

14. I hope Pawlenty drops out soon, I'm sick of the media obsessing over him

I'm glad to see Pawlenty finished a distant third, perhaps now the media will finally start to realize that no one likes him except the news media.

I mean seriously, since when has failing to break into double digit support most of the time make you a 'first tier' candidate? I mean even the people who like Pawlenty only like him because he's seen as an electable moderate and the alternate to Mitt Romney, if even most of your own core supporters just support you for strategic reasons rather than because they like you that's a really bad sign.

[Cosmocat]

16. Yeah ...

he has been drawing dead all along.

The republican are RABID, and he is Romney LIGHT - not rabid, but trying to act it.