Skip to comments.
Could Typo Rewrite Caucus History? (Santorum may regain win)
KCCI Des Moines ^
Posted on 01/05/2012 6:12:47 PM PST by mnehring
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141-145 next last
1
posted on
01/05/2012 6:12:59 PM PST
by
mnehring
To: mnehring
Interesting....Does anyone here know what the consequences might be?
2
posted on
01/05/2012 6:15:42 PM PST
by
maeng
( l)
To: mnehring
Interesting....Does anyone here know what the consequences might be?
3
posted on
01/05/2012 6:16:02 PM PST
by
maeng
( l)
To: maeng
I’m not sure it really matters. As far as most of the country is concerned it was either a draw or a win for Santorum
4
posted on
01/05/2012 6:17:37 PM PST
by
cripplecreek
(Stand with courage or shut up and do as you're told.)
To: mnehring
IIRC the “official tally” will not be completed for a couple of week. Since it’s this close, I’d suggest they both hold their breath. ;~)
5
posted on
01/05/2012 6:18:13 PM PST
by
hoosiermama
(GAME-ON!)
To: maeng
In Iowa, the delegates aren’t actually assigned by the caucus so it is mostly a PR victory.
6
posted on
01/05/2012 6:18:35 PM PST
by
mnehring
To: mnehring
Thanks, that is what I thought but never know what someone will come up with.
7
posted on
01/05/2012 6:19:45 PM PST
by
maeng
( l)
To: mnehring
Yes, the person that originally lied, will have to lie again, and claim it was a mistake.
Then, Rick, as winner, will carry 13 of Iowa’s delegates to the convention and Mitt will carry 12.
8
posted on
01/05/2012 6:21:45 PM PST
by
G Larry
("I dream of a day when a man is judged by the content of his Character.")
To: mnehring
He said when he checked to make sure the Republican Party of Iowa got the count right, he said he was shocked to find they hadn't.
Edward "True", must have suspected something for him to follow up on the numbers. Interesting.....
To: mnehring
Wow, and Snitt Romney was so proud of finally getting an additional .0005 percent rather than never getting above 24% or something. I bet he'll throw a tantrum and fire someone in his campaign crowd.
10
posted on
01/05/2012 6:21:52 PM PST
by
Rashputin
(Obama stark, raving, mad, and even his security people know it.)
Click
11
posted on
01/05/2012 6:22:37 PM PST
by
RedMDer
(Forward With Confidence!)
To: Free Vulcan; stillafreemind
Given your closeness to the process and the caucus happenings, this is the kind of stuff I asked you guys about on an earlier thread.
Like I said, the narrative coming out of Tuesday had to be "Romney won" == whether or not it was actually true. Thoughts?
FReegards!
12
posted on
01/05/2012 6:23:09 PM PST
by
Agamemnon
(Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
To: mnehring
This can easily be resolved by asking caucus goers at that location whether more than 2 of them supported Mitt!
13
posted on
01/05/2012 6:23:22 PM PST
by
G Larry
("I dream of a day when a man is judged by the content of his Character.")
To: maeng
“Interesting....Does anyone here know what the consequences might be?”
Yea, Rove will have a harder time justifying his statement that Romney’s win was a landslide and that the others might as well fold now.
14
posted on
01/05/2012 6:23:33 PM PST
by
BobL
("Heartless" and "Inhumane" FReepers for Cain - we've HAD ENOUGH)
To: cripplecreek
I think it does matter.
Not so much about who won... clearly Santorum (0.74c per vote versus $160 per vote) won hands down, regardless of who had the 25.0001 versus 25.0002 or whatever.
First, the smaller reason, the bragging rights. With an 8 vote lead, Robney will be milking it for all he can in what he says, and his new ads.
But the bigger reason... with any actual proof of the R officials meddling with the results to get this difference in the outcome, there is tremendous mileage to be gained by Santorum and perhaps other not-Robney’s.
Exacerbated by this coming shortly after the reports of R officials meddling with Virginia ballot petition signatures
as far as total, and how they are or are not validated.
15
posted on
01/05/2012 6:24:04 PM PST
by
C210N
(Dems: "We must tax you so that we can buy your votes")
To: cripplecreek
I’m interested that a Paul supporter went against the Mitt Machine... that’s the story.
Well, the true backstory is that Santorum and Romney satisfied Iowa’s ethanol subsidies ‘program’.
16
posted on
01/05/2012 6:24:31 PM PST
by
txhurl
(Perry/Pence 2012 OR Perry/Ryan 2012 or even better Perry/Abbott 2012!)
To: mnehring
It would make a big psychological difference. The media here in a Democrat and RINO GOP infected area quickly reported Romney won blah blah blah and he should carry it to the first IA/NH double win in blah blah blah. Some stories had no mention of Santorum only of the “winner” of Iowa.
To: Pan_Yan
18
posted on
01/05/2012 6:28:05 PM PST
by
Pan_Yans Wife
("Real solidarity means coming together for the common good."-Sarah Palin)
To: hoosiermama
IIRC the official tally will not be completed for a couple of week. Since its this close, Id suggest they both hold their breath.
This always happens to Republicans. If this was a dem the count would have been finished and certified that same night... and all the ballots destroyed.
19
posted on
01/05/2012 6:28:22 PM PST
by
JSteff
((((It was ALL about SCOTUS. Most forget about that and HAVE DOOMED us for a generation or more.))))
To: mnehring
Bragging rights. Public perception. Momentum. These are bigger than a single delegate or two.
I don't do Photoshop, but somebody ought to Photoshop this image: (Swap Truman's face with Rick's; swap Dewey's name with Romney's; swamp Truman's name with Santorum's)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141-145 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson