[altura]

Doughty, this is beneath you. Trump fully expected to win and all his supporters expected that as well.

Iowa was very important then and to come on now and say Iowa didn’t matter is disingenuous. Iowa probably doesn’t matter much but saying it after Trump lost is just pathetic.

[map]

Trump fully expected to win...

Trump wanted to win Iowa, but he never predicted nor expected he would win. When he was asked for a prediction the day before the caucus he declined to say he would win. Your assessment is wrong.

[DoughtyOne]

Trump was 3.3% from winning Iowa without dirty tricks or camping there for over a year.

I’m actually satisfied with his finish there.

If his finish there was the result of some sudden turn, what does that tell you about the vote before the turn?

I wouldn’t play that turn up too much.

Doughty, this is beneath you. Trump fully expected to win and all his supporters expected that as well.

Iowa was very important then and to come on now and say Iowa didn’t matter is disingenuous. Iowa probably doesn’t matter much but saying it after Trump lost is just pathetic.

I didn't think those comments were that inflammatory. For some reaon you did.

Trump was in the 3.3% range.  There's nothing that controversial there.

I was satisfied with his finish.  Of course I wanted to see him win, but getting one less delegate than Ted isn't exactly a blow out.  I was satisfied.

If his second place showing was made larger by some of the shenanigans pulled by other teams, that does cause one to think his standing may have been better than the final vote reflected.

If Rubio and Cruz did sophon off voted from Carson, then both their totals came outhigher than they otherwise would have. I think it's reasoned to address that.  With what we know it is a dynamic of the final result totals.

That being the case, listing ten reasons why Iowans abandoned Trump seems a bit iffy. One reason alone, that some folk don't want to talk about, could have swung the votes from Carson to Cruz and Rubio, thus impacting Trump negatively.

I don't think that's being mean or making comments that are somehow seen as a low blow.

The Iowa Caucus was always an iffy proposition to me.  Yes, when the polls seemed to swing in Trump's direction I thought he had more of a chance than he previously had, and I may have said I thought it looked like he might win.  Look at the free for all at the caucus stations though.  Yikes.  That's what was gnawing at the back of my mind leading up to Iowa's Caucus.  You can never know what's going to happen there, because those caucus stations completely out of control.  Candiate's opearatives are right there corrupting the vote right up until the last second.  That process doesn't look like anything I've come to think of as a reasoned secure voting process.  Even if Trump won, the way that thing was run, I'd say the same thing.

Early in the evening before the caucus was officially opened up to votes, I voiced the opinion it didn't look good having the candidates or their operatives there. I think that was a fair comment not being influenced by an already revealed result.  I maintain that thought now.

Your last sentence above, it addresses arguments I didn't make.