Posted on 02/02/2016 8:47:21 AM PST by justlittleoleme
Republican Sen. Ted Cruz managed to snag Iowa’s heaviest corn-producing counties despite his opposition to federal mandates and subsidies for ethanol. Does this mean King Corn’s days are numbered in the Hawkeye State?
Cruz snatched victory from challenger business mogul Donald Trump Monday night, but what’s most interesting is Iowa counties that grow the most corn supported the Texas senator despite his opposition to ethanol subsidies — ethanol is mostly made from corn.
-snip-
Trump also jumped on Cruz for his opposition to ethanol, warning Iowans Cruz would “destroy” the industry if he wins Monday night’s caucus.
“He will destroy your ethanol business 100%,” Trump said Monday. “And look, I’m not really blaming him because he’s financed by oil people. The oil people don’t want ethanol, it’s very simple.”
“Your ethanol business if Ted Cruz gets in will be wiped out within six months to a year. It’s gonna be gone,” Trump warned.
Trump’s warning may have swayed some Iowans — Cruz won the state’s first and fourth-largest corn counties, but Trump was able to win three of Iowa’s top five corn counties.
-snip-
Cruz's strong showing in Iowa suggests Hawkeye State voters are less beholden to the ethanol lobby than they had been in previous years. Polling up to the caucus showed the federal ethanol mandate was not a top concern for most Iowans.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
and for the TITLE....
Cruz is not anti-ethanol
Cruz is anti-ethanol subsidies, and all other subsidies.
This blows the assumption that everyone in Iowa is an ethanol fan.
An important distinction.
Right, or that they even see themselves as in the “ethanol business”. Maybe they think they’re corn farmers?
Not just subsidies, but including the mandate.
Yes. Only farmers and politicians support the ethanol scam. The rest of the state's citizens suffer from the same low-mileage, engine damages, and high food prices that we do.
Maybe Iowans put the interests of the nation before the interests of the ethanol lobby (even though it generally benefits some in the state)?
The ‘mandate’ is the biggest subsidy of all!
Subsidies are the spending of Tax Dollars.
It is a massive benefit to those companies, but it is not a subsidy.
Ethanolized gas gums up fuel filters and fuel lines. If you want to buy gas without ethanol for long term storage in seldom used equipment (such as a generator), it costs about 20 dollars per gallon.
But my main issues in the campaign are still illegal immigration, H1b abuse, the importation and resettlement of potential terrorists, our f’n pussy rules of engagement that have gotten our soldiers killed or maimed, our backstabbing of allies, our capitulation to Iran, and our complete Screwing of we the people when negotiating in trade deals.
Ethanol isn’t even a blip on the radar when stacked against the other issues.
Iowa is going to grow more corn than anyone needs (almost) because corn is a tall grass being grown in what was once tall grass prairie.
Marginal production areas like Missouri, Texas and Kentucky will bear the brunt of reduced acreage in the absence of fuel ethanol.
Voters seldom see the interest of big corporations as the same as their own. That’s as true in Iowa as anywhere else.
Yes, but you knew what I meant. Without the mandate there wouldn’t be any corn in our gas!
It’s simple: Ted Cruz has the smarts of a principled conservative, the courage of a principled conservative, and the off-the-charts work ethic of a principled conservative!
Not all farmers.
Wife’s relatives farm in SW Iowa and won’t touch this blended fuel in their cars, machinery, etc.
Iowa lived up to its reputation as a state of idiots.
“Iowa lived up to its reputation as a state of idiots.”
Even idiots wouldn’t vote for Trump. ;-)
Exactly, you made my point, they voted for Goldman Sachs Cruz.
;)
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.