IOWA Results

 NBC is calling Cruz the winner. Is this the beginning of the end for Trump?

Cruz 28%

Trump 25%

Rubio 22%

On the DEM side too close to call.

Hillary 50%

Bernie 49%

Iowa caucus | Results

84.53% reporting

Candidates
Total Votes


% Votes


Del.






Ted Cruz

43,550

27.72%

0

Donald Trump

38,358

24.42%

0

Marco Rubio

36,065

22.96%

0

Ben Carson

14,609

9.3%

0

Rand Paul

7,103

4.52%

0

Jeb Bush

4,409

2.81%

0

John Kasich

2,970

1.89%

0

Carly Fiorina

2,867

1.83%

0

Mike Huckabee

2,758

1.76%

0

Chris Christie

2,731

1.74%

0

Rick Santorum

1,542

0.98%

0

Others

106

0.07%

0

Jim Gilmore

11

0.01%

0

View less

I think maybe being scared off by Megan Kelly might not have been a good move.  But, now we will see the full force of the horrible Cruz.  

What happens to O'Malley's delegates now that he is suspending his campaign? 

Rubio came in third and is making a victory speech.

Past GOP Iowa Caucus winners:

2012- Rick Santorum

2008 - Mike Huckabee

Here comes Mr. Trump.

Trump says that he expects to win the nomination, but he is very far more subdued than we have ever seen him. Also his speech was very short.

Iowa State Democratic Party says it is 50/50, but Clinton is claiming victory.

even closer now

dave said:

What happens to O'Malley's delegates now that he is suspending his campaign? 

Does he have any delegates?

No.

yikes on both sides! 

http://www.loser.com

Results are in!

Bern and Hill split at 50/50 says a lot about socialism and a lot about Hilary...what a lot of surprises last night.  I wonder where O'M's supporters will go...Funny I feel Hilary could win over Bern for a prez election...and feel we don't know enough really about Cruz and Rubio (political crap aside, yada yada)..truly I don't know their platforms but then again I have been reading the Skimm for my news these long short days.  

With the vote so close for both the Democrats and the Republicans, it seems unlikely that any one candidate can say they "won" Iowa.  Delegates will likely be split pretty evenly among the front runners for both parties.

.

Last night was awesome.  

Bernie almost came through to beat Hillary.  This greatly highlights her many, many vulnerabilities and increases the likelihood that Bernie will start being more aggressive about exploiting them as the primaries go on.  She's going to have to start attacking him more aggressively now, and he'll probably fight back.  I just wish he had actually beat her.  Oh well.  The only thing better than a weakened Hillary would be a Bernie nomination.  Last night made either more likely.

Anything other than 1st place would have counted as a big loss for the windbag Trump.  That he was really close to 3rd place, and that he lost so much momentum at the end, would seem to predict a rapid decline from here.  Better late than never.

The biggest reasons for Cruz's victory were that Rubio took so many Trump votes at the end, and that it's Iowa, probably the most conservative evangelical state there is.  So his win, which was hardly a landslide, is not too shocking.  I'm hopeful he'll have a much tougher time going forward.  But he does seem to have a formidable organization.  

Rubio was the biggest winner last night, IMO.  Great finish almost beating Trump, and a terrific, moving and optimistic speech afterward (and yes it was kind of a victory speech, and appropriately so), and now much of the Republican establishment money will start flowing to a single candidate who IMO could actually win in November.  I think the sense of relief in the Republican Party that this creates will provide more momentum.  While not an ideal candidate for me, he seems like a plausible and electable candidate next to the jerk, the windbag, the liar and the socialist.

Overall a great night for those who don't want 4-8 more years of liberal or ultra-liberal government.

ice said:

Last night was awesome.  



Overall a great night for those who don't want 4-8 more years of liberal or ultra-liberal government.

Just when, precisely, have we had these years of liberal government?

joan_crystal said:

With the vote so close for both the Democrats and the Republicans, it seems unlikely that any one candidate can say they "won" Iowa.  Delegates will likely be split pretty evenly among the front runners for both parties.

But Joan, four of them made victory speeches!

Dennis_Seelbach said:

ice said:

Last night was awesome.  



Overall a great night for those who don't want 4-8 more years of liberal or ultra-liberal government.

Just when, precisely, have we had these years of liberal government?

We who support Senator Sanders do not want "liberal or ultra-liberal" government. We want Social Democracy.

ice,

Where have you been? I thought you would be on MOL loudly cheering that the Post Office demolition has actually begun.

Dennis_Seelbach said:

ice said:

Last night was awesome.  



Overall a great night for those who don't want 4-8 more years of liberal or ultra-liberal government.

Just when, precisely, have we had these years of liberal government?

I'm told that if you watch Fox News, all will be revealed.

Dennis_Seelbach said:

ice said:

Last night was awesome.  



Overall a great night for those who don't want 4-8 more years of liberal or ultra-liberal government.

Just when, precisely, have we had these years of liberal government?

I think ice must've missed all the lib/left criticisms of BHO, including many MOL voices. As Christie aptly puts it, this ain't a student council election, Marco. You're gonna have to stop spouting redundant memorized answers from your stump speech. 

BTW, Hillary's a hawk in dem circles. That's what Bernie's attractiveness has been based on. Too hawkish; too cozy w/Wall Street. 

LOST said:

ice,

Where have you been? I thought you would be on MOL loudly cheering that the Post Office demolition has actually begun.

Yay!  The post office should be completely demolished long before President Rubio takes office!!

The Sphinx will be demolished before Rubio becomes President.  

It is possible, Bernie may have won but for the coin tosses. He is down a couple of delegates. Some of Hillary's delegates are "Super Delegates" that are Congress people and state officials that become delegates without anyone voting for them in a caucus or primary.

They get to vote for whoever they want and announced they will vote for Hillary --- but they could change their minds.

Secondly, the coin tosses. 6 caucuses were tied. State law says that in such a case, they can flip a coin. Hillary's delegates won all six tosses.

Without the Supers and the coin tosses, Bernie would probably have had a couple more delegates than Hillary.

LOST said:

The Sphinx will be demolished before Rubio becomes President. "> 

What do you have against Cuban-Americans?

(ETA, in case of any doubt, that was a joke)

BTW, on the coin toss thing... the Washington Post is now reporting that the Des Moines Register got the story wrong, and the Hillary coin toss wins were not very remarkable after all.

"Update: The initial 6-for-6 report, from the Des Moines Register missed a few Sanders coin-toss wins. (There were a lot of coin tosses!) The ratio of Clinton to Sanders wins was closer to 50-50, which is what we'd expect."

Phew for her.  The last thing she needs is another scandal.

ice said:

 

LOST said:

The Sphinx will be demolished before Rubio becomes President. "> 

What do you have against Cuban-Americans?

 "> 





(ETA, in case of any doubt, that was a joke)

I actually have a Cuban-American relative.

But I have never seen the appeal of Rubio.  He isn't as pure a Tea-Party Conservative as Cruz. He doesn't have executive experience like JEB or Kasich, and he isn't a complete anti-establishment outsider like Trump. Is he just everyone's second choice?