Iowa caucus prediction.

[msj]

I'm curious as to who voted for Michele Bachmann above?

What is that saying? To old men everywhere, I would sleep with Michelle is not a reason to actually vote for her.

Ugh, reminds me of my MIL.

Edited January 4, 2012 by msj

[cybercoma]

I'm curious as to who voted for Michele Bachmann above?

What is that saying? To old men everywhere, I would sleep with Michelle is not a reason to actually vote for her.

Ugh, reminds me of my MIL.

What a sexist pile of garbage. Imagine: "To old women everywhere, I would sleep with Rick Santorum is not a reason to actually vote for him."

[msj]

What a sexist pile of garbage. Imagine: "To old women everywhere, I would sleep with Rick Santorum is not a reason to actually vote for him."

You really need to get a sense of humour.

I'm pretty sure I heard that one from Jon Stewart of the Daily Show.

[bud]

I'm curious as to who voted for Michele Bachmann above?

bc2004?

[cybercoma]

You really need to get a sense of humour.

I'm pretty sure I heard that one from Jon Stewart of the Daily Show.

I'm just bringing attention to how women are treated by the media.

[msj]

I'm just bringing attention to how women are treated by the media.

Sure, while neglecting that younger men are making fun of older men's taste (or lack there of) and their lack of rigorous voting methodology.

[msj]

Well, according to this link there is a question as to whether Santorum ( ) won Iowa.

I guess this means Obama is getting re-elected?

[Shady]

Well, according to this link there is a question as to whether Santorum ( ) won Iowa.

No there isn't.

I guess this means Obama is getting re-elected?

Huh?

[punked]

No there isn't.

Yes there is Shady. It is like you don't follow the news even red state is reporting it.

[Michael Hardner]

BBC

Edward True of Moulton, Iowa, who helped count votes in one precinct, says the published figures differed the count he observed.

Mr Santorum said the possible error "doesn't really matter", saying the vote would still effectively be a tie.

[Shady]

Like I said, there isn't. Apparently there was an error giving Romney 21 extra votes. But there was also a 20 vote error made in favour of Santorum. Which means there isn't any change in the results. Plus, they both receive the same number of delegates regardless of who wins by a few votes.

It's much ado about nothing.

Edited January 7, 2012 by Shady

[msj]

Like I said - there was a question and it has now been unsatisfactorily resolved - contra Shady's denials from the very start.

While still incomplete, the party’s certified results flip the top two finishers compared to the order announced in the early-morning hours of Jan. 4 when Iowa GOP Chairman Matt Strawn said the unofficial count showed Romney with an 8-vote lead over Santorum.