ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Sunday, January 31, 2016

Trump takes the lead

Apparently blowing off the final debate like a boss was the right thing to do in the Iowa voters' eyes. If, that is, the media has gotten the final pre-caucus poll more or less right:
Donald Trump has overtaken Ted Cruz in the final days before Iowa's caucuses, with the fate of the race closely tied to the size of Monday evening's turnout, especially among evangelical voters and those attending for the first time, a Bloomberg Politics/Des Moines Register Iowa Poll shows.

The findings before the first ballots are cast in the 2016 presidential nomination race shows Trump with the support of 28 percent of likely caucus-goers, followed by 23 percent for the Texas senator and 15 percent for U.S. Senator Marco Rubio of Florida.

The billionaire real estate mogul leads Cruz among those who say they definitely plan to attend, 30 percent to 26 percent. With the less committed—those who say they'll probably attend—Trump also beats Cruz, 27 percent to 21 percent.

“Trump is leading with both the inner core of the caucus universe and the fringe—that’s what any candidate would want," said longtime Iowa pollster J. Ann Selzer, who oversaw the survey for the news organizations.
If Trump does even better than indicated, we'll know that the poll organizations were playing games and trying to suppress Trump's numbers; in the UK, ALL the polls were "corrected" at the very end in order to try to make themselves look less hopelessly wrong in comparison with the actual vote.

So, this "late move" may be nothing more than the media bringing the polls more in line with the expected result.

That doesn't mean Trump will win Iowa. We have, after all, been repeatedly informed by those on the ground that he will not do so. So, like everyone else, we'll just have to wait and see.

The Democratic race is more interesting than anyone would have thought; Hillary Clinton is simply a terrible candidate who can't win an even remotely competitive election. Even liberal voters dislike her because she is a terrible, dishonest person, even as politicians go. If she didn't have the entire weight of the bifactional establishment behind her - note how even establishment Republicans have said they would back her over Trump - she would have numbers that made Carly Fiorina's look good.

Labels: ,

160 Comments:

Anonymous Wyrd January 31, 2016 6:03 AM  

Iowa farmers hate trump. He doesn't offer enough pyramid subsidies.

Blogger VD January 31, 2016 6:18 AM  

Haxo, let me explain something to you about rhetoric. In most cases, less is more. The more you throw in "Judeo-globalist", the less anyone pays attention to anything you say. And before you rush to claim I am only saying this in defense of the "Judeo-globalists", I will point out that this is a rhetorical truth and the same would be true if you were decrying "Communists", "Catholics", or "creationists".

Presumably you keep commenting because you want to convince people of your point of view. If this is the case, why don't you stop being a complete fucking moron and pay at least a modicum of attention to how people who are able to successfully convince people to change their minds do it?

Because the only thing you have convinced people here to believe is that anything you say must be wrong, because you utilize rhetoric in such a stupid and clumsy manner.

Now, the subject happens to be the Iowa caucuses, not what amazes you. So drop it.

Anonymous Mr. Rational January 31, 2016 6:27 AM  

@1 While Iowa farmers are influential, their numbers are not all that large.  I'd bet there are more employees of Rockwell-Collins in Cedar Rapids than there are farmers in all of Iowa.

Anonymous Napoleon 12pdr January 31, 2016 6:29 AM  

I'm not sure Iowa matters that much this cycle, except to screen out that no-hope candidates. If that poll is accurate, the other contenders have 34% of the vote between them. Enough to be decisive, depending on how the preference cascade goes.

As for the Dems, they're in a sticky mess. Clinton clearly has an express ticket to a Federal prison. Sanders is an avowed socialist. Their best bet is some sort of bait-and-switch to run Biden...which merely means alienating Sanders' supporters and running on Obama's record. This should be fun.

Blogger dh January 31, 2016 6:36 AM  

I think like the unskew movement of 2012 the polling is in bad shape of the early contests. Iowa is difficult to gauge because the nature of who turns out to caucus is unpredictable. I usually find paens to complexity saline hollow but in this case I generally sympathize.

I see two problems, one being that no one knows if trumps first time caucus goers will actually pull of the chaotic caucusing process.

The second being that identifying who is most likely to actually spend the 2-3 hrs required is challenge.

Sanders has the same problem - the party is so weak in Iowa that they don't have volunteers enough to run the events everywhere with enough voters to support an event. This problem leans pro Hillary.

My prediction is that for the GOP primary the top line is Cruz followed by Trump. I think the story from the media will be that a new dark horse arose - I believe that the party and elite have selected Kaisch to play this years Bob Dole.

On the DNC side I believe the top line goes to Hillary by 8 points and the story is that she has beaten back the challenger and has gotten her groove back.

Blogger Stilicho January 31, 2016 6:37 AM  

Iowa voter remind me of ugly girls at closing time: they think they're 10s because of all the attention they're getting and never seem to realize they'll be doing the walk of shame after a one night stand.

Nonetheless, it is an interesting situation: the NY liberal non-politician vs the movement conservative vs the establishment toady on one side and the old, tired sway-backed nag vs the admitted communist on the other. Interesting times as the Chinese might say.

Anonymous Steve January 31, 2016 6:39 AM  

Hillary Clinton is simply a terrible candidate who can't win an even remotely competitive election

This is the weird thing about Hilldog.

The media, and even Republicans, take her seriously, as if she were the reincarnation of Lady Macbeth and Maggie Thatcher.

Why?

She's just a malicious old cow. She's brittle, she's less fun than a boomerang made out of human shit, and her only consistent message is "vote me, coz muh dried up, grey-haired, wrinkly old vagina!"

Every HR department in the world has at least one mad old tart like her in it, and they're all walking adverts for involuntary euthanasia. Preferably involving being bitten to death by howler monkeys.

I bet the Trumpster could trigger her into an epic meltdown in a one-on-one debate.

Anonymous Wyrd January 31, 2016 6:57 AM  

This is the weird thing about Hilldog.

It's spelled Hilldawg, please.

Anonymous aero January 31, 2016 6:58 AM  

News media CON JOB
They select the polls they want you to know. They present facts in a twisted way to make their targets believe something that is 180 from the truth.

Anonymous Napoleon 12pdr January 31, 2016 7:03 AM  

On reflection, it occurs to me that we're living through a replay of the French Revolution. That wasn't a single event, but a decade of political turmoil with distinct stages.

Stage 1 was a political crisis. The economic problems of 1789 in France, Iraq in 2006 for the US.

Stage 2 is the Left grabbing control. Around 1792 for France, 2008 elections for the US.

Stage 3 is the Left governing hysterically until they are purging Leftists for insufficient zeal. 1793-4 for France, the present for the US.

Stage 4 is a takeover by a less murderous but very corrupt 'looter' regime. The Directory in France ca. 1795. This MAY have happened in the US with the election of a Republian Congress in 2014. Or it may be that this will happen in the 2016 elections.

Stage 5 is the advent of an authoritarian regime that provides competent, stable government. France after Napoleon seizes power, the US hopefully after this election.

Anonymous Steve January 31, 2016 7:05 AM  

Wyrd - Howdy! I am still trying to learn American. You chaps do react strangely when I mention that I'm gasping for a fag.

And by fag, I meant the magnificent homosexual Milo, who I hope - by some hilarious King Ralph-type mishap - will one day become our Queen.

Aero - I think Jeb's going to win this. He has a note from his mother and everything.

Anonymous Wyrd January 31, 2016 7:10 AM  

LOL!

Blogger David of One January 31, 2016 7:12 AM  

ILLary is the GRANSTER.

Anonymous aero January 31, 2016 7:17 AM  

Steve
Its the communist pinko fag that is going to win. 75 percent of the news media are fags.

Anonymous Wyrd January 31, 2016 7:18 AM  

ILLary is the GRANSTER.

Nanageddon:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XR4gcOn2G0

Blogger David of One January 31, 2016 7:25 AM  

15. Wyrd

Okay, that's mighty accurate ... maybe we should really say, "Evilary is the GRANSTER". ;-o

Blogger tz January 31, 2016 7:52 AM  

@7
The old Lizard Queen,
Is a vending machine.
Put the coin in,
and your law is a win.

Anonymous Wyrd January 31, 2016 8:07 AM  

Evil Steve has got me into an English mood:

Kate Bush:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2GDWtgd8zA

Yes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33SRbmdGbBg&list=RD33SRbmdGbBg

Genesis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEjlomgi8Mw

Blogger Cinco January 31, 2016 8:08 AM  

I am personally hoping for 1. Trump, 2. Cruz, 3. Paul, just to see the look on the establishments faces. It would be just hilarious.

IWTWIB!

Anonymous HongKongCharlie January 31, 2016 8:19 AM  

19. Cinco January 31, 2016 8:08 AM

I am personally hoping for 1. Trump, 2. Cruz, 3. Paul, just to see the look on the establishments faces. It would be just hilarious.

IWTWIB!
Iowa order of finish will be Trump, Cruz, Rubio and Carson.

HKC

Blogger rumpole5 January 31, 2016 8:23 AM  

Soon some real results instead of hype and polls! From my vantage point here in Florida, I expect Trump to win. My mother's afro-american aide, my expat wife, my med school son, the Hispanic guy who sprays my house and my Latvian neighbor across the street all enthusiastically support the Trumpster. I can not think of anything else that disparate group would likely agree on. It is like an alignment of the planets in a sci-fi film. A Tsunami feels imminent.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan January 31, 2016 8:27 AM  

Iowa thy name is Sanctimony.

Blogger Timmy3 January 31, 2016 8:37 AM  

Polling ahead by five is not enough margin to necessarily win Iowa. Santorum was polling behind by 9 when he barely beat McCain in 2008. Turn out is the key. The last two Iowa winners didn't become President either. Both of them showed up at Trump's Vet charity event. I'm sure Mike Huckabee wants to feel like a winner after he ultimately lost the nomination. Trump needs to win everything, run the table.

Blogger Cinco January 31, 2016 8:39 AM  

Looking through the historical data, since 1976 no one who has finished under the top 4 has been the nominee. Consider this, the only one who has finished 4th and was able to become the nominee was McCain in 2008. He was barely edged out by Fred Thompson in Iowa to the tune of only 400 voters. So, I expect a lot of the establishment candidates to drop out after Iowa, especially Bush (I married a Mexican for this) the III.

I think Rubio's strength may be underestimated; however, I see him appealing to the baby boomer generation who are probably less inclined to caucus now that they are dead/older and they still have landlines.

Anonymous aero January 31, 2016 8:45 AM  

The news media will not say this. The democratic party is communist party and the communist party has two feet planted well into the republican party.

Those Candidates that say they can beat Hillary or Sanders do not say they can defeat what they stand for but will say that you have to compromise or communicate with them. I say they should just join the democratic party

Blogger Doom January 31, 2016 8:48 AM  

I'm having great fun "supporting" Trump. All the lamestream GOPe sites are threatening everything from obamacare will stay with Trump, to he is lying about everything. Which, he might well be doing, but I haven't seen a Republican not do that in... What century is this. None of them keep their promises. They do a few things then swing to the middle. Dems are more likely to keep more of their promises, and those promises are more damaging.

I am not even sure I will vote for Trump. I just trust him more than the others. Not because he will be more honest. It's just that if he does something about immigration, against what others are offering, the rest will fix itself in time. Without fixing immigration there simply isn't a solution. A final one, perhaps, but for them or "us", whoever is whichever mind you... that is another question entirely.

No, they are porking their numbers. I'd slap some notes that Trump will win a bit better, unless they have a rig in. With "both" parties against him, it wouldn't be that hard. In that case, I almost expect !Heb! to win. What a gas.

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 8:50 AM  

1) cruz
2) trump
3) Rubio
4) Rand

Bad weather will be a factor if it happens. If it does cruz wins move trump to forth and bump everyone up.

Lack of organization will kill trump if there is a big storm.

Trump will do much better in NH.

Cards are stacked against him in iowa. It is an old school retail politics system and he is not an old school retail candidate.


Blogger Cinco January 31, 2016 8:56 AM  

@26 Doom

Without fixing immigration there simply isn't a solution. A final one, perhaps, but for them or "us", whoever is whichever mind you... that is another question entirely.

I admit it, I laughed.

Anonymous Broken Arrow January 31, 2016 8:57 AM  

This poll is probably accurate. There's always a group of voters which decide in the last couple of days before the voting begins so the polls can shift dramatically in the last 24-48 hours. This is especially true in presidential voting.

Anonymous Ryan January 31, 2016 9:12 AM  

The ilk are tickling my funny bone this morning.

Since I'm here in Iowa I thought I'd report on my informal poll, taken from the following demographic groups...

a) the employees of the local lumber yard
b) the fellow muscle heads at the gym
c) the dog walkers in the neighborhood
d) a couple of unemployed guys who hang out in the library and stare at the wall
e) a group of high school aged basketball players

Here are the results...

1) Trump 40%
2) Say what? 25%
3) Huh? 20%
4) Mumble mumble 15%

There were some really awful comments about Hilldawg but I took them as a no.

Blogger Doom January 31, 2016 9:14 AM  

Cinco,

And? I laugh all the time. Both with, and at, sometimes both. What is your point, unless you don't have one. Which, yeah, okay, then go away.

Anonymous The OASF January 31, 2016 9:37 AM  

Iowa is a prime example of why America does not deserve to be saved. The farmers out there just love their cheap illegal immigrant AG labor and government subsidies to grow their genetically modified crap, I mean crops.

I predict that Iowa will be stolen for any candidate but Trump. I'm not at all convinced that Rubio won't end up winning considering that he is now the establishment's last glimmering hope for a fraud election rip off.

Anonymous farmer Tom January 31, 2016 9:55 AM  

Posting this so you can see the actual numbers.

135,000

According to Steve Deace, an Iowa talk show guy, and a friend of mine, who does hard numbers, here is an interesting little tidbit.

"The Register poll is projecting 386 thousand GOP voters on Monday. That's only a 300 percent increase over the all-time record. Oh, and Trump only leads by five with that turnout?"

Blogger tz January 31, 2016 10:11 AM  

Cruz lost, he is likely to be #2, with Rubio a close #3. First is the voter violation kerfuffle atop Drudge - Cruz claim - I'm a nice Christian; his halo just fell off.
But here's the critical moment - the first part.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=mchG_uI-JOQ
video
Note how Cruz interrupts, but when the idiot airhead pushes back, Cruz backs down like a chastised puppy.
I was watching and thought that if at that point he started walking out, he'd be competitive with Trump. Nope.
Then after nanny says he has permission to speak, it comes off more as whining and the "I should walk out - just kidding" made him shrink further.

The CNBC parallel showed better since he seemed forceful, presidential, but the timing was right. Here he was being pummeled and backed down.

If he can't handle an idiot like Chris Wallace, how can he handle Putin, Iran, or even McConnell?

There are many Cruzbot Cultists in Iowa, and Glenn Beck and his co-hosts are there. So he will get votes.

But at its root, Cruz is (literally, he said in multiple interviews) copying Obama's Narwhal but better. The slimy voter violation duplicated an Obama 2012 flyer. His database targets "undecideds" and his likely supporters using google-ad-server like algorithms. It's all targeted marketing. The problem is it only works when you can target enough for a majority. Romney and Obama were 48%, so a ground game can push things. It cannot make 20% into 40% if there is no latent support.

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 10:14 AM  

Tz... that whole bit was to setup the trump joke. The dummy talking head that interrupted him was to stupid to pick up on it.

Anonymous farmer Tom January 31, 2016 10:17 AM  

Trump's negatives

Anonymous farmer Tom January 31, 2016 10:23 AM  

Today's big story.

F-you

Blogger tz January 31, 2016 10:28 AM  

@33 thanks. good background,
Trump's supporters seem to have figured it out

@35 Nanny doesn't like to wait for puppy to finish muleing. I got the joke, but I had to assemble the parts. Rubio chimed in he would never walk out.
I didn't think I would watch, but succumbed to the base instinct to gawk at a chain reaction accident in progress.

Blogger Harsh January 31, 2016 10:29 AM  

I just don't see Count Dracula... er, Ted Cruz, I mean... actually winning Iowa.

Blogger Nick S January 31, 2016 11:03 AM  

I just don't see Kefka...er, I mean Trump actually winning Iowa.

Anonymous Leonidas January 31, 2016 11:10 AM  

@27:

Ordinarily I'd agree with this analysis - and I'm still not ruling it out. On the other hand, Trump has hit quite a few things this campaign cycle that he's supposedly not good at... only for everyone to find out after the fact that, no, he's got a handle on it after all. This may - or may not - be another case of this. At this point it's almost impossible to say.

The media has been strictly kept out of his campaign offices in Iowa. I can't remember where it was now, but I read a long article a week or two ago detailing the "ground game" of every candidate in Iowa. Trump's stood out because they weren't even allowed in the building. That could be very bad, meaning that he basically has no ground game and doesn't want to show it. Or it could mean that he's got a different game plan than a traditional candidate.

My gut says that if things looked good there, he'd be showing it all over the media. With a "normal" candidate, I'd be sure of it. But Trump is anything but a normal candidate, and I'm not ready to rule out option b - until we see the actual vote tallies on Tuesday night.

The Iowa caucuses are deliberately setup to change people's minds during the actual event. Trump himself would be a master of this, were he able to be present at every single precinct. Of course, he can't be. But the question is, does he have a plan for this? If he does, it's not obvious. But given his inclination toward rhetorical persuasion techniques - and the totally unconventional way he's done everything so far - I'd be very surprised if he doesn't have something up his sleeve, and something unusual.

At the same time, Cruz has made a number of missteps over the last few weeks. Most of them are small, but there's a rather large number of them... and they're all unforced errors. The voting report cards were a colossally bad idea. Bad enough that they reinforce my theory that Cruz is an Aspie who's desperately trying to hide it. It's a little shocking to see some of it, because it's all rookie mistakes.

The biggest thing, though, is Cruz's refusal to bow to King Corn. While I respect it - and would prefer to give a huge middle finger to the ethanol lobby - I suspect in the end that it will kill him in Iowa. I'm strongly of the opinion that at the end of the day most people will vote in their own self or group interests (in the retail politicking sense, if not in the ideological sense). Corn feeds the Iowa economy. It's hard to see it losing out on Tuesday.

TL;DR: if this were a normal campaign cycle, I'd be in basically 100% agreement with your prognosis. And it still very well might be correct. But this cycle hasn't been normal at all, so I'm not ready to put all my chips on that bet. My gut says that Trump has some kind of plan for this. Whether it will work or not remains to be seen.

Blogger So Meh January 31, 2016 11:18 AM  

What is the over/under Primary or Caucus that Hillary cries? in 2008, it was New Hampshire. If the Bernie wins in Iowa, my guess is Wisconsin (with all the college students).

Sanders closing Iowa argument: “Imagine a better world!”
Clinton closing argument: “We’re highly confident no indictments are forthcoming."
enjoy.

Anonymous Leonidas January 31, 2016 11:25 AM  

@42: I still think Bernie's going to pull out a squeaker in Iowa. Could be wrong, but I think there's a strong preference cascade brewing against Hillary. The leftist herd is just afraid to admit that they're not going to vote for the female candidate. As soon as they see enough other voters doing it to be comfortable that it's OK, I think she's toast.

Anonymous farmer Tom January 31, 2016 11:30 AM  

I agree with Leonidas.

Hitlery is toast.

Anonymous Leonidas January 31, 2016 11:37 AM  

Iowa is actually a perfect environment for the anti-Hillary cascade, as well. People get in, they aren't sure... then they see their friends caucusing for Bernie. Maybe it's not so scary to stand up or him when so many other people are.

And, of course, what are O'Malley's voters going to do when they fail to cross the 15% threshold?

Tuesday night is going to be very interesting.

OpenID sigbouncer January 31, 2016 11:38 AM  

Gut feeling it's gonna be Trump and then Rubio, 1-2. Cruz has been taking a beating lately and rightfully so.


http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/26/who-is-the-real-ted-cruz/

At the same time Ted’s bulging 2016 campaign accounts and supporting Super-PACs are stuffed with big oil and gas money. He knows how to play the game.

And perhaps the ultimate hypocrisy of the native born Canadian is that his spouse, Heidi, by all accounts a lovely wife and mother, has been employed by Goldman Sachs since 2005. She is on leave as managing director and regional head of private wealth management. Heidi is a proud member of the lefty Council on Foreign Relations, advocates of one world government and the New World Order.

Heidi is not a bit player in the Cruz campaign with those credentials but rather an integral part of the campaign’s fundraising efforts. As reported by CNN last year, “She works the phones the way she worked them when she was at Goldman,” said Chad Sweet, the Cruz campaign’s chairman, who recruited Heidi to work at the giant investment bank.”

Yet we are to believe that the big Wall Street banks have no leverage over Ted Cruz? Why didn’t Heidi Cruz resign from Goldman Sachs instead of taking a leave of absence? That’s like saying Bill Ayers and Saul Alinsky have had no influence on Barack Obama.

The other inside connection that hits one like a baseball bat is the Bush connection.

Ted was George W.’s brain when he ran for President. A top policy adviser. Ted maneuvered for Solicitor General in Bush World but settled for a plum at the Federal Trade Commission. Ted’s a Bushman with deep ties to the political and financial establishment.

Ted and Heidi brag about being the first “Bush marriage” – they met as Bush staffers which ultimately led to marriage. Cruz was an adviser on legal affairs while Heidi was an adviser on economic policy and eventually director for the Western Hemisphere on the National Security Council under Condoleezza Rice. Condi helped give us the phony war in Iraq.

Also conveniently missing from Heidi’s Wikipedia bio is her service as Deputy U.S. Trade Representative to USTR head Robert Zoellick. At USTR Heidi worked on U.S.-China trade policy- the one Donald Trump talks about so much.

And Chad Sweet, Ted Cruz’s campaign chairman, is a former CIA officer. Michael Chertoff, George W. Bush’s former Secretary of Homeland Security, hired Sweet from Goldman Sachs to restructure and optimize the flow of information between the CIA, FBI and other members of the national security community and DHS. Chertoff and Sweet co-founded the Chertoff Group upon leaving the administration.

A known tactic of the intelligence community is the use of strategic communications as a “soft power” weapon against it adversaries — the creation of false narratives by the effective use of all media — social, digital, newspaper, print, etc. Combined with denial and deception, it can be a potent force. Glenn Beck and Mark Levin are abetting this.

Despite his ability to lie with a straight face (sadly Nixonian) on his support for amnesty and TPP, he got nailed by Senator Marco Rubio on the debate. Acting like a prick in the U.S. Senate was the core of Ted’s disciplined effort to bury his old school ties and reinvent himself as a modern-day Jesse Helms and supposed Conservative outsider. It’s a ruse.

As we get closer to the Iowa Caucus and New Hampshire Primary, Cruz and his establishment puppet masters are engaged in an aggressive strategy against Trump. The false narrative of course being that Cruz is the outsider while Trump is the insider. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

In its most simplistic terms – the power elite have no leverage over Trump – nothing.

Cruz, on the other hand, is the establishments quisling, spawned by the Bushes and controlled by Wall Street, who became a strident “outsider” only four years ago.

Blogger bob k. mando January 31, 2016 11:41 AM  

4. Napoleon 12pdr January 31, 2016 6:29 AM
Their best bet is some sort of bait-and-switch to run Biden



the problem with ANY Demoncrat alternate at this point is that they are missing, not merely entry deadlines, but entire primaries.

assuming that Hitlery actually is going to get slapped with a major felony prosecution, Sanders already has the nom almost locked up simply due to the inability of the purported alternates to get a campaign up and running in time to offset the states Sanders will have already picked up.

i mean, i suppose the DNC could institute a rule that all Hillary delegates get assigned to the new candidate ... but i can't imagine that there would not be a huge amount of blowback in Sanders' favor if they do that.

the Dems are almost hoist on their own petard at this point.



7. Steve January 31, 2016 6:39 AM
I bet the Trumpster could trigger her into an epic meltdown in a one-on-one debate.



she's likely already had a stroke.

as i've said before, there's little that i would find more amusing than Hillary getting a major slap down from Trump or Cruz in a debate, stroking out and dying on live tv.



32. The OASF January 31, 2016 9:37 AM
The farmers out there just love their cheap illegal immigrant AG labor



wut?

Iowa is corn and grains. those are all highly capital intensive ( 1/2 million dollar combines for harvesting, etc ) crops, in which thousands upon thousands of acres are harvested by roving bands of WHITE heavy equipment owner/operators.

any significant illegal population would be in the meat packing plants ... not exactly a large source of votes.

you want migrant *farm workers*, you're talking about the southern crops, fruits and ground vegetables and the like.


35. Nate January 31, 2016 10:14 AM
Tz... that whole bit was to setup the trump joke. The dummy talking head that interrupted him was to stupid to pick up on it.



*shrugs*

and Cruz botched the delivery.

Blogger praetorian January 31, 2016 11:48 AM  

She's just a malicious old cow. She's brittle, she's less fun than a boomerang made out of human shit, and her only consistent message is "vote me, coz muh dried up, grey-haired, wrinkly old vagina!"

She Be Tha Most Qualified Presidential Candidate In Modern History (tm). Given the FedGov and the current electorate, can you argue with that narrative?

The strongest indication to me that Trump is going to win Iowa, besides Farmer Tom's cogent arguments in his favor of course, is how the MSM narrative has shifted. Originally it was "Trump is a joke" then it was "[not-Trump] has a commanding lead in Iowa" and now it is "The battle in Iowa is really for second place and momentum."

Applying "watch what they do, not what they say" to the situation, I think they think that the Trumpsatzgruppen is going to roll Iowa flatter than a Belgian pancake.

We'll see.

Blogger SciVo January 31, 2016 11:54 AM  

So, this "late move" may be nothing more than the media bringing the polls more in line with the expected result.

Heh. That is traditional: skew your polls in the direction you want, using them as a persuasion device -- since emotional reasoners would rather feel like a winner by backing a winner -- and then unskew them at the very end so that you don't destroy your reputation with the public.

That is actually what enabled Nate Silver to be a prediction superstar: he crafted an algorithm for calculating each pollster's skew quantity and unskew date, so his aggregate was accurate.

OpenID sigbouncer January 31, 2016 11:54 AM  

"Today's big story.

F-you"


So now Cruz, the political cameleon that he is, wants to take on the Trump persona of not apologising. What a surprise.

I guess Cruz finally realized that apologising to NY and Sarah Palin didn't work out so well for him. So he's gonna test the waters by shitting on the public in Iowa. This guy is becoming a much bigger douchebag than one could have imagined.

Blogger VD January 31, 2016 11:57 AM  

Today's big story.

All right, Farmer Tom, in light of everything that has changed on the ground since last time, what is your call on the finishes?

Blogger The Other Robot January 31, 2016 11:57 AM  

Tomorrow night we will all know.

I am sure Farmer Tom will be vindicated.

Blogger The Other Robot January 31, 2016 12:00 PM  

Sanders closing Iowa argument: “Imagine a better world!”

Is that the John Lennon version?

Blogger SciVo January 31, 2016 12:09 PM  

dh @5: I think the story from the media will be that a new dark horse arose - I believe that the party and elite have selected Kaisch to play this years Bob Dole.

You're half right. The media represent the left half of the Uniparty, and they prefer Kasich because he's so bland and inoffensive, he isn't just a cuck -- he's a punk. He wouldn't just offer the Dems his wife, he'd lick them clean and then drop trou for round two. OF COURSE he got the Jew York Times's endorsement.

No, the right side of the Uniparty is firmly behind Bush. They're not stupid; think about how much more confident and relaxed Bush looked in the last debate. In an alternate universe where Trump didn't run, he could've been a credible candidate -- but apparently super-alphas make him anxious.

Blogger Cinco January 31, 2016 12:10 PM  

All right, Farmer Tom, in light of everything that has changed on the ground since last time, what is your call on the finishes?

Yeah, it's always difficult to ignore the ground truth, but with what Ryan wrote, recent polling and if Farmer Tom now leans Trump, it's Trump.

Skipping that debate is turning out to be a great move, as Cruz became the primary target, Trump eliminated the possibility of stepping on his crank and conditioned the media further for his ascension.

This just makes me wonder if managing the construction of billion dollar buildings is that much harder than running an election campaign. The irony here is of coarse that Trump is a one man wrecking ball.

Anonymous Steve January 31, 2016 12:17 PM  

Wyrd - Kate Bush is now leading Jeb Bush in the polls.

Wow. Unbelievable.

Anonymous Steve January 31, 2016 12:32 PM  

Tz - I think the most eye-opening thing about that debate clip, apart from Ted Cruz's pissy passive-aggressive demeanour and Ned Flanders voice, is what Jeb Bush said.

He's got a cunning plan to fix the Middle East by giving weapons to the "good" Durka-durkas.

What could possibly go wrong?

praetorian - Caligula's horse was a more adept politician than Mrs Clinton.

Bob K Mando - do American EMT's even carry reptilian blood transfusions?

Anonymous farmer Tom January 31, 2016 12:32 PM  

Plus or minus 3 on all these numbers.

1. Cruz 28%
2. Trump 25%
3. Rubio 18%
4. Paul 9%

Blogger Sheila4g January 31, 2016 12:37 PM  

While Iowa matters little in the grand scheme of things, the media and pundits have set it up as this grand prize that the frontrunner MUST win, and if Trump doesn't come in first, they're going to be all over it as a huge loss for him. That's why I give him a pass on ethanol (which I strongly oppose).

I was at the gym yesterday when that last poll came out, and watched Fox for a few minutes (without sound connected). They spent the entire time (I glanced up periodically while I was on the treadmill) talking about Cruz versus Rubio. I didn't even see Trump's name on the screen.

Since I didn't vote in 2012 (other than, with great reluctance and later great regret, for McCain), I guess I haven't gotten on any Cruz mailing lists. If only because it would be a huge psychological blow to his campaign, I'd like to see him come in 3rd in Iowa. As Vox has said, we'll just have to wait and see.

Blogger bob k. mando January 31, 2016 12:53 PM  

57. Steve January 31, 2016 12:32 PM
do American EMT's even carry reptilian blood transfusions?



you'll have to ask BGS. i have no med training and wouldn't know.

Anonymous Wyrd January 31, 2016 12:54 PM  

@Steve

He's got a cunning plan to fix the Middle East by giving weapons to the "good" Durka-durkas.

When around you, I shall always endeavor to refer to it as the "Scottish Play" rather than "Macbeth".

Anonymous BGKB January 31, 2016 12:59 PM  

This is the weird thing about Hilldog. The media, and even Republicans, take her seriously, as if shewould shoot down a 747 filled with women raped by her husband. Playing the Clinton version of clue takes weeks.

Milo, who I hope - by some hilarious King Ralph-type mishap - will one day become our Queen.

There is more of a risk of him becoming Captain Sweden. I cant find the Freedom Assault Group videos on youtube anymore.

two ago detailing the "ground game" of every candidate in Iowa. Trump's stood out because they weren't even allowed in the building

Why would Trump want the enemy media to report his ground game?

do American EMT's even carry reptilian blood transfusions?

Blood can only be administered by RN's, EMTs only have sterile fluids, not sure what type is reptilian.

Blogger The Other Robot January 31, 2016 1:11 PM  

Plus or minus 3 on all these numbers.

1. Cruz 28%
2. Trump 25%
3. Rubio 18%
4. Paul 9%


Curiously, the Des Moines Register has Trump at 28% and Cruz at 23.

However, I believe in you Farmer Tom!

Blogger Technomad January 31, 2016 1:21 PM  

I'm informed that what's keeping Shrillary in the position of the mainstream Democrat candidate is that she, and Bill, have a great deal of damaging information on a lot of prominent Democrats, and have let it be known that should they be taken down, they'll take as many others down with them as they can. This does make sense---I doubt that, when all those Republicans' FBI files were found over at the Executive Office Building in Bill's reign, they neglected to go through the Democrats' files as well.

Blogger SciVo January 31, 2016 1:54 PM  

You know you have a weird year when more than one other candidate out-spergies the Paul in the race.

Just a random thought.

Blogger Ingot9455 January 31, 2016 2:13 PM  

@64 Yes, that's the big question on the Hillary indictment. What does she have on Obama and is he afraid of it, given his position. If he is afraid, she can easily get a pardon, but in a normal world that would lose her the presidency. If he isn't, she gets a perp walk and we see if Hilldawg is bluffing about what she has or if other people lean on her not to upset the applecart. If no pardon but the DOJ doesn't indict, then the FBI just keeps leaking information until the election, also a presidency-loser in a normal world.

I say 'in a normal world' because we here have some relationship to logic and reality even though even the most INTJ and roboticly logical and Houyhnhnm like of us are still swayed by rhetoric. We have to understand that the traditional Democrat (or Socialist) voter does not have that relationship to logic and reality. For the smart ones it's only power whether they admit it or hide it behind 'ideology', for the dumb ones it's only emotion.

Blogger S Ss January 31, 2016 2:18 PM  

Lol u mad

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 2:19 PM  

i would remind everyone that elections aren't won by people answer questions on land lines.

As we've seen over and over... the polls leading up to the Iowa Causus are often silly.

Santorum won in 2012 and the thursday before the vote he was polling 4th.

Blogger The Other Robot January 31, 2016 2:27 PM  

OK, on that basis we can look forward to Ben Carson winning Ohio, and Trump will go on to become the Republican Nominee?

Anonymous SilvaInc January 31, 2016 2:36 PM  

"Nobody knows healthcare like Trump," says Trump.

"What are you going to replace Obamacare with, sir?"

"We are working on that."

Is this really who conservatives want carrying our banner? This guy is a dolt who talks but knows nothing.

Anonymous Jack Amok January 31, 2016 2:47 PM  

The leftist herd is just afraid to admit that they're not going to vote for the female candidate. As soon as they see enough other voters doing it to be comfortable that it's OK, I think she's toast.

I think this is right too - and it probably takes both the fact that she is an unlikable, worn out has-been, and Sanders is a full-blown commie for them to abandon the minority candidate. If he was just your average straight, white old guy, or if she had a shred of likability, she'd be a shoe in.

As it stands, I think her only hope is strong support among one key demographic - the people who count the votes.

Blogger The Other Robot January 31, 2016 2:48 PM  

Is this really who conservatives want carrying our banner? This guy is a dolt who talks but knows nothing.

You've just moved up into first place in the race for the dolt of the year.

Blogger The Other Robot January 31, 2016 2:49 PM  

Hmmm, I think the GOPe should have gotten Dupont to prove that Trump is bad for the Ozone layer.

That would have fixed him.

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 2:51 PM  

"Is this really who conservatives want carrying our banner? This guy is a dolt who talks but knows nothing."

No. this is the guy who's leading the NATIONALIST charge. Not the conservative charge. Conservative has nothing to do with it.

What we are seeing is the fight to decide if the GOP is going to be a liberal elitist party like it has been... a conservative party (which is what cruz wants), or a nationalist party.

Blogger The Other Robot January 31, 2016 2:51 PM  

As it stands, I think her only hope is strong support among one key demographic - the people who count the votes.

If only they could resurrect Joe Jugashvilli.

Blogger The Other Robot January 31, 2016 2:52 PM  

a conservative party (which is what cruz wants)

Ahhh, so a conservative party is an open borders bankster support party?

Blogger Jourdan January 31, 2016 2:55 PM  

Two points of disagreement:
1) U.S. polling is vastly superior to UK polling, due to the sanction of law against expressing "hate speech" in the UK. People simple there are scared to say they vote Conservative. Here, this phenomena exists, but not quite yet to the UK's degree, largely because the Red states and counties are very, very Red.

2) Clinton: Terrible candidate, yes, but given the electoral weight of the Blue states plus D votes among blacks, asians, single women and latinos, there is no way an R beats her. Not even Trump.

Of course, it is the realization that USG is beyond European-American control by legal, electoral means is a very, very good thing for our side, long run.

I know no one here agrees with me on point 2...but you heard it here first.

Blogger RobertT January 31, 2016 2:56 PM  

Pray for Hilary. Trump vs. Hilary. I could live with that. If Hilary goes down, I don't think the libs will let Bernie run

Blogger RobertT January 31, 2016 2:56 PM  

Moonshot Bernie.

Anonymous Wyrd January 31, 2016 3:03 PM  

If Hilary goes down...

Only on Huma. Thank you, everybody. Tip your waitress. I'm here all week.

OpenID sigbouncer January 31, 2016 3:03 PM  

" a conservative party (which is what cruz wants)"


You mean the politcal cameleon Cruz wants to repeat a GW Bush neocon party. All ready to bail out the banks again. The same who created and fully supported this Cruz campaign.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/26/who-is-the-real-ted-cruz/

At the same time Ted’s bulging 2016 campaign accounts and supporting Super-PACs are stuffed with big oil and gas money. He knows how to play the game.

And perhaps the ultimate hypocrisy of the native born Canadian is that his spouse, Heidi, by all accounts a lovely wife and mother, has been employed by Goldman Sachs since 2005. She is on leave as managing director and regional head of private wealth management. Heidi is a proud member of the lefty Council on Foreign Relations, advocates of one world government and the New World Order.

Heidi is not a bit player in the Cruz campaign with those credentials but rather an integral part of the campaign’s fundraising efforts. As reported by CNN last year, “She works the phones the way she worked them when she was at Goldman,” said Chad Sweet, the Cruz campaign’s chairman, who recruited Heidi to work at the giant investment bank.”

Yet we are to believe that the big Wall Street banks have no leverage over Ted Cruz? Why didn’t Heidi Cruz resign from Goldman Sachs instead of taking a leave of absence? That’s like saying Bill Ayers and Saul Alinsky have had no influence on Barack Obama.

The other inside connection that hits one like a baseball bat is the Bush connection.

Ted was George W.’s brain when he ran for President. A top policy adviser. Ted maneuvered for Solicitor General in Bush World but settled for a plum at the Federal Trade Commission. Ted’s a Bushman with deep ties to the political and financial establishment.

Ted and Heidi brag about being the first “Bush marriage” – they met as Bush staffers which ultimately led to marriage. Cruz was an adviser on legal affairs while Heidi was an adviser on economic policy and eventually director for the Western Hemisphere on the National Security Council under Condoleezza Rice. Condi helped give us the phony war in Iraq.

Also conveniently missing from Heidi’s Wikipedia bio is her service as Deputy U.S. Trade Representative to USTR head Robert Zoellick. At USTR Heidi worked on U.S.-China trade policy- the one Donald Trump talks about so much.

And Chad Sweet, Ted Cruz’s campaign chairman, is a former CIA officer. Michael Chertoff, George W. Bush’s former Secretary of Homeland Security, hired Sweet from Goldman Sachs to restructure and optimize the flow of information between the CIA, FBI and other members of the national security community and DHS. Chertoff and Sweet co-founded the Chertoff Group upon leaving the administration.

A known tactic of the intelligence community is the use of strategic communications as a “soft power” weapon against it adversaries — the creation of false narratives by the effective use of all media — social, digital, newspaper, print, etc. Combined with denial and deception, it can be a potent force. Glenn Beck and Mark Levin are abetting this.

Despite his ability to lie with a straight face (sadly Nixonian) on his support for amnesty and TPP, he got nailed by Senator Marco Rubio on the debate. Acting like a prick in the U.S. Senate was the core of Ted’s disciplined effort to bury his old school ties and reinvent himself as a modern-day Jesse Helms and supposed Conservative outsider. It’s a ruse.

As we get closer to the Iowa Caucus and New Hampshire Primary, Cruz and his establishment puppet masters are engaged in an aggressive strategy against Trump. The false narrative of course being that Cruz is the outsider while Trump is the insider. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

In its most simplistic terms – the power elite have no leverage over Trump – nothing.

Cruz, on the other hand, is the establishments quisling, spawned by the Bushes and controlled by Wall Street, who became a strident “outsider” only four years ago.

Blogger Ragin' Dave January 31, 2016 3:06 PM  

1 - Santorum won Iowa in 2012. He didn't win a single other state.
2 - The polls out of Iowa are always wrong, sometimes by a large margin.
3 - I don't trust a single bit of data coming out of the national polls just yet.

OpenID sigbouncer January 31, 2016 3:14 PM  

"Nobody knows healthcare like Trump," says Trump.

"What are you going to replace Obamacare with, sir?"

"We are working on that."


Maybe Trump can stop the reported killings and attempted assassinations of the doctors who have already demonstrated having the cures to our world's biggest diseases. As that would certainly lesson the costs of health care.

Trump's already established his disdain for big pharmaceutical companies and those who lead them.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2015/09/23/3704948/donald-trump-pharma-bro/

http://healthimpactnews.com/2015/is-the-u-s-medical-mafia-murdering-alternative-health-doctors-who-have-real-cures-not-approved-by-the-fda/

http://www.mnwelldir.org/docs/cancer1/sam.htm

Anonymous farmer Tom January 31, 2016 3:37 PM  

That "controversial" mailer that Cruz sent, well, guess what?

So did RPI,(Republican Party of Iowa)both 2 and 4 years ago. And so did Rubio, yesterday.

voting record

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 3:44 PM  

"Maybe Trump can stop the reported killings and attempted assassinations of the doctors who have already demonstrated having the cures to our world's biggest diseases. "

Is Trump going to stop the Chemtrails too?

OpenID sigbouncer January 31, 2016 3:45 PM  

"That "controversial" mailer that Cruz sent, well, guess what?

So did RPI,(Republican Party of Iowa)both 2 and 4 years ago. And so did Rubio, yesterday."


So did George Soros site moveon.org in 2012.

Politicians, you're only as good as the company you keep and ideas you repeat.

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 3:46 PM  

"Ahhh, so a conservative party is an open borders bankster support party?"

Hey sugar... Cruz isn't an open borders guy. Saying that doens't make cruz look bad. It makes you look dumb.

Oh.. and Trump's own kids say amnesty is a big part of his immigration plan. Which indicates to me something is amiss because the plan Sessions wrote doen't have anything like that in it.

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 3:48 PM  

wait wait wait...

a mailer telling people to go vote is now controversial?

Anonymous farmer Tom January 31, 2016 3:49 PM  

One more thing to add to your knowledge base.

The poll that this thread is referring to, was done by the Des Moines Register. Now, they get credit for being pretty accurate, but sometimes they are real close.

This link is to a post by Steve Deace from back in May. Some of his comments are now well out of date, but the facts at the beginning are beyond dispute.

"Just a bit outside"

Anonymous farmer Tom January 31, 2016 3:51 PM  

Yes, Nate. Because it "shames" people for not having done their "civic duty".

Can't be reminding people that they haven't voted, that might "trigger" some of them.

OpenID sigbouncer January 31, 2016 3:52 PM  

"Is Trump going to stop the Chemtrails too?"

Chemtrails? That's old news. Already been regulated this past year.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/06/epa-will-regulate-chemtrails.html

Blogger The Other Robot January 31, 2016 3:59 PM  

Ground Control to Farmer Tom, Ground Control to Farmer Tom, Check your Crystal Ball and render us a poll!

OpenID sigbouncer January 31, 2016 4:00 PM  

"a mailer telling people to go vote is now controversial?"

It is when you don't respect the voting privacy laws set forthwith.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepoliticalsystem/a/electionday.htm

What are my rights as a voter?

Equal treatment and opportunity to register and vote, regardless of race, religion, national origin, sex or disability.

Privacy - only you should know how you voted.

Anonymous farmer Tom January 31, 2016 4:05 PM  

Just so you know I'm not playing slappy for Cruz.

He's some analysis with numbers from another friend of mine. We got acquainted clear back in 1996/2000 during the Keyes campaigns.

I totally disagree with most of his analysis, especially the Huckabee stuff, he is very biased toward the FAIR tax, and the Huckster is the only one supporting it, and he admits he's not been in the state most of this cycle.

Here it is,

Craig Bergman

OpenID sigbouncer January 31, 2016 4:05 PM  

More on the political cameleon Cruz lack of regard for laws and shady plays.

http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/01/20/campaign-watchdog-group-files-fec-complaint-ted-cruz-failure-to-disclose-goldman-sachscitibank-financials/

A candidate CANNOT take out an unsecured signature loan for their campaign. Also, while the legalese can quickly get a person into the weeds, essentially a candidate’s spouse is similarly limited in contribution amount to the same principles as an unrelated campaign donor.

If a candidate could take out an unsecured signature loan, it opens the door wide open to corrupt exploitation by external influence.

The candidate with $500k in assets, or a Manchurian candidate with zero in assets, could be given a $2 million loan – which the loan originator would not expect to get back.

In this example, third parties, who are part of the influence equation, could pay back the loan on the candidate’s behalf, avoid FEC/public scrutiny and hold influence over what the elected political official does in office.

That’s the BIGGER question in this example.

• Was this second scenario a method for Wall Street, via Goldman Sachs, to put the well-educated husband of one of their “employees” into office, simply to insure that as a U.S. Senator he was friendly to their interests?

• Would Wall Street industrial bankers, who finance global corporations, be able to insure this type of candidate would, as an example, advocate for something like Trans-Pacific Trade?

• Would Wall Street institutional bankers, who benefit from low interest loans via U.S. Treasury, be able to influence such a candidate to avoid auditing the federal reserve?

• Would Wall Street institutional banking agents who benefit from low interest federal borrowing, and higher interest investment loaning, be able to influence policy regarding North American economic development?

• Would, as an example, a billionaire hedge-fund manager (Robert Mercer), who is in a legal fight with the IRS to the tune of $10 BILLION taxes owed, be willing to invest several million, perhaps tens of millions, into a presidential campaign in an effort to win the White House and influence a U.S. Tax Policy that would tilt the IRS scales in his favor – and consequently save him billions?

Those become the bigger questions to consider when asking yourself why would such a brilliant legal expert, a very smart lawyer like Ted Cruz, just inadvertently omit such a filing to the FEC.

Wouldn’t an equally sharp spouse like Heidi S. Cruz, who was -according to Ted- a key decision maker in the loans, and who is also an energy investment banker with Goldman Sachs, also identify the concern?

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 4:13 PM  

"Wouldn’t an equally sharp spouse like Heidi S. Cruz, who was -according to Ted- a key decision maker in the loans, and who is also an energy investment banker with Goldman Sachs, also identify the concern?"

Heidi is an account manager that handles account of 40 million or more.

Ted isn't one of Heidi's customers.

If he was... he wouldn't need a loan for his campaign.

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 4:14 PM  

"It is when you don't respect the voting privacy laws set forthwith."

If you vote or not is not a matter of privacy.

What planet do you live on where you think privacy applies to voting?

It doesn't.

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 4:15 PM  

"Chemtrails? That's old news. Already been regulated this past year. "


/facepalm

OpenID sigbouncer January 31, 2016 4:22 PM  

"Heidi is an account manager that handles account of 40 million or more."

No she isn't. She is officially on leave from Goldman Sucks to help her husband with his campaign.

Anonymous jOHN MOSBY January 31, 2016 4:24 PM  

"1 - Santorum won Iowa in 2012. He didn't win a single other state."
And you are wrong.Do your homework before you post next time.

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 4:24 PM  

"No she isn't. She is officially on leave from Goldman Sucks to help her husband with his campaign."

You're a moron. That was her position before she took unpaid leave.

Here's a hint... She didn't approve his loan while she was on unpaid leave either.

OpenID sigbouncer January 31, 2016 4:25 PM  

"If you vote or not is not a matter of privacy.

What planet do you live on where you think privacy applies to voting?

It doesn't."


I guess the sealed envelopes and private voting machines are all for show then.

Let me know when they start lining us up by candidate when we go to vote.

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 4:25 PM  

also... a soldier on leave is still in the army.

She is still an employee of Goldman Sachs. She is simply on unpaid leave.

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 4:28 PM  

"I guess the sealed envelopes and private voting machines are all for show then.

Let me know when they start lining us up by candidate when we go to vote."

Hey dumbass... "who you vote for" and "if you vote or not" are not the same thing.

Also...

The whole private voting thing?

That's a traditional system. Its not a right. You don't even have a right to vote at all. States can choose to appoint their representatives to the electoral college if they want. They don't have to let you vote on it at all.

Much less let you do so in private.

That's just how they have chosen to do it.

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 4:29 PM  

Farmer Tom...

Explain to this dumbass how the Iowa Caucus actually works. Tell him how the votes are actually cast.

OpenID sigbouncer January 31, 2016 4:31 PM  

"That was her position before she took unpaid leave. "

So explain to me the relevancy of this in your response? Why don't you try reading the link provided and the complaint filed before ignorantly commenting on it.

OpenID sigbouncer January 31, 2016 4:36 PM  

"Here's a hint... She didn't approve his loan while she was on unpaid leave either."

"Wouldn’t an equally sharp spouse like Heidi S. Cruz, who was -according to Ted- a key decision maker in the loans, and who is also an energy investment banker with Goldman Sachs, also identify the concern?"

Yeah again explain how that Yuge stretch of an assumption applies to her being able to identify the concern on a loan taken out for her husbands political run that was based on 50% of their joint income?

Anonymous farmer Tom January 31, 2016 4:37 PM  

This just showed up in my news feed. Happened yesterday in Hamlin, Iowa. My brother was there, in the front row with his 3 year old son.

I grew up in the area, although I live across the state from there now. BTW, I should know the farmer in the video, I recognize the face, can't put a name with it right now. I should call my brother and ask, he would know.

Anyway,

Forget for a moment that Ted Cruz is the featured "star" here. And forget for just a moment that most of you have a deep hatred for ethanol, I know that.

But, for a moment, listen to Cruz's argument.

I'm not asking you to like Cruz, nor to even believe that he'll do what he says.

Just listen to his argument.

Is he right? Should we eliminate all subsidies? All of them? Solar, wind energy, ethanol?

And should the blend wall, put in place by the EPA be eliminated? So that based on the market cost of the product, ethanol has to compete for market share of the fuels market on a level playing field? If ethanol can be produced from stover and grass, or from sugar beets and or sugar cane, if it can even be made from wood pulp or wood chips, should the EPA have a limit in place saying that ethanol can not be sold in the market at more than 15/20 percent blend?

Is that a valid argument?

Would farmers be better off, if the blend wall was removed? Is Cruz making a valid argument?

Again, I'm not asking you to like Cruz or vote for him, I'm asking about the governmental policy.

I'd like to see an actual discussion on his policy issue.

the Blend Wall

Now, just one more point.

I Love It

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 4:37 PM  

" Heidi S. Cruz, who was -according to Ted- a key decision maker in the loans, and who is also an energy investment banker with Goldman Sachs"

Because you're a dumbass who wrote the stupid this stupid sentence.

Heidi didn't have shit to do with those loans. That isn't what Heidi does. it isn't what Heidi did before she took leave.. and damn sure isn't what she does now that she is on leave.

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 4:39 PM  

Look sigbouncer... I know you're all Hopey Changey for you magic billionaire Donald Trump.

You're an obama voter and Trump is your Obama.

But seriously... its embarrassing. I mean at least try to give a hint of critical thinking skills every once in a while. If just for appearances sake.

Anonymous farmer Tom January 31, 2016 4:44 PM  

Hamlin, IA, January 30, 2016

252

Crowd was estimated at about 280. My brother drove from about 20 miles away.

Anonymous Winterfestus January 31, 2016 4:53 PM  

At some point in this discussion of ag policy we should mention that somewhere north of 60% of Iowa farmland isn't owned by farmers. Colloquially we always referred to buyers as "lawyer from Chicago" though nowadays we would say 'hedge fund.' Secondly, for each farmer who owns the land there are four people waiting for him to die so they can get their slice. Land values are VERY important in Iowa.

OpenID sigbouncer January 31, 2016 4:54 PM  

" Heidi S. Cruz, who was -according to Ted- a key decision maker in the loans, and who is also an energy investment banker with Goldman Sachs"


"Because you're a dumbass who wrote the stupid this stupid sentence.

Heidi didn't have shit to do with those loans."


Of course she did. You're just not using your God given brain to figure it out.

As I said previously, go read the link provided where those comments came from. Then you might catch on that it's a joint loan based on 50% of their combined income. Therefore, as Cruz stated above, she was a key decision maker in the loan (as in in them taking out the loan you dumb fuck). The loan is her responsibility too as she is a part of it.

Anonymous johnc January 31, 2016 4:54 PM  

@22 2) Clinton: Terrible candidate, yes, but given the electoral weight of the Blue states plus D votes among blacks, asians, single women and latinos, there is no way an R beats her. Not even Trump.

I feel similar. Looking at the 2012 electoral college map, it's hard to see what states the Republicans pick up. Maybe Trump can pick up MI, OH, and PA on what's left of the blue-collar vote.

But otherwise the numbers... they're just not there for the Republicans.

And America is a lot ............ browner since 2012.

OpenID sigbouncer January 31, 2016 4:58 PM  

"Look sigbouncer... I know you're all Hopey Changey for you magic billionaire Donald Trump.

You're an obama voter and Trump is your Obama."


That's a blatant lie Nate. You take that lying shit back. I'm no Obama voter or supporter.

The only two people I have voted for this century is Ron Paul and Ralph Nader.

Anonymous Wyrd January 31, 2016 5:03 PM  

Look sigbouncer... I know you're all Hopey Changey for you magic billionaire Donald Trump.

You're an obama voter and Trump is your Obama.

But seriously... its embarrassing. I mean at least try to give a hint of critical thinking skills every once in a while. If just for appearances sake.


Shut your whore mouth, Nate. Your need to shit in a Trump thread is only rivalled by your ability to solo two-girls-one-cup. We know you do not like or trust Trump. Convert to CD because your broken records skip intolerably.

Blogger The Other Robot January 31, 2016 5:07 PM  

In Germany, the vice chancellor called for a nationalist party to be put under observation by the government agency that tracks extremists after its leader suggested that police should be allowed to shoot refugees trying to enter the country.

I wonder if they have Trump under surveillance.

Anonymous Napoleon 12pdr January 31, 2016 5:19 PM  

I actually feel pretty confident about the general election. With Trump, his odds are binary. He'll either win big or lose big. Remember that much of his power base are the old Reagan Democrats - lower middle-class, blue-collar voters. His weak spot will be the Establishment GOP knifing him in the back. His strength? Trump is NOT a blank slate on which the Propaganda Press can paint what they please, and he plays them like a violin.

Cruz and Rubio each have strengths and weaknesses. Rubio is glib, but ideologically suspect. Cruz is hard-core, but not nearly as smooth in the delivery. The rest of the GOP field has no hope.

The good news is that the Democrats have a choice of poisons.

Clinton is headed for either an indictment or campaign-gutting leaks. Sanders is a bona-fide socialist with Soviet connections. Both get stomped in the general election. If the Dems try to drag Clinton along then swap Biden in, Sanders' supporters walk out. If Bloomberg runs as an independent, it's a three-way race between the socialist (Sanders), the nanny-statist (Bloomberg), and the GOP candidate (the next President).

I'm actually feeling pretty confident.

Blogger The Other Robot January 31, 2016 5:23 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

OpenID sigbouncer January 31, 2016 5:25 PM  

"If ethanol can be produced from stover and grass, or from sugar beets and or sugar cane, if it can even be made from wood pulp or wood chips, should the EPA have a limit in place saying that ethanol can not be sold in the market at more than 15/20 percent blend?

Is that a valid argument?"


The oil vs ethanol thing isn't high in my list of priorities. The only man (guy named Bennie, forget his last name, would know it if you said it though) I knew who knew anything about oil, created his own company down south back in the 1960's. I think it might have been BP, although could be very wrong about that. I do remember the color blue being in his gas station signs fwiw.

Bennie's tip to me was that super unleaded gas is no different than unleaded, so don't waste money on the super.


But for the anti ethanol people I guess there is this?

http://www.growthenergy.org/images/uploads/MythbustersRackCard4-10.pdf

Blogger Stephen St. Onge January 31, 2016 5:25 PM  

        Nate Silver's blog FiveThirtyEight.com had a post the other day about the Iowa Poll, and Seltzer, it's director.

        Bottom line, she's correctly called eight of the nine previous caucuses and presidential elections, and her average error has always been low, within the statistical margin of error.  They flatly say she's the best pollster in Iowa.

        Meanwhile, Nate Silver's methodology says Trump has a 58% chance of winning Iowa, compared to 32% for Cruz, 8% for Rubio, and 2% for Carson.

        And Real Clear Politics has five polls on the Caucuses, their average is Trump leads Cruz by 6%, Cruz leads Rubio by 9%.

        Given the number of closet Trump supporters the media has reported on, I can't see how he can lose.

Blogger The Other Robot January 31, 2016 5:33 PM  

It's all over for Trump!

Saudi Media Claim Billionaire Saudi Prince Delivered ‘Knockout’ to Trump

Blogger Stephen St. Onge January 31, 2016 5:35 PM  

@23. Timmy3
        When Santorum won, the Iowa polls daily numbers showed Santorum's strength gaining the last few days.  Trump's been the one gaining strength recently in Iowa, and Cruz has been losing it.  I'd bet on The Donald, if I was you.

Blogger DeeDee Arnold January 31, 2016 5:50 PM  

Hey, as a baby boomer who has been trying to tell you idiots to avert your eyes from the glittery objects for 50 years now . . . . You got it. You own it. You live it.

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 6:00 PM  

I think Trump people should be looking very skeptically at this latest narative that "He's doing well in Iowa and a win in Iowa shows he's for real."

The people saying this are no friends of Trump.

They are saying this because they don't believe he will win Iowa.. and they want to use that to discredit him when he comes in second.

Trumpster would be much wiser to down play Iowa as just the first of many important votes to come.

You also shouldn't assume that everyone who is predicting something other than a Trump win is doing so out of hatred for Trump.

Cruz has 12,000 volunteers. Its the biggest organization anyone has ever constructed in Iowa. Cruz' people have voted in plenty of caucuses before and they will show up to vote in this one.

Trump voters are largely new. We have no idea how they are going to perform. We do know that Trump has no conventional ground game at all. But does he need one? We don't know.

But being skeptical of that doesn't make someone irrationally hates Trump. Its a perfectly rational position to take. In fact it is the most rational position to take. It is the "believe it when I see it" position.

I expect Trump to get 2nd in Iowa... but I think he will dominate in NH. The races in the South will be tighter and to many things can change to say anything about them now.

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 6:29 PM  

On Cruz's ethynol answer:

I understand why it sounds good to farmers who love ethynol... but the fact is... its an ethynol death sentence.

Ethynol can't compete on a level playing field. The population hates ethynol. And the blend wall thing I'm sure sounds great too... but it is totally irrelevant. You can put 30% ethynol blends out there all you want.. no one will buy them.

Or... that is to say... no one who pays even the slightest attention will buy them.

Ethynol is the best example of malinvestment I can think of in the modern economy. Taking a product that is needed in many industries and tons of food products.. and using it to make a product no one wants... thus driving up the prices in all the other things that people do want.

Peak Retard.

Blogger SciVo January 31, 2016 6:49 PM  

Jourdan @77: I know no one here agrees with me on point 2...but you heard it here first.

You're going against the grain -- by endorsing the conventional wisdom of the mainstream.

So brave. Thank you for this.

Of course, it is the realization that USG is beyond European-American control by legal, electoral means is a very, very good thing for our side, long run.

Can't argue with that, which is what makes Trump a Xanatos gambit.

Anonymous Cheddarman January 31, 2016 6:51 PM  

Imo Cruz will pull an upset from evangelicals voting for him...just my gut feeling

Blogger tz January 31, 2016 7:16 PM  

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/ted-cruzs-iowa-mailers-are-more-fraudulent-than-everyone-thinks

CyberTerminator Skynet Ted finds the real world more complex.

@Nate - Heidi is Goldman's Geisha (the CFR probably contributes). Not a mere lobbyist, but the last thing at night and first thing in the morning and during coitus she can "suggest" policy. The Masturbatchurian candidate.

Blogger Thucydides January 31, 2016 7:26 PM  

Do your part. Register "D" and cast a ballot for Bernie Sanders at the primaries. IF Hills is buried beyond the margin of fraud then maybe the establishment will give up on trying to prop her up and let justice take its course. 4-8 years in Levensworth seems appropriate....

What you do for real in the polling booth on election day is up to you, of course.....

Blogger The Other Robot January 31, 2016 7:34 PM  

I think Trump will win.

Then the establishment will start looking for those crazy lone gunmen again.

Blogger The Other Robot January 31, 2016 7:43 PM  

DES MOINES, Iowa (Reuters) - If Hillary Clinton pulls off a victory in her close race for the Demonic presidential nomination with Bernie Sanders, she will have women like Joan Pinnell to thank.

I might have changed that a bit, but it seems like girrrrrrl power is a thing.

However, there is said to be a blizzard rolling in tomorrow, and we can feel it already in NorCal.

Blogger newanubis January 31, 2016 8:02 PM  

Nicely done Napoleon. Clearly you would have been wise enough to search that chessboard for your ticket off the island!

Blogger newanubis January 31, 2016 8:12 PM  

Isn't it just 'soul supplanting' wherein their conciousnesstakes command of the body/organism as is?

Blogger Jourdan January 31, 2016 8:15 PM  

@127 - According to you, my view that the electorate has changed so radically that any D beats any R is conventional wisdom? Really? Could you cut and paste the many articles from major media saying so?

No?

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 8:52 PM  

"Shut your whore mouth, Nate. "

Oh I'm sorry.. you have to be over 52 inches tall to ride this ride. COme back in a year or so when you've had a growth spurt.

or maybe you can ride with a grown up?

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 8:53 PM  

"That's a blatant lie Nate. You take that lying shit back. I'm no Obama voter or supporter. "

The Train is fine.

Blogger Nate January 31, 2016 8:54 PM  

I mean when you're to fucking stupid to understand the insults thrown at you... you should shut up.

Anonymous Wyrd January 31, 2016 9:03 PM  

Oh I'm sorry.. you have to be over 52 inches tall to ride this ride. COme back in a year or so when you've had a growth spurt.

or maybe you can ride with a grown up?


Nate can't shut his whore mouth. Alas.

Blogger newanubis January 31, 2016 9:06 PM  

Isn't it just 'soul supplanting' wherein their conciousnesstakes command of the body/organism as is?

Blogger TheLiberatorOfBados January 31, 2016 9:25 PM  

There is a factor people aren't considering here for Trump: Namely he is appealing to people that normally don't vote, or haven't voted in a looooooooooong time. This is a HUGE amount of people who either normally don't care, or are highly disillusioned with politics. And we're hearing from the ground level that it is THIS group of people he is attracting, on top of his cross-political appeal. This is a group of people that none of the other establishment candidates in the Uniparty can attract. That's Trump's ultimate "trump card". Even if he can only get 10% of this group of people, that's still millions none of the other candidates can tap into. It's a significant advantage, and one the GOPe has been terrified of, as evidenced in Virginia where they had that bogus "loyalty pledge" that just got overturned due to its questionable legality.

The "splitter strategy" only works if you keep most of the voters from wanting to vote. Nobody was counting on Trump showing up and actually giving people a reason to vote again. This completely destroyed their strategy to get Jeb in with a minimum of delegates, and everything since then has been damage control to try and maintain that plan...but it's clearly failing. Now we can see that they are desperate to dislodge Hillary and replace her with somebody else because she is such a weakling compared to Trump. Maybe Sanders can pull through? But it's also possible they may try to run Biden instead since Sanders is an unknown as far as the establishment goes (personally I don't trust him).

I think Trump will be winning the primaries by a bigger degree than most people realize.

OpenID sigbouncer January 31, 2016 9:27 PM  

"I mean when you're to fucking stupid to understand the insults thrown at you... you should shut up"

Basic reading comprehension >>> Guessing if what Nate writes is literal or not


@113

Sigbouncer: " Heidi S. Cruz, who was -according to Ted- a key decision maker in the loans, and who is also an energy investment banker with Goldman Sachs"


Nate: "Because you're a dumbass who wrote the stupid this stupid sentence.

Heidi didn't have shit to do with those loans. That isn't what Heidi does. it isn't what Heidi did before she took leave.. and damn sure isn't what she does now that she is on leave."


Sigbouncer: Of course she did. You're just not using your God given brain to figure it out.

As I said previously, go read the link provided where those comments came from. Then you might catch on that it's a joint loan based on 50% of their combined income. Therefore, as Cruz stated above, she was a key decision maker in the loan (as in in them taking out the loan you dumb fuck). The loan is her responsibility too as she is a part of it.

OpenID sigbouncer January 31, 2016 9:50 PM  

http://www.infowars.com/live-now-trump-wins-iowa-in-landslide/

Anonymous Malwyn's apprentice January 31, 2016 9:59 PM  

@7 Steve: "I bet the Trumpster could trigger her into an epic meltdown in a one-on-one debate."

Love to see that. Hill's debate vs Rick Laszio showcased his epic mistake when he treated Hill like a candidate instead of like a woman. She claimed that his stepping out from his podium on TV was threatening & she felt intimidated (guess a brick wall wasn't handy).

So yeah, let's have a real debate throwdown where Hill can learn the meaning of "intimidating" from a candidate who'll throw the gender card back in her face.

Anonymous Malwyn's apprentice January 31, 2016 10:11 PM  

@57Steve: "He's got a cunning plan to fix the Middle East by giving weapons to the "good" Durka-durkas."

Uhm, didn't we already try that with the ATF's gunwalker program that's worked out so well? Selling guns to Mexican drug gangs ... what could possibly go wrong? (not adding sarc, 'cause this was actual gov't policy)

Blogger The Other Robot January 31, 2016 10:45 PM  

One of the nation's leading Democratic donors, billionaire George Soros, is finally throwing his fortune behind Hillary Clinton, investing $6 million into a super PAC backing her campaign, federal election records showed Sunday.

SuperPACs

Try as I might, I cannot find any Trump SuperPACs.

Anonymous jOHN MOSBY January 31, 2016 10:46 PM  


"You also shouldn't assume that everyone who is predicting something other than a Trump win is doing so out of hatred for Trump."
I can't speak for no one but myself, I never thought that.
Trump is prolly going to the Big One, whether you like it or
no. Reagan was not perfect, but he beat the hell out of what we had in office at the time, by a long damn shot.

Anonymous jOHN MOSBY January 31, 2016 10:52 PM  

"Nate can't shut his whore mouth. Alas."
I would have thought Jr. High school kids would't want to hang here.

Blogger The Other Robot January 31, 2016 11:35 PM  

Carson to offer amnesty to all those illegals already here.

Rewarded for committing crimes.

Blogger Nate February 01, 2016 12:12 AM  

"I would have thought Jr. High school kids would't want to hang here."

C'mon mate... over the last couple of years.. the alt-right morons and game retards have inundated the place.

the average IQ in the comments has dropped from around 140 to probly 110 just from their influx alone.

And in terms of IQ... most of these dipshits are closer to monkies than they are to Vox.

Blogger Nate February 01, 2016 12:14 AM  

"Trump is prolly going to the Big One, whether you like it or
no."

We've been over this.

I'm perfectly happy with Trump winning it all. If trump wins it all it will prove once and for all that this PC shit is done... and that a pro-deportation political stance is viable.

That's great news for all of us.

You won't see me bitching if Trump wins it all. I'll be enjoying the show.

Blogger Sir Thermite February 01, 2016 3:31 AM  

over the last couple of years.. the alt-right morons and game retards have inundated the place

You don't get more page views than Scalzi by being appealing to mostly 140 IQ folks, and obviously you don't sell a lot of books that way either. Some readers were cuckservative morons or anti-game retards before people like Vox helped us toward the light. We read the blog because we need and learn from it. If you're a reader who knows it all already and a proper worldview came to you naturally, and you despise the majority of the participants, then this site must be of limited usefulness now other than for propping up your own ego.


Anonymous Toby February 01, 2016 4:01 AM  

The blog became popular, Nate. What you observed was expected to happen.

Anonymous Jack Amok February 01, 2016 11:56 AM  

I'm perfectly happy with Trump winning it all. If trump wins it all it will prove once and for all that this PC shit is done... and that a pro-deportation political stance is viable.

That's great news for all of us.


Nate, question for you.

You just articulated the main reason I support Trump, yet the vast majority of your posts are anti-Trump, which implies you think another option is even better. But I don't see how any of the other candidates move us in that direction. So where do we disagree?

Blogger skiballa February 01, 2016 12:19 PM  

Claims reading comprehension skills

Doesn't recognize simple metaphor



You know, when I first started visiting VP, I thought I was dumbing the place down with my 135 IQ, but damn!

Blogger Timmy3 February 01, 2016 12:54 PM  

New polling says Trump is either tied with Cruz or ahead of Cruz by 7. Rubio improved to 22 in either case. So what matters is turnout

OpenID sigbouncer February 01, 2016 3:20 PM  

@155 skiballa

"Claims reading comprehension skills

Doesn't recognize simple metaphor"

There was no claiming. It's a fact right there for anyone to see @142 reading comprehension 101.

Nice job rimming Nate's ass though. I'm sure he will appreciate it as much as you appreciate the metaphor.

Anonymous jOHN MOSBY February 01, 2016 5:56 PM  

" Nice job rimming Nate's ass though. I'm sure he will appreciate it as much as you appreciate the metaphor. "
Your gonna be one bad dude when your nuts finally drop,sonny.
Does your mom let you kiss her with that potty mouth of yours ?

Blogger FP February 01, 2016 7:26 PM  

@61 "When around you, I shall always endeavor to refer to it as the "Scottish Play" rather than "Macbeth"."

AARGH! Hot potato, office drawers, Puck will make amends!

Blogger Timmy3 February 02, 2016 11:56 PM  

123. Stephen St. Onge

LOL!!!

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts