Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MineralMan

(146,317 posts)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 11:34 AM Jan 2016

Lots of enthusiasm for both Clinton and Sanders in Iowa.

Both candidates have an army of volunteers out encouraging people to caucus. They're out this weekend and have been out prior to this weekend, talking to likely caucus-goers and trying to build support for their favorite candidate.

They'll be out again tomorrow, since the caucuses don't start until 7 PM. In the end, though, it will be the voters in Iowa who will decide whether to show up and who they will caucus for. Pollsters try to figure out how many and who will caucus. Will they get it right, or will there be some sort of surprise once all the caucuses have adjourned and the numbers begin appearing?

We could argue about that here on DU, but our arguments and posts about enthusiasm and energy will have nothing whatever to do with what Iowans decide to do. That will be up to them. We're just spectators, and those of us who live in other places than Iowa can only guess what Iowans will do in the end.

It's an interesting event for spectators, but even more interesting if you're a voter in Iowa. I'm in Minnesota, not that far from Iowa's northern border. We'll be having our own caucuses a month from now. I'll be in the stands, rooting for my candidate, but I have no illusions about my cheering changing anything in Iowa. I am not an Iowan.

Good luck to the Democratic candidates! We'll be watching.

11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

floriduck

(2,262 posts)
1. Good post, mm. We out of staters are all observers
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 11:46 AM
Jan 2016

with a preferred candidate. We can moan and howl at the moon but all we do is make noise. Both of the leading candidates have made their case and the Iowa voters have made or will make their choices.

Good luck and let the fun begin.

yallerdawg

(16,104 posts)
2. Asked about "enthusiasm," Iowa voters said...
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 12:47 PM
Jan 2016

"contrary to 'conventional wisdom' - Hillary beats Bernie!

Are you enthusiastic:

Hillary Clinton - 73%
Bernie Sanders - 69%


Very enthusiastic:

Hillary Clinton - 53%
Bernie Sanders - 49%


As usual, MineralMan maintains his record of 'unconventional wisdom"!

to MineralMan!

http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/video/handicapping-the-democratic-race-ahead-of-the-iowa-caucus-612752963809

MineralMan

(146,317 posts)
3. Thanks for that link. I hadn't seen that.
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 01:44 PM
Jan 2016

Around DU, it's "common knowledge" that people aren't enthusiastic about Hillary Clinton. I've never really been sure that was true, and your data seems to show that I'm right.

Lots of confirmation bias going around these days.

 

libdem4life

(13,877 posts)
4. And another persepctive ... it could be that the country is not ready for a race where candidates
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 01:49 PM
Jan 2016

do not exchange in mano-a-mano. Perhaps they secretly love it and it gets them going, who knows. Accounts for the strong showing at least in polls for the "fighter" Trump. Come and get me...let's fight and I'll win...type of attitude.

The "worst" I have seen from Bernie is comparing positions...of course, seen as an attack, because they are not usually comparisons that are necessarily pleasant to some. I won't make any comments on the other because I'm a Bernie supporter first.

yallerdawg

(16,104 posts)
5. This is what he said about the former Democratic Secretary of State.
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 02:00 PM
Jan 2016
“No one can deny that Secretary Clinton has a lot of foreign-policy experience. But experience does not necessarily equate to judgment. Dick Cheney had a hell of a lot of experience,” he said in a reference to the former Republican vice president.

I guess Senator Sanders (I-VT) is held to 'another' standard for what is considered negative.

 

libdem4life

(13,877 posts)
6. What a "hateful attack" Not. Just answering the accusation he had little or no experience.
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 02:03 PM
Jan 2016

Neither did Obama, but he got up to speed in plenty of time, een though I don't agree with a lot of what he did, he has served us and the Democrats, in the overall picture, well.

yallerdawg

(16,104 posts)
7. I did not say...
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 02:21 PM
Jan 2016

"hateful attack."

I said "negative."

Bernie Sanders launched his presidential campaign in 2015 by promising not to go negative -- either on the stump or in ads -- against Hillary Clinton.

Yup - 'another' standard.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/14/politics/bernie-sanders-negative-ad/index.html
 

libdem4life

(13,877 posts)
8. Does that mean he does not reserve the right to respond to lies by the opponent? Is that negative?
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 02:28 PM
Jan 2016

And other than bringing out her record, how has Bernie gone negative? I know most of that is a collection of inconvenient facts, as her flip-flops are mostly on video, but aside from that...Please be specific. And quoting CNN doesn't prove a thing.

Yes, Bernie is "grappling" with what to do about lies being slung out there. What's he supposed to do...cheer them on? No, he has every right to refute...regardless whether someone wants to diss him for breaking his promise.

Fail.

yallerdawg

(16,104 posts)
9. This is why I don't argue with Bernie supporters.
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 02:41 PM
Jan 2016

Comparing Hillary to Dick Cheney is not negative?

And CNN quoting Senator Sanders (I-VT) doesn't prove a thing?

If you believe what you say, further conversation is pointless - I don't argue with Republicans, either.

 

libdem4life

(13,877 posts)
10. Some people just call that disagreeing. And no, CNN is not the last word on Bernie.
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 02:46 PM
Jan 2016

They, like most of the rest of the MSM, just recently discovered he even existed.

Hassin Bin Sober

(26,330 posts)
11. I think maybe the issue you are having is the meaning of words.
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 03:04 PM
Jan 2016

Sanders didn't "compare" Hillary to Cheney. He merely used Cheney as an example of someone with lots of experience still showing poor judgment.

"Comparing" Hillary to Cheney would be saying Hillary supported the Iraq war and so did Cheney. That's a comparison.

But this is silly season so any mention of Cheney in the conversation results in "omg omg he compared her to Cheney!1!1!"

I was a Hillary supporter in 2008. So I got to see this nonsense from both sides. The Bobby Kennedy assassination meme was a perfect example. HRC used June and the Bobby assassination as an example of how primaries can still be contested in to June. Like clockwork, the Obmama supporters went off the rails accusing her of fomenting an assassination plot. Olbermann did one of his breathless special comments accusing her of being Lee Harvey Oswald in waiting - if that wasn't when I stopped watching Olbermann it was close.

Silly season.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Lots of enthusiasm for bo...