You'll get it right eventually

in a caucus that Rick Santorum won the last time?

I'll give you a hint... You are getting warmer...

And that's verifiable.

But please try again

But please refrain from getting angry and "shouting" with ALL CAPS.

Spontaneous moral outrage is something to be lauded and not condemned.

Must be upset now

Mmmmm tasty

Carson!

If the Royals beat the Mets 1-0 and the Phillies beat the Red Sox 10-5, do you figure that means the Phillies will beat the Royals?

And there are millions of them!

It's the craziest thing!

eom

I don't know who you support but who ever it is will lose to Hillary .

They want Bush to face off against Clinton because the winner will be predictable and controllable by the oligarchs. Trump is a demagogue - a loose cannon, and Sanders intends to reverse the Wall Street/MIC power grab. This is why EVERY corporate owned media outlet is ignoring or ridiculing him. Trump makes good ratings but the POB are becoming concerned. They've got to be careful with the Republican base, though, so they are trying now to use Carson to edge Trump out. When Trump is out they will also destroy Carson. Guys like the Koch brothers, Adelson and the Waltons do NOT want to disrupt the status quo.

in 08 and 12 respectively. So yea, it is perfectly possible for Carson to be ahead.

they both beat Obama!

if you have some I would love to see that.

Cmon take it the last logical step from there...

Honestly, I find it hard to believe she is up by that much and suspect that their likely voter screen might be a bit too stringent. The Register poll is the most respected one and it will be interesting to see what that poll shows. Trends will also be interesting. I think she is ahead, and likely by a significant amount, but 41 seems rather high.

#1 - Biden not running. She got all of his support, probably adding 10-15% or so.

#2 - Her strong debate performance probably added 5-10 points.

#3 - Her beating down the idiotic Republican attempts to smear her at the House select committee on Benghazi hearings
And
#4 - Sanders supporters walking out of the Jefferson Jackson dinner there in the middle of the dinner after Sanders finished speaking was widely reported there and it apparently angered a lot of Iowa Democrats.

so that can't have anything to do with it. I do think items 1-3 is why she has a significant lead. But I don't think it is 41 points.

No. 4 is a self inflicted wound by arrogant Bernie fans that showed their hand a little early.

So not sure why you have a hard time believing that carson leads with them.

Or saying just because Hillary may lead and end up winning iowa it doesn't mean she will win the nomination ?

Trump is too sinful in their eyes. Their choice is never predictive. Roberts, Huckabee, Santorum did not get the nomination. No surprise to me that they've latched on to Carson this time.

OTOH Iowa dem caucus has been more predictive.

The Dems take the process seriously and they get out and see all the candidates, ask them hard questions. and make up their >>>> own minds <<<<<

I cannot read your mind so I don't know what response you are trying to elicit. So to me it sorta seems like you are insulting Democratic caucus goers of being easily manipulated by some secret power cabal.

Bernie can and will win here especially if the GOTV effort is really solid.

to the Republican race in local newspapers or TV news.

Clinton loses to carson so maybe i will be wrong and racists in GOP will vote carson.

At least when Carson Is in white house you can't say i didn't watn people.

Thank you!

That comes with a bonus!

Santorum and Huckabee won the last two times.

and manipulated by corporatist, third way, Sherrod Brown style fake progressive,republican lite DINOs

Iowa 1996:
Democratic winner - Bill Clinton
Republican winner - Bob Dole

Democratic Nomination winner - Bill Clinton
Republican Nomination winner - Bob Dole


Iowa 2000:
Democratic winner - Al Gore
Republican winner - George W. Bush

Democratic Nomination winner - Al Gore
Republican Nomination winner - George W. Bush.


Iowa 2004:
Democratic winner - John Kerry
Republican winner - George W. Bush

Democratic Nomination winner - John Kerry
Republican Nomination winner - George W. Bush.


Iowa 2008:
Democratic winner - Barack Obama
Republican winner - Mike Huckabee

Democratic Nomination winner - Barack Obama
Republican Nomination winner - John McCain


Iowa 2012:
Democratic winner - Barack Obama
Republican winner - Rick Santorum

Democratic Nomination winner - Barack Obama
Republican Nomination winner - Mitt Romney



So, every Democratic winner of the Iowa Caucus since 1996 has ended up garnering the Democratic party nomination for the general election.

1992 was the last year the winner of the Iowa Caucus didn't win the Democratic party nomination. The eventual winner Bill Clinton only got 3% in the Caucus as Iowa's own son Tom Harkin got 76%.

trying to pull reasons out of the air for Bernie's failing campaign.

Couldn't be because american voters admire and agree more with Hillary than Bernie could it?

Naw couldn't be!

This is getting tiresome.

I am quite sure Hillary picked up a substantial lead. It is not 41 points however so their methodology is very flawed. I expected her to pick up between a 3-7 point bounce from the coverage of the debates. Then she had a very good couple of weeks so another bump before the first one disappears. Then Biden formally announced he is not running which is good for another point or two. So she gets a total of a 7-11 point bounce. It would be rather shocking given all that if she got no bounce or only sustained the first one.

It also tells me that those of us who support Bernie have a lot of work to do.

It tells me that Republicans are trying to nominate the craziest of the crazies and Trump just isn't crazy enough for them which is mind blowing to me, but there it is.

Maybe it's the mentality of "under-promise and over-deliver", but she apparently doesn't want to put too much stock into these current numbers.

The polls may be accurate representations of how Iowans feel, but there is something I find very suspect about them (and most polls in general). That is age demographics. According to the 2010 US census Iowa has a much larger population between the ages of 18 and 49 than they do between the ages of 50 to 64, or 65+. Yet these polls heavily over sample older people. I get older people are more likely to vote, but some of these over samplings are just egregious. Here is the age census numbers for Iowa from 2010:

10 to 14 years - 6.6%
15 to 19 years - 7.1%
20 to 24 years - 7.0%
25 to 29 years - 6.5%
30 to 34 years - 6.1%
35 to 39 years - 5.8%
40 to 44 years - 6.2%
45 to 49 years - 7.1%
50 to 54 years - 7.3%
55 to 59 years - 6.7%
60 to 64 years - 5.5%
65 to 69 years - 4.1%
70 to 74 years - 3.3%
75 to 79 years - 2.7%
80 to 84 years - 2.3%
85+ - 2.5%


Yes the data is 5 years old. So people in the 45-50 bracket will move into the 50+ bracket. But older people will also have died and younger people will have moved into the 18+ bracket. So the Demographics can't be that far off.


According to 2010 census, Iowa was 38.7% from 20 to 49 (leaving out 18 and 19 year olds, so probably a few percent higher). They were 19.5% from 50 to 64. They were 14.9% age 65 and older. According to these numbers 50 to 64 year olds were only half the size of the 18 to 49 year old demographic. 65+ were only 33% the size of the 18 to 49 demographic.


In the monmouth poll the 50 to 64 age group was 154% the size of the 18 to 49 group. The 65+ group was 162.5% the size of the 18 to 49 group.


The Loras poll was a little more reasonable. The 50 to 64 age group was 83.7% the size of the 18 to 49 group. The 65+ group was 86.5% the size of the 18 to 49 group. Still way larger than the younger groups in the census age demographics.





Census link

The four previous polls also had Carson leading.