Cruz soundly beats Trump in Iowa; Hillary edges past Bernie

Indeed. Cruz “beat” Trump by a total of “1”: 8 delegates to 7… literally the smallest amount by which he could have “beaten” him.

If you said a year ago that a non-politician would win 24% in Iowa it would be called an astounding success.

A businessman who decides to run for President isn’t a “non-politician.” He’s just a politician with zero relevant experience.


at least in nevada, we decide things the traditional way: highest card wins!


Trump is a horrible person but Cruz wants theocracy. I wouldn’t vote for either but if forced to choose, Cruz scares me more.



Alternative: “Now you know why I’m not mad at the One Percent!”


I don’t want “interesting choices.” I want qualified candidates for the highest office in the land. Shit. I can’t even get a job doing stuff I’m genuinely good at, and these buttclowns are vying for trabajo numero uno with zero experience or competence, and every bit of evidence to suggest they’d objectively ruin every part of the country. And the American public is eating it off a spoon. This is why I don’t follow politics. It’s become reality TV and it’s disgusting.


Kasich definitely comes off as “the grownup in the room” and the most sensible and adult, but those of us from Ohio know that he’s an excellent actor. He’s very good at pretending to be whatever the situation calls for. I know few people from his home state who trust him at all.

He also has a strange track record of messing with teachers… cutting salaries, cutting benefits, and stating that as president, he wants to abolish teachers’ lounges because “they go in there and sit and say ‘woe is us’”. He’s kind of a creep.


When Clinton wins six in a row against Bernie, you start to think the odds were something more like 100/0.


Suddenly there seems to be a lot of weight to the theory that Trump was kept around precisely to make someone like Cruz seem appealing.


Two-headed coins can’t melt steel beams!


I love this picture, captured around 11:45 when Clinton realised she’d be “winning” against Sanders by less that 0.5%. The deflation of her arrogant sense of entitlement is delicious (the sticker boy in the bg only adds to it)


Jensen’s Law: “Win or lose, you lose.”

Did the coins all fall within their own footprint?


The silver lining is that this is the first Iowa winner, R or D, in modern times who has opposed the ethanol mandate. That’s always been a weird litmus test in the primary process, and I’m glad to see that dam breaking.

Yeah, that’s always bugged me too. I think it’s just a way for winners (and their particular media enablers) to spin a huge mandate out of what is often a minority of peoples’ wishes (if you win 55-45, with 70% turnout, only ~39% of the population voted for you. But you didn’t get into this racket not to wield power, so you have to figure out how to make it look like you should be given free reigns).

1 Like

The nation that sees itself as the epitome of democracy … decides elections with a coin toss?

The whole controversies around the 2004 presidential election raised eyebrows but this is even more amusing (or depressing).

1 Like

Cruz did not soundly beat anyone. And, he did not garner MOST of the votes, he garnered the MOST votes. By 1. 3%. This is as unsound a beating as you can give someone. If anything I’d give Rubio the headliner here, actually earning 7 points.


Mmm hmm. Not to mention 2000.



Sound, adjective
vigorous, thorough, or severe:
e.g. a sound thrashing.

3.4% exceed expectations, and maybe even exceeded the margin of error.
That makes it unexpected, not severe.

Imagine winning a boxing match by a 3.4% margin, and see if the descriptor still applies.

1 Like

what the fuck? Is this real? Somebody explain this to me.

Conspiracy theory #1: The Donald Trump campaign is a Democratic plot.
Conspiracy theory #2: The Donald Trump campaign is a Republican plot.

[puts on tinfoil hat]

Cripes, both seem equally plausible.