From: pianoforte109@yahoo.com   
      
   On 1/17/24 10:24 AM, ScottW wrote:   
   > On Tuesday, January 16, 2024 at 10:37:28 AM UTC-8, mINE109 wrote:   
   >> On 1/16/24 12:11 PM, ScottW wrote:   
   >>> On Tuesday, January 16, 2024 at 8:09:49 AM UTC-8, mINE109 wrote:   
   >>>> On 1/15/24 11:15 PM, Fascist Flea wrote:   
   >>>>> Somehow, MAGA-ism has been weaponized. Like anthrax, maybe.   
   >>>>> It's swept through Iowa, laying waste to the wispy tendrils of Reality   
   >>>>> that may have survived the first round of Dumpsterism.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Is it possible that Putin's or Xi's mad scientists leapfrogged   
   >>>>> our cyberdefenses to manipulate the poor, dumb Iowans into   
   >>>>> voting to destroy America?   
   >>>> Discount headlines touting a big win or a "landslide." Barely half the   
   >>>> vote in a very conservative low turnout Iowa is not a sign of strength   
   >>>> in an event that previously went to Cruz, Santorum and Huckabee.   
   >>>   
   >>> Silly dem talking point. No one has ever cracked 50% in a first in the   
   nation crowded field   
   >>> caucus. But you keep lying to yourself. It's all you can do.   
   >> What am I lying about? Previous winners? Trump's margin of victory?   
   >>   
   >> Those times incumbents ran unopposed were effectively 100% of the vote.   
   >   
   >   When did the parties host a caucus with incumbents running unopposed?   
      
   Parties have cancelled caucuses in support of incumbents. Other times   
   incumbents had no serious competition, such as Obama's 98% win in 2008.   
      
   In this year's Republican caucus is different as Trump is effectively an   
   incumbent, therefore not a "first in the nation" event meant to identify   
   front runners. However, in the scenario you brought up, a "crowded field   
   caucus," Trump lost to Cruz in 2016.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)