To: Jim Robinson
If I had the time and motivation, I would find out just which state’s primary/caucus is historically the most important to win - which one among the early ones had the highest percentage of winners’ going on to bag the nomination.
I’m suspecting Iowa ain’t it...
4 posted on
01/02/2008 10:58:11 PM PST by
decal
(Mother Nature and Real Life are conservatives - the Progs have never figured this out.)
To: decal
If I had the time and motivation, I would find out just which state’s primary/caucus is historically the most important to win - which one among the early ones had the highest percentage of winners’ going on to bag the nomination. I’m suspecting Iowa ain’t it...
It's probably one of the late primaries; trouble is, they're "predictive" because by that time there's only one guy in the race, and he's got the nomination locked up.
Iowa doesn't determine the nominee, but it narrows the field and changes the momentum.
24 posted on
01/02/2008 11:30:41 PM PST by
xjcsa
(Defenseless enemies are fun.)
To: decal
I’d have to guess South Carolina. Examples of Iowa and New Hampshire having been lost by the eventual nominee spring easily to mind, but I can’t think of anyone losing SC and taking the big prize.
43 posted on
01/03/2008 12:33:32 AM PST by
MitchellC
(- www.fred08.com -)
To: decal
I’m suspecting Iowa ain’t it... Historically Iowa & New Hampshire winnow the field but it is South Carolina that decides.
85 posted on
01/03/2008 8:20:09 AM PST by
NeoCaveman
(If higher cigarette taxes discourage smoking, what...do higher Income Taxes discourage? - massgopguy)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson