quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Interesting...

This article says that if democrat party procedures were followed, bernie sanders actually won iowa 695 to 693..http://spectator.org/articles/65395/it%E2%80%99s-happening-just-i-told-you

That is nutsucker cockgargling, but not only doesnt it say that, but the coin toss is Iowa procedure in ties, or drawing names out of a hat.

There is no accurate factual count of total of coin tosses or number of tosses won by either candidate. There were at least a dozen with Sanders winning a handful. But it wouldnt have made a difference based on the complicated process Iowa uses to allocate delegates.

Of course, it is great pants shitting material for the imbecilic nutsuckers. They drool and beat their peeners over the felching blogs that give them the 'real inside hard hitting analysis' from people who don't have the IQ of a fuckin icecube.

quote:

Hillary’s weakness as a candidate is manifest even without the e-mail scandal coming into full flower yet. But for going 6-for-6 in coin flips to decide the awarding of delegates, Clinton would have lost the Iowa caucuses to Bernie Sanders; in fact, the votes to decide those delegates were ties, and Sanders actually won the caucuses 695-693. The irregularity, opacity, and apparent corruption of the process gave off such a stench that the Des Moines Register issued forth a blistering editorial lambasting the Democratic Party for its disgraceful caucus and demanding a reform of its process.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Im surprised rubio is so high, and christie so low, Im guesssing they are hedging