Iowa results suggest strong Cruz future

Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

Ted Cruz’s strong win in the Iowa caucuses tonight, combined with a record turnout of Republican voters (180K+) indicates that his support is far deeper than any poll or expert had predicted. Every prediction had insisted that if the turnout was big, Donald Trump would win. As noted at the second link, “By Team Cruz’s own admission, turnout of 175,000 tonight would strongly favor a Trump win.”.

Instead, the turnout was 180,000, and Trump lost to Cruz handily and was almost beaten by Marco Rubio.

On the other side of the aisle Clinton appears to have barely squeaked by Sanders. To me the more significant number is that the Democrats could only marshal about 10,000 voters, far less than in the past and suggesting that the enthusiasm for either of their candidates is weak.


  • D K Rögnvald Williams

    Ground game matters.

  • Garry

    I don’t know where they came up with their number of Democrat voters. It didn’t sound right, so I did some digging.

    The only other place I found vote counts for Democrats is If you select vote count by county, and choose to look at Democrats, it gives a breakdown. There is no total given, but starting from the bottom, some rough math in my head quickly brought Hillary’s total to more than 5,000.

    It appears that far fewer Democrats voted than Republicans, but more than 10,000.

    If I didn’t have such a busy day I’d add the totals by county; I’m really curious what the count is.

  • Cotour

    Since Iowa predicted president Huckabees presidency I really think Trump’s days are numbered. (sarcasm alert Edward)

    Lets look at the republican race as two professional politicians were forced to essentially split the vote by three. I think the more telling metric was on the Democrat side, Hillary won by 5 votes and a couple of coin tosses? And then she will loose badly in New Hampshire? Not good news for the Clinton crime family. I think at this point it is more significant who will replace Hillary when the White House tends to either indict or some other form of rejection of Hillary as she fails to dominate.

    And keep in mind I think we will all vote for anyone who is not: A Marxist, a Leftist, a Socialist, a Communist or a “progressive” (synonym for a socialist whether Hillary realizes it or not).

  • It appears the Democratic numbers at the link I cited are in error. According to this story, the Democrats had a turnout of about 171,000, significantly less than in 2008 but not as dismal as I first thought.

  • Cotour

    It is dismal, for Hillary. If it continues like this for her Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren will be getting warmed up in the bull pen. I think they will be a far more appealing and formidable couple of candidates once it is realized that Hillary is a net looser.

    And that is the net take away from the Iowa primary.

  • Robin Fox

    I DID add up all of the Hillary and Bernie votes from Gary’s link and came up with 138,894 votes Of course, that doesn’t count O’Malley’s votes. I would like to know where that 171,000 figure originally came from.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *