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

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.

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).

The only other place I found vote counts for Democrats is http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2016/primary-caucus-results/iowa 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.