Iowa Causus tonight!

[b-diddy]

uhhhh, arent there 2 winners in new hampshire?

[Big Swami]

Oops, I mean at the Convention.

[Wizzle]

[DrRay11]

this guy agrees with me that this is an especially important election:

I may go as far as to argue that this is the most important US election. Ever.

[WTFchris]

I kind of thought the last one was given the situations in Iraq, with Al Queda, South Korea, etc. We needed a president to deal with all those concerns as well as improve our economy at home. We certainly got less than people bargained for, that is for sure. I'm not sure another canidate would have solved all those things. However, I felt it was a huge election and we were all let down.

I suppose this one is just as big because none of those things have been resolved.

[Hermy]

Doubt this is top 30 in importance.

[b-diddy]

our position in the global economy is awfully shaky right now. i honestly believe it is 'very important' we elect a leader who not only knows what needs to be done, but how to get it done. hilary has the experience (maybe) but she is too devisive to get cooperation from accross the isle to really get done what needs it.

we cant afford another president who is willing to put party and chronyism before country again.

the china threat is real, imo.

and to put things in perspective, i believe the iraq war is only moderately important, relatively speaking.

[DennyMcLain]

Stop ripping on Iowa.

It offers them a feeling of importance once every 4 years (nationally). People throughout the world say, "Oh yeah....Iowa. Almost forgot about them. It's near Maryland, right?"

Iowa needs a superhero, like Kansas has Superman.

I elect Glenn.

[DennyMcLain]

No joke. I'm not totally against the Iowa Cockass. After spending millions of dollars on campaign advertising, this is the first true barometer on where candidates fare. I find it interesting how the Dems have a completely different system of caucusing than the more simplified version the Reps use.

Not sure if one version sends a clearer message than the other one, but it's disheartning that if your Democratic candidate holds less than 15% on the vote in one area (I think it's 15), you can actually "switch" to a stronger candidate. Weird.

[Tahoe]

I kind of thought the last one was given the situations in Iraq, with Al Queda, South Korea, etc. We needed a president to deal with all those concerns as well as improve our economy at home. We certainly got less than people bargained for, that is for sure. I'm not sure another canidate would have solved all those things. However, I felt it was a huge election and we were all let down.

I suppose this one is just as big because none of those things have been resolved.

Iraq is doing better, AQ was beaten out of Iraq by most reports and SK has come to the table.

Mission Accomplished? Hell no, but we made progress, imo.

jm2c