this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2024
104 points (94.8% liked)

politics

19235 readers
3150 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A New York Times analysis of the results released so far estimated that the final turnout will be around 110,000 voters. As of 11:30 pm Eastern time, about 105,000 votes had been recorded. That would be significantly below the 187,000 Republicans who voted in 2016, which was a record turnout. About 122,000 voted in 2012, 118,000 in 2008 and about 87,000 in 2000.

The Trump train is losing major steam. Only 18% of the GOP turned out to vote yesterday. Trump only got half of that GOP vote lol.

all 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Candelestine 41 points 11 months ago (1 children)

No complacency on our side. When fascism is marching, it needs to be drowned in a tidal wave of mythical proportions, so they see just how outnumbered they are, how violence won't work for them. Fear is their tool, it's what they understand. So, no mercy.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago

The weather was horrible. No one should be attributing this to anything else right now.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I mean, if you live in Iowa, cold weather this time of year is the norm. I think all the 'ooh nobody showed because of dreaded coldness's', is pretty much an excuse. Even republicans are tired of this shit show, and that's why they didn't bother to drive across town to caucus. They'd drive across the state for a decent TacoPizza (tm). smh

[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 months ago (4 children)

There's cold and then there's cold. 20°F/-6°c is uncomfortable and requires proper attire. -5°F/-15°C is seriously dangerous to go out in regardless of what you're wearing.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I would say that’s still a manageable temp to go vote in, if you’re spending little time out of doors, rather going house-to-car-to-building. Any significant requirement of time spent outside, particularly idling in line; changes that.

That answer is also changed depending on the state of the ground/roads. Is there a significant amount of ice about? In neighbouring Wisconsin there is.

Also, a lot of voters, particularly conservative ones, are older, and the perils of the ice and deep cold are greater for them, and likely considered as such.

So… yeah. I can see weather dampening turnout at this quite a bit.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Is there a significant amount of ice about?

About 23.5" of snow has fallen between now and the previous weekend. Travel is returning to winter normal, but is definitely still difficult. Last time I participated (previous election) the line for the sign-in/registration table went outside and I had to wait ~5 min. to get inside.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

Now I'm imagining some kind of Green Boots scenario where voters slowly file past one of their own who couldn't handle the cold, and whose body it is too dangerous to retrieve.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 months ago

-5°F/-15°C is seriously dangerous to go out in regardless of what you're wearing.

That's funny

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

I'd say that line starts at -25 / -30°C not -15. Unless you literally don't have any proper winter clothes.

[–] johannesvanderwhales 3 points 11 months ago

It's cold as hell and basically everyone expected Trump to win in a landslide. So not exactly surprising that people didn't prioritize showing up for caucuses. They're not a small commitment.

[–] ShittyBeatlesFCPres 23 points 11 months ago

Imagine driving in a blizzard to caucus for Vivek Ramaswamy or Ron Desantis.

[–] CADmonkey 21 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I still remember his Tulsa rally, in one of the reddest states in the US. He got tricked into thinking there would be a million people present. And he bragged on it. But only 6,000 people showed up.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Isn't that the one where Herman cain showed up and died "totally not from covid" a few weeks later?

[–] CADmonkey 4 points 11 months ago

I think that's right.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago

Same here. It was tragically hilarious.

[–] FlyingSquid 7 points 11 months ago

I said this yesterday and got downvoted, but I'll say it again- if you aren't crazy, why are you going to go in sub-zero weather to sit in a room and vote for DeSantis in a non-anonymous vote?

[–] assassin_aragorn 2 points 11 months ago

Good, honestly. Caucuses are great on paper but awful in practice.