Are you surprised by the Iowa votes? Why do you think they nominated who they did - issues?

Here is a really good breakdown of number of votes for everyone. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21229206 Democrats: number of votes: Barack Obama: 940 John Edwards: 744 Hillary Clinton: 737 Bill Richardson: 53 Joe Biden: 23 Uncommitted: 3 Chris Dodd: 1 Mike Gravel: 0 Dennis Kucinich: 0 100% of precincts reporting Total number of votes for Democrats: 2,501 ***** Republicans: number of votes Mike Huckabee: 39,814 Mitt Romney: 29,405 Fred Thompson: 15,521 John McCain: 15,248 Ron Paul: 11,598 Rudy Giuliani: 4,013 Duncan Hunter: 515 96% of precincts reporting. Total number of votes so far for Republicans: 116,114 Who will get the extra 4 percent of the Republican votes? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21116732 http://www.yournextpresident.net/thefacts.php http://www.youtube.com/youchoose

Public Comments

1. Not really, i think Obama deserved it also because of his popularity.
2. Huckabee will probably get the other 4 %, thanks to Chuck Norris.
3. I don't give a Rats @zz..... whos ever got the Most money,will win....They can buy a recount....
4. I'm surprised that both parties had the wide margin of victory that they did. I suspected Obama would win but not by nearly that much -- he, Edwards and Hillary had been polling within a point of each other. I thought that Romney might pull away at the end, but I was wrong about that; Huckabee won decisively.
5. typical americans........
6. i was surprised by how coherent and wise the voting was. the republican caucuses have realised that the republican vote is essentially a religious (and christian) vote these days, and have accordingly dismissed all candidates without a clear christian agenda. i deeply regret the way that ronald reagan ended separation of church and state in american politics, but a realist has to accept that this is what happened. the caucuses were certainly aware of that. on the democrat side, i still think hillary is the more electable candidate, but obama has a very convincing platform. john edwards' insistence on listening to middle america has a certain amount of credibility, but even a majority can be a sectional interest. i think edwards has to fail eventually as not being sufficient of a universal candidate, and whether his followers go to barack or hillary is likely to prove crucial. i shan't vote in these elections, and i am glad of that. on the one hand i'd like to see a republican returned - because a weak america is less likely to cause trouble in the world at large. and republicans are guaranteed to keep america weak. on the other hand there is much that is good and decent among american people. america nearly became a great nation again under one clinton. it might be interesting to see if it could complete the process under another (though i certainly think barack would be almost as fine a president).
7. you damn right i am,i thought the iowains were smarter than that but as i said before, it's a done deal. " rockerfeller" as i have said has allready decided who our next president will be. mark my word
8. I am not totally surprised by the results, but I am somewhat surprised by the margins of victory. People want change. Congress has lost touch with America, as has most of the predictable, reoccurring candidates. A third party is now not just a pipe dream, but a possibility, ripe for the picking. Its too early in the election season to count out everyone, but a lot of them (the candidates) are shaking in their boots, today, as a result of the Iowans opening the eyes of Americans desiring change.
9. I am not surprised. The thing that amazes me is how unrealistic people are about the results and their value to the nomination. Iowa gets more credit than due and is seldom indicative of final results. It's a long year. What wide margin???????