Record Turnout in Iowa
Earlier today, Hillary Clinton’s team revised their turnout estimates up to 150,000 — which would be a record. Turns out, Iowans are shattering even those raised expectations.
Clinton Spokesman Mo Elleithee confirms what the Obama campaign is telling Major Garrett — saying they think turnout will be somewhere north of 200K (and probably south of 250K).
While many believe such high turnout is great news for Obama, since it means he expanded the universe of usually older caucus goers to include the younger Iowans who are more likely to support the him, Elleithee said it was “too soon to start making projections” about what the turnout numbers mean, and that they’re hearing positive things from the field in rural and urban counties.
“Look, we’re just playing our game. We came here, we’re going to do as well as we could. We feel very good about the ground game that we had. We feel very good about the way things are looking at this point of the evening,” he said.
Asked about the entrance polls that show Obama in front, followed by Clinton and Edwards, Elleithee said “We’re focused on the info that’s coming in to us from the field. We feel good about where we are.”
“As the boss said earlier, today is just the beginning. It’s not the end. Tomorrow you hit reset and you start all over again in New Hampshire and you run hard for five days.”
What if it’s really, really close? “New Hampshire be very exciting for everyone won’t it?”
They’re expecting a fairly late night. Sen Clinton is still upstairs watching returns, and is likely to come speak to supporters before 9pm CST.
Tags: hillary clinton, iowa
Share
Iowa has shown us that the American people can see through the Clintons’ 2-for-1 strategy, which we first heard from Bill back in 1992. At President Bush’s first inauguration, Bill said, “We’ll be back.” It’s part of Bill and Hillary’s life-long plan. Fortunately, it’s been rejected, and we can only hope the rest of the country follows suit.
I did not ask for 2-for-1 then, nor do I ask for it now. That’s just the life-long Clinton strategy that moves Hillary into a position for which she is not qualified.
Every time Bill moves up (Gov of Arkansas), Hillary moves up with him (Attorney General of Arkansas). Bill moves up again (President of the US); Hillary moves up with him (US Senate). See the pattern, women?
Consider what America got with the first Clinton co-Presidency:
• Abuse of the powers of the office of the President
makes me doubt her capabilities.
• Granting Presidential pardons to buy Hillary’s election to the Senate. As a woman who made it on my own, Hillary’s need to ride Bill’s coattails and her sense of entitlement (as in “it’s my turn and Obama should wait his turn”
• Hillary’s long-suffering marriage to Bill, enabling a lifetime of sexual trysts and trying to contain the Bimbo eruptions, gives me a President without the backbone to stand up to a man. Hillary claims to be tough enough to play with the boys when, in fact, she is unable to leave a cheating husband. How will she stand up to other male leaders who see this in “Mrs.” Clinton and walk all over her?
• Being married to a former President does not make one qualified to be President.
Hillary has less experience in elected office than Barack. She’s held elected office for one Senate term plus one year and has introduced no major legislation during that time. She showed us in the interview about Pakistani elections the extent of her foreign policy experience–she did not know what office the election was for or who was on the ballot! Is this the kind of experience we want in the Oval Office?
I am not a “Hillary hater;” I am an America lover. Please consider very carefully which candidate the Democratic Party puts on the ballot. The future of this country absolutely depends on it.
Your recap excluded Fred Thompson. Fox which I watch religiously (no pun intended) has done little in covering Fred’s campaign. As a Fred Thompson supporter I think that this is unfair, given that he is the most conservative of all those running. McCain has a clip and he came in fourth, behind Fred.
Try working on that fair and balanced thing some more please!
P.S. I loved Denise’s comment! You are right on lady!
Right on Art!!!
Fox have been very unfair because our “slow talkin” ranch style candidate with a real conservative message (Which this house happens to think is appealing) can’t answer in 30 seconds I guess. I can only think it is easier to omit him from the rosters in the caucus and primaries.
In all fairness when they give him over 30 secs. as Neil Cavuto did tonight the real truth of our country is heard.
John Edwards i can’t believe you would stoop at low as to accuse the Clintons regarding MLK. They have always admired him. and you know that. You will stoop as low as you can for a vote. Your the Racist.! I’ve lost all respect for you. You need to stay home and care for your wife–we know your proprities!