Jan 3, 2008
I Shoudln't Make Predictions
Iowa is a disappointment but there is data to be analyzed. In some counties, Dr. Paul came in second with over 25% of the votes. The quality engineering side of me wants to know the mechanics of the campaign efforts. The goal is to find some pattern that can be reproduced in the next states. Why was Dr. Paul able to do so well in some counties and is there a correlation that can be made? If so, then you might just find a winning formula
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I think, Rick, that one of the problems is that the caucus system is just so vast. I've seen some numbers from a few precincts in the western Iowa area (across the river from Omaha), where some of the Omaha MUG has been helping out--in some of those precincts he's come in 1st--in others, second. The The thing is, you're talking about 99 counties, and something like 1800 precincts--each precinct having it's own caucus. Iowa, demands grassroots organization and massive retail politics, and you while I'm sure all those college kids helped out, it may have just been too late for the kind of saturation needed. A lot of rural precincts than may have had a dozen people show up. Better days will be ahead in New Hampshire, though--and just looking at the Paul percentage--that's respectable.
Post a Comment