Just so we're clear I do vote in all elections but that's just cause I like to bitch and if you don't vote you can't bitch.
I'll have some of that too, drawmack. It's annoying when people go on and on about how much they hate the president (i don't happen to be a Bush fan) and when you ask them who they voted for, they say they didn't. Ridiculous.
Anyway, with RE to Howard Dean or any of the others, I don't consider the Iowa "primary" to be all that conclusive. Its true that the internet isn't campaigning to the target audience, but the whole Iowa thing just isn't an accurate representation.
For instance:
Lets say everyone voting at this thing is standing in their candidate's corner (i've been told this is the voting method, correct me if I'm wrong). And lets say you're in your corner to vote for Joe Bloggs, and with everyone there, you have 10% of the vote. Well, if that doesn't meet the arbitrary minimum requirement, then everybody in the Joe Bloggs corner has to go to their second choice, and stand in a different corner. Therefor, instead of 10%, Joe now has 0%. Now, obviously Joe wasn't going to win anyway, with only 10%, but i believe this skews the results substantially.
Now I could have just misunderstood what I was hearing about this, but if this is how that vote works, I'm seriously skeptical of the results.
