I could be wrong, but it looks like 51% of the Republican vote (Iowa) is pretty good considering

.....it's like

:laugh:


1705444169832.png
 
How is half of the party voters not wanting him to be the nominee good for a quasi-incumbent president?

In 2016 he had 24.3% in Iowa and was elected president. I'd say doubling those numbers is a positive.


But I get it, you don't actually know much of anything and just spout nonsense because it sounds good in your head.
 
In 2016 he had 24.3% in Iowa and was elected president. I'd say doubling those numbers is a positive.


But I get it, you don't actually know much of anything and just spout nonsense because it sounds good in your head.

In 2016 it was an open race. This year he's a known commodity and already served a term. Quite a different scenario.
 
When you start a post with the phrase "I could be wrong" it means you are unsure of your own opinion. Trump's victory in Iowa was significant. Combined with DeSantis. the numbers run around 80% . It must have been shocking when the media's darling and the left's hopeful spoiler Nikki Haley placed a dismal 3rd after all that money and propaganda.
 
Democrats have fashioned a fiction that anything less than 100% is a loss. That's nothing but what they tell themselves. The fiction is, that every republican that did not caucus for Trump will vote against him. How many think that?
 
In 2016 he had 24.3% in Iowa and was elected president. I'd say doubling those numbers is a positive.


But I get it, you don't actually know much of anything and just spout nonsense because it sounds good in your head.

Yep

You have libs figured out to a T
 

Forum List

Back
Top