Does the winner of Iowa get the whole kit and kaboodle

[dkf]

or are the delegates divvied up?

I guess I'm wondering...if the whole danged thing is super close, will it even matter who came in where?

Yes I can see the media might make a big deal out of it, but if someone else wins in New Hampshire, does that make up for it?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

1. It's Not The Delegates...It's The Perception...

I believe there are around 4,000 delegates to be chosen...Iowa chooses 45...

[dkf]

3. I know its the perception, but what if it looks a whole lot like a three way tie?

Or what happens if the person who wins the most votes actually doesn't get the most delegates because of the way the population is distributed?

Does the winner of Iowa get all of Iowa's 45 delegates?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. You're Asking Me How The MSM Will Interpet It

If Edwards finishes anywhere but first the MSM will say he's done...

As long as Obama finishes in the top three the MSM will say he's still alive because they just like him...

As long as HRC finishes in the top three the MSM will say she's in it till Super Tuesday despite the fact they hate her...

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

4. Did Kerry & Edwards get the same , or roughly the same, # of delegates, despite the vote disparity?

In Iowa in '04.

I seem to recall something like that.

[ooga booga]

12. AND....I believe that they're "uncommitted" delegates....

I read somewhere that ALL delegates chosen before the Mega-Hugemongous-Super Tuesday in February are uncommitted delegates. If that's true, Iowa and New Hampshire are even more perception and less real than we imagine.

They both disappear quickly like the Tournament of Roses parade -- but they tend to leave powerful perceptions behind.

In 2004, in my view, the race was already beginning to be lost when John Kerry emerged after Iowa and New Hampshire. He'd have made a fine President, but he lacked the ability to sell himself to the country -- particularly "flyover America" where I live. Also, good down-the-ballot Democratic candidates lost in "flyover America" partly because John Kerry was at the top of the ticket. It ought to be a cautionary tale for 2008, but the campaigns with the most money can still make the most noise. Unfortunately, they can still steer us into a poor choice.

[antiimperialist]

2. I think delegates are divided according to the votes

Which makes me wonder why is it that some believe winning Iowa will have so much bearing in the outcome of subsequent elections.
If I'm not mistaken, Kerry kicked Dean's ass in Iowa. This is different, becasue getting one's ass kicked is embarassing and humiliating...but a tight race would not embarrass anyone.

[Mind_your_head]

5. Yes! Unless Kucinich wins in Iowa

Just sayin'...... n/t

[Mind_your_head]

9. Go Dennis! and Dear Iowan's (

Please vote your heart/your conscience ~ NOT your politics this time ~ vote for the guy/gal that will REALLY represent you and your NEEDS and WANTS!!!! Vote for the guy/gal you want/NEED to be your nominee.....the nation will most likely follow (or at leat take NOTICE!)

Peace & blessings,
M_Y_H

[alfredo]

7. The winner gets the Kit, but not the kaboodle. It's donated to charity.

[CK_John]

8. There are 1700 and change precincts in Iowa, so at least 1700 delegates will be up for grabs. n/t

[EstimatedProphet]

10. 1700 delegates?

No, more like 56.

[CK_John]

13. The Iowa forum would have better info but the idea is on the 3 they are

voting for delegates to the state convention. Then the proportion of these delegates will be awarded to go to the national convention in Denver. Example Hillary wins 1/2 of the delegates on the 3rd, she will get 1/2 the state delegates, who then go to Denver.

[NoPasaran]

11. There are no more winner-take-all primaries or caucuses

They've been banned by the Democratic Party since the McGovern Reforms of 1972 (who ironically was the last to benefit from a winner-take-all primary--California's---that year).

A candidate does need to get at least 15 percent of the vote to be awarded delegates, however.