Did someone say Clinton wanted Jan 5 Iowa caucuses?

[CoffeeCat]

I cannot find the post, but I read that someone said Hillary Clinton
wanted the Iowa caucuses to be on Jan 5, which is now the final date
for the caucuses.

If Hillary did lobby for this Jan 5 date, I think that should be
made known to the public.

Last year the Iowa caucuses were January 19. On Jan 5, virtually
most of the Iowa college student population will be home (most likely
out of town or out of the state) for winter break.

In effect, a mass exodus of tens of thousands of progressive students
will leave Iowa. They will have no voice or vote in the Iowa caucuses.

If Hillary--a more centrist Dem--had any hand in selecting or even
pushing for this Jan 5 date, I think this needs to be known.

Can anyone verify or dispute a Hillary connection to this question?

[Renew Deal]

1. I haven't heard that.

Jan. 3 is way too early, but I think it's set.

[hlthe2b]

2. I don't know the specific answer to your question...

However, I'd be very surprised if ALL the campaigns did not weigh in. Very surprised....That does not mean they had decision-making power, however.

[CK_John]

3. More bad info from the disinformation campaign. Jan 3 is the date. n/t

[Freddie Stubbs]

4. "Last year the Iowa caucuses were January 19."

Who won the 2006 Iowa Caucuses?

BTW, the Caucuses will be on January 3rd, not the 5th.

Next time to try to smear someone, please try to get you facts straight.

[CoffeeCat]

6. Nice way to avoid a legitimate question...

Yes, I got the date wrong. It's Jan 3, not the 5th.

However, the major point is that the date of the caucuses
falls on a date that the college students will be on winter
break.

THAT was the main point. That point still stands. My
mistake doesn't change the central premise of my post.

Go ahead and get mired down in moot points though.

Gee, I wish the Hillary supporters would be this detail-oriented
when it comes to their support of a candidate who plants questions
at orchestrated speeches--and then lies about it afterward.

So much piling on for a moot mistake on a messageboard, but
barely a flinch when your warmongering, corporately corrupted
candidate can't even be honest and sincere with the people--and
instead hides behind fake events.

Have a blast with your hypocrisy.

[CK_John]

7. The Orange Bowl is also Jan 3rd. n/t

[Freddie Stubbs]

14. The University of Iowa is barely bowl eligible, they are in no danger of going to a BCS bowl

[Freddie Stubbs]

10. Here's a point: You made an accusation based on a post 'you can't find"

Perhaps it is because the post never existed.

[CoffeeCat]

11. Hey you're right...it's a conspiracy!

I never saw or read the post!

It's all a conspiracy to damage your war-gal Hillary!

Quick, look over by the grassy knoll! It's me with my
keyboard! I'm lying again!

Sorry, but this stay-at-home soccer mom from the Iowa suburbs
doesn't lie. They do try to find the truth though.

[Freddie Stubbs]

13. A conspiracy by definition requires more than one person

I never accused you of working with anyone else.

[CoffeeCat]

15. That's right...

I'm a lone wolf on this job.

A lone...lying...wolf.

:rofl:

[MonkeyFunk]

5. LOL

That is the lamest smear-attempt ever.

Get the basic facts right, first.

[CoffeeCat]

9. It's not a smear, it's a question...

I think it's an important question.

It's important that we know how the caucus date was selected--and
if certain Dem voices lobbied (and secured) that Jan 3 date---a date when
tens of thousands of Progressive voices will be missing in Iowa.

I asked a question. I asked for any information that would verify
OR nullify Hillary's involvement in this.

Obviously, you have no information at all. For all you know, she
did lobby for this date. You don't know. At this point, it's still
a question and information is being gathered.

However, you aren't interested in information--just attacking and blindly
shilling for a woman who gallivants around MY state--planting questions
and hiding behind events that are more choreographed than a Bob Fosse
musical.

Then again, I'm sure you'll not question her disingenuous, insulting
actions--and instead attack as usual.

[MonkeyFunk]

12. It's not a real question

it's unadulterated bullshit.

Your basic facts are entirely wrong, and your assertion that Clinton was behind setting the date is entirely unfounded.

Lame... really really lame.

[youthere]

8. I thought we caucused on the 3rd.

nevermind...just saw your newest post. Thought I was losing it for a second there!