Winning Iowa is crucial!

[ssunlimited]

I think this is why Ron Paul campaigned heavily, and got pretty close at winning, Iowa caucus in 2012. If you win Iowa you win publicity and from that donations and you can keep in the presidential race. That is what someone else told me on Yahoo! Answers; you have to win either Iowa or New Hampshire. When Paul got second place in NH the media treated him like a rock star. If Paul had won either NH or Iowa he may have been able to win more states and while I think Romney would have still won, Paul would've had a much better chance than what he did. I think he had a good campaign manager and a good strategy. This is about media bias and campaign donations. I wonder if Santorum would have won those states had he lost Iowa?

[juleswin]

Gonna be a debbie downer but we do have a bigger problem in our hands. The vote is rigged, Rand Paul or any real game changers isn't going to win anything. They control the media, the political parties and most importantly the voting machines.

[klamath]

Strategy 101- win either IA, NH or SC or your campaign is done. Anybody that doesn't know this should be nowhere near making decisions for a campaign.

[ssunlimited]

Strategy 101- win either IA, NH or SC or your campaign is done. Anybody that doesn't know this should be nowhere near making decisions for a campaign.

Oh!

[Sola_Fide]

Gonna be a debbie downer but we do have a bigger problem in our hands. The vote is rigged, Rand Paul or any real game changers isn't going to win anything. They control the media, the political parties and most importantly the voting machines.

I don't think you're being a downer at all. Getting Rand past the primaries is going to be a monumental grassroots effort on the level of getting Ron in.