International reaction to Iowa caucus

[Alex+R 0]

Your profile shows you were gone for 3 months. Found it amusing that weight was brought up (again) considering the drama with that last thread....

Ok, I don't remember any drama, but either way that thread certainly had nothing to do with my taking a vacation from VJ. And on this thread, I'm sort of on the other side of the debate, aren't I?

I can see both sides. I have been overweight before, so I sympathize with people who are, but ATM I'm not overweight, and I question the choices of a lot of the country if they're hurting us as a whole. That's it.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Your profile shows you were gone for 3 months. Found it amusing that weight was brought up (again) considering the drama with that last thread....

Ok, I don't remember any drama, but either way that thread certainly had nothing to do with my taking a vacation from VJ. And on this thread, I'm sort of on the other side of the debate, aren't I?

I can see both sides. I have been overweight before, so I sympathize with people who are, but ATM I'm not overweight, and I question the choices of a lot of the country if they're hurting us as a whole. That's it.

<off topic> That's awesome, Alex! I remember you had wanted to get some at-home exercise equipment.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Australia

Stephen Roberts, Research director at Lehman Brothers:

“This is so early in the process that markets really can’t take anything out of this one tiny

sample. It’s still impossible to say who will run, no matter who will be president in the end,

so there’s nothing to base an investment decision on. Maybe when Super Tuesday is out

the way, we will know more.â€

Australia has the right train of thought. An Iowa winner has not won the presidency since 1976. It's one caucus, it's means very little.

Yup. Too early.

Edited January 4, 2008 by LuckyStrike