Pundits who have said "Iowa doesn't matter"

[randomname]

(updated) Most of these have stated pretty strongly that Iowa does not matter:
Chris Wallace
Chris Matthews
Rachel Maddow
Sean Hannity
Bill O'Reilly
Chuck Todd
Bill Kristol
George Will
Joe Scarborough
Charles Krauthammer
Jennifer Rubin (Washington Post)
Nia Malika-Henderson (Washington Post)
Reid Wilson (National Journal)
Rich Lowry (National Review)
Roger Simon*(Politico)
Dick Polman (Philadelphia Inquirer)

These have said no such thing:
Karl Rove
Mike Huckabee
Sarah Palin
Wolf Blitzer
Pat Buchanan

These have criticized the prostitutes:
Matt Drudge
Neil Cavuto
Jack Cafferty
Ed Schultz
Cenk Uygur

Unsure about these yet:
Geraldo Rivera
Gretchen Carlson
Steve Forbes
Elliot Spitzer
Lawrence Kudlow
Glenn Beck
Paul Begala
Alex Castellanos
Paul Gigot
Richard Wolffe
Bret Baier
John McLaughlin
Harold Ford, Jr.
Donna Brazile
Mary Matalin
Greta Van Susteren
Tucker Carlson
Alan Colmes
James Carville
Pat Buchanan
Laura Ingraham
James O'Keefe
Chris Matthews
Roland S. Martin
Dick Morris
Clarence Page
Michael Medved
Brit Hume
Juan Williams
Arianna Huffington
Lawrence O'Donnell
Mike Barnicle
Eugene Robinson
Michelle Malkin
Howard Fineman
G. Gordon Liddy
George Stephanopoulos
Steve Doocy
Ann Coulter
Shepard Smith
David Schuster
Rush Limbaugh
Michael Savage
Dylan Ratigan
Anderson Cooper
Andrew Breitbart
Ron Christie
Keith Olbermann
Jonathan Alter
Cliff Schecter
Greg Gutfeld

 

[nbruno322]

Great list! We should def keep this up to keep better tabs of the prostitutes in the media.

I'm pretty sure bill kristol, george will, joe scarborough, and charles krauthammer have said iowa doesn't matter, don't have a link though.

 

[North Beach Bum]

When hasn't Iowa been important to the Republican nomination? Is it because all of the sudden a darkhorse like Ron Paul is doing so well? I can't stand these media pinheads.

 

[randomname]

You know when they also said "Iowa doesn't matter"? When Obama won Iowa against Clinton.

 

[Spikender]

I think this is going to turn into a pattern. Every state that Ron Paul does well in, well, that state just doesn't matter. I think it's going to get to the point where 50 of our states don't matter. That'll only leave them with 7 states, with one left to go.

 

[Maverick]

The second meme going around about Iowa is that a 2nd-place finish for Romney will be huge for him. I would suspect most of the pundits on this list have made similar statements.

So these individuals have said, in essence: "Iowa is completely irrelevant, except for the guy who comes in 2nd."

Buh? Someone tell me how the fuck that computes. What hypocrites.

 

[georgiaboy]

On the other hand, GOP establishment understands implicitly how important Iowa is, because they won't stop fomenting about how Ron Paul winning negates the caucus process, negates Iowa's vaunted position as first in the nation, "hijacking", and on and on, which they would not be doing if Iowa were, as they say, inconsequential.

They doth protest too much. The people of Iowa are about to speak loudly and clearly to the nation and the world that supporting small gov't is alive and well!

This is beginning to turn into another People vs. Establishment a la Rand vs. DC in Kentucky.

 

[Spikender]

On the other hand, GOP establishment understands implicitly how important Iowa is, because they won't stop fomenting about how Ron Paul winning negates the caucus process, negates Iowa's vaunted position as first in the nation, "hijacking", and on and on, which they would not be doing if Iowa were, as they say, inconsequential.

They doth protest too much. The people of Iowa are about to speak loudly and clearly to the nation and the world that supporting small gov't is alive and well!

This is beginning to turn into another People vs. Establishment a la Rand vs. DC in Kentucky.

I agree; the establishment is in full damage control mode, from saying that an RP win renders the Iowa caucus null and void, to the fears of hackers interfering in Iowa. They are trying anything and everything in an attempt to discredit an RP win. It would be funny if there weren't so many people who take the media and insiders seriously.

 

[Occam's Banana]

Karl Rove, Matt Drudge, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, Neil Cavuto, Jack Cafferty, Wolf Blitzer, Cenk Uygur, Pat Buchanan and Ed Schultz haven't said so yet

I think you can safely remove Cenk Uygur from the OP:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGPDTkeYjFs

 

[Brown Sapper]

Hey is there any 2008 footage of the guys stressing how important Iowa is? Could be worth looking in to.

 

[randomname]

Hey is there any 2008 footage of the guys stressing how important Iowa is? Could be worth looking in to.

There's enough 2011 footage out there as well... it's only since Ron Paul started polling strongly it suddenly is not important any more

 

[randomname]

I think you can safely remove Cenk Uygur from the OP:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGPDTkeYjFs

Only watched a few seconds in that video but isnt he ridiculizing the notion that Iowa doesn't matter there? That's what I meant to say with that list... those are the guys who havent sold out yet and spun the importance of the Iowa caucuses

 

[Occam's Banana]

Looks like Neil Cavuto can be removed from the list as well.
In fact, he even calls out some of the others on the list by name.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJLHyrecog0

 

[Occam's Banana]

Only watched a few seconds in that video but isnt he ridiculizing the notion that Iowa doesn't matter there? That's what I meant to say with that list... those are the guys who havent sold out yet and spun the importance of the Iowa caucuses

You're right, he is. So is Neil Cavuto.

My bad. I misunderstood your original post as meaning that they hadn't said anything one way or the other & were still "up in the air." I see you've edited the OP to say "Pundits who have stated no such thing."

Maybe you should add a seperate section for people like Uygur & Cavuto (& any others) who've actually criticized the people dissing Ron Paul & Iowa (as distinct from the people who haven't said anything one way or the other).

 

[Bruno]

Are they on record also saying previously Iowa did matter?

 

[randomname]

If anyone has youtube vids I'll be happy to put them in the OP

 

[A. Havnes]

Am I the only one who fears rigging in the caucuses? I mean, I was a bit fearful last time as well, but this year I'm particularly worried. How far would they go to force Ron Paul to lose?

Setting aside the conspiracy theories and paranoia, our main goal should be to win these caucuses and primaries "that don't matter", pick up delegates "that don't matter", and win the nomination, which will obviously be because we stuffed the ballot boxes, or some such thing. The goal should be to keep Ron Paul's steam going far beyond Iowa in order to prove the pundits wrong. Granted, it'll be a little hard with the media actively campaigning against Ron, but the grassroots are just as passionate as ever, and the official campaign actually is very active this time around.

How's his organization in other states right now?

 

[Kords21]

Wouldn't it be kind of hard to rig a caucus? Isn't it just people gathering in a certain area to represent their guy and the biggest crowds get first and so on?

 

[dvalukis]

This is what happens when a society becomes a parody of itself.

P.S. There's resistance because there's something to protect. Whatever it is, apparently it's of great value.

 

[Travlyr]

This is what happens when a society becomes a parody of itself.

P.S. There's resistance because there's something to protect. Whatever it is, apparently it's of great value.

Indeed it is. It is control over the money supply, "Gold, Peace, and Prosperity" by Ron Paul