Overview
Turnout was low: 87,666 compared to more than 96,000 in 1996.  One factor which likely affected the dynamics of the 2000 Republican caucuses was the tremendous focus on the Iowa Straw Poll held about five months earlier on August 14, 1999.  About 24,000 Iowans turned out for that event, which may have had the effect of prematurely winnowing the field.  (The 1995 straw poll had not had as much credibility because out-of-staters could participate).

Gov. George W. Bush obtained the broad victory he needed gaining support of 35,948 caucusgoers or 41.0%.  He finished ahead of the field in 80 of the state's 99 counties.

Steve Forbes did better than most observers had expected.  Attracting the support of 26,744 Republican caucusgoers or 30.5%, Forbes improved markedly on the 10.2% he had garnered in 1996.  He finished first in 16 counties: Boone, Calhoun, Carroll, Hardin, Humboldt, Ida, Keokuk, Monroe, Plymouth, Tama, Union, Washington, Webster, Winnebago, Woodbury, Worth.  Forbes' best showing in a big county was Woodbury (Sioux City) (40.8% of 2,887).  His strongest showing percentagewise was in Ida county (57.7% of 241); this was likely due to the Streck factor--Nancy Streck, an activist who worked on Forbes campaign, hails from Ida County.

Alan Keyes' fairly strong third place showing was one of the surprises of the evening. 12,496 caucusgoers or 14.2% turned out for Keyes, putting him well ahead of the 7.4% he had obtained in the 1996 caucuses.  Strong counties for Keyes included Jefferson (Fairfield), in the southeast (29.0% of 528), Allamakee (Waukon) in the northeast (26.9% of 453) and Davis, also in the southeast (24.2% of 211).  Larger counties where Keyes fared relatively well were Johnson (19.1% of 2,444), Linn (18.9% of 5,072) and Dubuque (18.8% of 1,588)

It was a disappointing evening for Gary Bauer, who finished fourth with the support of 7,487 caucusgoers or 8.5%.  However, Bauer supporters noted that this first campaign; by comparison Alan Keyes, in his first campaign in 1996, had obtained 7.4% in the caucuses.  Bauer did finish first in three counties: Sioux (40.1% of 2,322), Lyon (43.6% of 438) and O'Brien (29.4% of 667) counties; these are all in the northwest corner of the state.  One base of support for Bauer in this area was Dordt College, a school which follows a Christian curriculum, and is located in Sioux Center (Sioux County).

Sen. John McCain, who made a point of not campaigning in Iowa, ranged from 1.1% to 11.3%.  The 11.3% came in Johnson County (Iowa City--home of the University of Iowa). Other strong counties for McCain included Winnishiek (Decorah) at 8.2% and Story (Ames--Iowa State University) at 8.0%.

Sen. Orrin Hatch obtained very sparse handfuls of votes in most counties; in fact he had less than 1% in a majority of counties.  Despite his serious campaign effort, Hatch finished far behind Sen. McCain.  Hatch's best showings in larger counties were in Johnson (3.1% of  2,408) and Scott (2.0% of 4,379).  Hatch had a base of support at Palmer Chiropractic in Davenport (Scott County).

Note: Table requires "Landscape" format for printing.

 Results of January 24, 2000 Iowa Republican Caucuses--By County
With 2,114 of 2,131 Precincts Reporting     Total Votes Counted: 87,666
County Reported     Bauer Bush Forbes Hatch Keyes McCain Total
10 of 10   10   138   78   2   32   14   274
ADAIR 3.6% 50.4% 28.5% 0.7% 11.7% 5.1%
11 of 11   12   74   36   2   19   6   149
ADAMS 8.1% 49.7% 24.2% 1.3% 12.8% 4.0%
22 of 22   26   200   82   4   122   19   453
ALLAMAKEE 5.7% 44.2% 18.1% 0.9% 26.9% 4.2%
14 of 14   31   219   159   5   29   23   466
APPANOOSE 6.7% 47.0% 34.1% 1.1% 6.2% 4.9%
6 of 6   14   80   28   2   5   2   131
AUDUBON 10.7% 61.1% 21.4% 1.5% 3.8% 1.5%
21 of 21   60   261   199   6   156   18   700
BENTON 8.6% 37.3% 28.4% 0.9% 22.3% 2.6%
64 of 64   362   1220   786   14   373   105   2860
BLACK HAWK 12.7% 42.7% 27.5% 0.5% 13.0% 3.7%
26 of 26   118   297   309   10   124   21   879
BOONE 13.4% 33.8% 35.2% 1.1% 14.1% 2.4%
16 of 16   49   271   174   6   75   25   600
BREMER 8.2% 45.2% 29.0% 1.0% 12.5% 4.2%
16 of 16   87   172   155   1   62   14   491
BUCHANAN 17.7% 35.0% 31.6% 0.2% 12.6% 2.9%
. 18 of 18   90   264   233   3   67   14   671
BUENA VISTA 13.4% 39.3% 34.7% 0.4% 10.0% 2.1%
16 of 16   64   201   147   1   55   15   483
BUTLER 13.3% 41.6% 30.4% 0.2% 11.4% 3.1%
18 of 19   15   129   134   3   34   11   326
CALHOUN 4.6% 39.6% 41.1% 0.9% 10.4% 3.4%
15 of 15   22   183   186   3   105   31   530
CARROLL 4.2% 34.5% 35.1% 0.6% 19.8% 5.8%
16 of 16   47   321   157   5   70   32   632
CASS 7.4% 50.8% 24.8% 0.8% 11.1% 5.1%
13 of 13   90   221   162   8   55   13   549
CEDAR 16.4% 40.3% 29.5% 1.5% 10.0% 2.4%
31 of 31   67   569   409   9   205   41   1300
CERRO GORDO 5.2% 43.8% 31.5% 0.7% 15.8% 3.2%
21 of 21   29   196   186   2   49   24   486
CHEROKEE 6.0% 40.3% 38.3% 0.4% 10.1% 4.9%
18 of 18   28   146   90   8   17   13   302
CHICKASAW 9.3% 48.3% 29.8% 2.6% 5.6% 4.3%
8 of 8   11   99   58   2   27   4   201
CLARKE 5.5% 49.3% 28.9% 1.0% 13.4% 2.0%
. 22 of 22   75   284   247   7   58   31   702
CLAY 10.7% 40.5% 35.2% 1.0% 8.3% 4.4%
25 of 25   26   210   142   4   52   19   453
CLAYTON 5.7% 46.4% 31.3% 0.9% 11.5% 4.2%
34 of 35   25   477   461   17   136   43   1159
CLINTON 2.2% 41.2% 39.8% 1.5% 11.7% 3.7%
16 of 16   14   145   88   0   48   11   306
CRAWFORD 4.6% 47.4% 28.8% 0.0% 15.7% 3.6%
21 of 21   59   736   574   21   191   66   1647
DALLAS 3.6% 44.7% 34.9% 1.3% 11.6% 4.0%
18 of 18   11   76   66   2   51   5   211
DAVIS 5.2% 36.0% 31.3% 0.9% 24.2% 2.4%
21 of 22   34   160   75   20   42   16   347
DECATUR 9.8% 46.1% 21.6% 5.8% 12.1% 4.6%
20 of 20   18   186   164   3   82   11   464
DELAWARE 3.9% 40.1% 35.3% 0.6% 17.7% 2.4%
21 of 21   47   334   328   17   183   54   963
DES MOINES 4.9% 34.7% 34.1% 1.8% 19.0% 5.6%
14 of 14   42   161   106   2   35   25   371
DICKINSON 11.3% 43.4% 28.6% 0.5% 9.4% 6.7%
. 41 of 41   141   542   541   19   299   46   1588
DUBUQUE 8.9% 34.1% 34.1% 1.2% 18.8% 2.9%
11 of 11   14   90   52   0   28   12   196
EMMET 7.1% 45.9% 26.5% 0.0% 14.3% 6.1%
28 of 28   56   286   210   9   80   27   668
FAYETTE 8.4% 42.8% 31.4% 1.3% 12.0% 4.0%
13 of 13   31   136   113   1   40   18   339
FLOYD 9.1% 40.1% 33.3% 0.3% 11.8% 5.3%
17 of 17   13   206   130   9   42   18   418
FRANKLIN 3.1% 49.3% 31.1% 2.2% 10.0% 4.3%
13 of 13   8   116   44   0   14   11   193
FREMONT 4.1% 60.1% 22.8% 0.0% 7.3% 5.7%
17 of 17   16   168   162   6   68   16   436
GREENE 3.7% 38.5% 37.2% 1.4% 15.6% 3.7%
7 of 7   31   216   146   2   61   5   461
GRUNDY 6.7% 46.9% 31.7% 0.4% 13.2% 1.1%
17 of 18   8   173   170   1   34   18   404
GUTHRIE 2.0% 42.8% 42.1% 0.2% 8.4% 4.5%
13 of 13   31   346   164   4   63   19   627
HAMILTON 4.9% 55.2% 26.2% 0.6% 10.0% 3.0%
. 10 of 10   37   171   131   4   85   7   435
HANCOCK 8.5% 39.3% 30.1% 0.9% 19.5% 1.6%
12 of 12   30   239   397   1   80   26   773
HARDIN 3.9% 30.9% 51.4% 0.1% 10.3% 3.4%
26 of 26   36   188   89   3   50   28   394
HARRISON 9.1% 47.7% 22.6% 0.8% 12.7% 7.1%
19 of 19   18   195   164   6   83   23   489
HENRY 3.7% 39.9% 33.5% 1.2% 17.0% 4.7%
17 of 17   15   115   71   5   29   8   243
HOWARD 6.2% 47.3% 29.2% 2.1% 11.9% 3.3%
17 of 17   11   105   122   4   39   19   300
HUMBOLDT 3.7% 35.0% 40.7% 1.3% 13.0% 6.3%
9 of 10   17   59   139   1   16   9   241
IDA 7.1% 24.5% 57.7% 0.4% 6.6% 3.7%
19 of 19   24   153   150   0   94   19   440
IOWA 5.5% 34.8% 34.1% 0.0% 21.4% 4.3%
16 of 16   16   172   102   3   44   10   347
JACKSON 4.6% 49.6% 29.4% 0.9% 12.7% 2.9%
31 of 31   133   575   511   17   173   42   1451
JASPER 9.2% 39.6% 35.2% 1.2% 11.9% 2.9%
. 12 of 12   21   179   155   2   153   18   528
JEFFERSON 4.0% 33.9% 29.4% 0.4% 29.0% 3.4%
52 of 52   102   1024   501   75   466   275   2444
JOHNSON 4.2% 41.9% 20.5% 3.1% 19.1% 11.3%
18 of 18   15   211   174   2   69   16   487
JONES 3.1% 43.3% 35.7% 0.4% 14.2% 3.3%
16 of 16   16   135   140   2   42   4   339
KEOKUK 4.7% 39.8% 41.3% 0.6% 12.4% 1.2%
21 of 21   46   175   136   4   79   16   456
KOSSUTH 10.1% 38.4% 29.8% 0.9% 17.3% 3.5%
22 of 23   20   207   144   4   61   36   472
LEE 4.2% 43.9% 30.5% 0.8% 12.9% 7.6%
77 of 77   361   1995   1380   46   960   330   5072
LINN 7.1% 39.3% 27.2% 0.9% 18.9% 6.5%
7 of 7   11   121   106   0   37   11   286
LOUISA 3.8% 42.3% 37.1% 0.0% 12.9% 3.8%
8 of 8   37   105   103   3   34   4   286
LUCAS 12.9% 36.7% 36.0% 1.0% 11.9% 1.4%
9 of 9   191   147   36   2   47   15   438
LYON 43.6% 33.6% 8.2% 0.5% 10.7% 3.4%
. 20 of 20   37   183   178   6   80   11   495
MADISON 7.5% 37.0% 36.0% 1.2% 16.2% 2.2%
17 of 17   188   377   257   4   131   19   976
MAHASKA 19.3% 38.6% 26.3% 0.4% 13.4% 1.9%
19 of 21   173   337   292   2   113   25   942
MARION 18.4% 35.8% 31.0% 0.2% 12.0% 2.7%
19 of 19   72   704   540   8   253   56   1633
MARSHALL 4.4% 43.1% 33.1% 0.5% 15.5% 3.4%
14 of 14   48   170   76   2   49   23   368
MILLS 13.0% 46.2% 20.7% 0.5% 13.3% 6.3%
13 of 13   21   127   99   2   30   11   290
MITCHELL 7.2% 43.8% 34.1% 0.7% 10.3% 3.8%
16 of 17   51   107   69   1   14   6   248
MONONA 20.6% 43.1% 27.8% 0.4% 5.6% 2.4%
10 of 10   12   77   88   0   14   6   197
MONROE 6.1% 39.1% 44.7% 0.0% 7.1% 3.0%
12 of 12   12   223   76   5   37   21   374
MONTGOMERY 3.2% 59.6% 20.3% 1.3% 9.9% 5.6%
26 of 26   68   436   333   10   136   69   1052
MUSCATINE 6.5% 41.4% 31.7% 1.0% 12.9% 6.6%
. 20 of 20   196   182   166   4   99   20   667
O'BRIEN 29.4% 27.3% 24.9% 0.6% 14.8% 3.0%
9 of 9   30   97   39   1   21   8   196
OSCEOLA 15.3% 49.5% 19.9% 0.5% 10.7% 4.1%
12 of 12   26   180   74   0   78   25   383
PAGE 6.8% 47.0% 19.3% 0.0% 20.4% 6.5%
21 of 21   19   117   81   6   46   4   273
PALO ALTO 7.0% 42.9% 29.7% 2.2% 16.8% 1.5%
16 of 16   95   351   414   4   114   24   1002
PLYMOUTH 9.5% 35.0% 41.3% 0.4% 11.4% 2.4%
11 of 11   32   119   104   0   41   5   301
POCAHONTAS 10.6% 39.5% 34.6% 0.0% 13.6% 1.7%
163 of 163   927   6461   4092   167   2113   886   14646
POLK 6.3% 44.1% 27.9% 1.1% 14.4% 6.0%
51 of 51   104   934   410   21   187   110   1766
P'TAWATTAMIE 5.9% 52.9% 23.2% 1.2% 10.6% 6.2%
21 of 21   46   239   186   7   63   36   577
POWESHIEK 8.0% 41.4% 32.2% 1.2% 10.9% 6.2%
9 of 9   9   106   58   0   8   3   184
RINGGOLD 4.9% 57.6% 31.5% 0.0% 4.3% 1.6%
. 9 of 9   6   150   140   4   57   29   386
SAC 1.6% 38.9% 36.3% 1.0% 14.8% 7.5%
60 of 62   218   1756   1494   90   661   223   4442
SCOTT 4.9% 39.5% 33.6% 2.0% 14.9% 5.0%
16 of 16   55   138   75   1   41   22   332
SHELBY 16.6% 41.6% 22.6% 0.3% 12.3% 6.6%
23 of 23   931   657   307   7   378   42   2322
SIOUX 40.1% 28.3% 13.2% 0.3% 16.3% 1.8%
43 of 43   300   1346   883   45   463   263   3300
STORY 9.1% 40.8% 26.8% 1.4% 14.0% 8.0%
24 of 24   35   202   215   5   102   10   569
TAMA 6.2% 35.5% 37.8% 0.9% 17.9% 1.8%
8 of 8   10   71   38   1   24   10   154
TAYLOR 6.5% 46.1% 24.7% 0.6% 15.6% 6.5%
15 of 15   23   123   131   0   61   13   351
UNION 6.6% 35.0% 37.3% 0.0% 17.4% 3.7%
9 of 9   15   118   115   4   48   14   314
VAN BUREN 4.8% 37.6% 36.6% 1.3% 15.3% 4.5%
24 of 24   37   276   260   9   92   13   687
WAPELLO 5.4% 40.2% 37.8% 1.3% 13.4% 1.9%
. 24 of 25   103   579   496   13   221   51   1463
WARREN 7.0% 39.6% 33.9% 0.9% 15.1% 3.5%
14 of 14   35   192   199   4   114   24   568
WASHINGTON 6.2% 33.8% 35.0% 0.7% 20.1% 4.2%
10 of 10   19   72   55   2   33   4   185
WAYNE 10.3% 38.9% 29.7% 1.1% 17.8% 2.2%
29 of 33   79   412   494   5   100   25   1115
WEBSTER 7.1% 37.0% 44.3% 0.4% 9.0% 2.2%
16 of 16   66   146   154   2   35   16   419
WINNEBAGO 15.8% 34.8% 36.8% 0.5% 8.4% 3.8%
26 of 27   32   258   139   3   62   44   538
WINNESHIEK 5.9% 48.0% 25.8% 0.6% 11.5% 8.2%
49 of 49   220   1058   1178   24   336   71   2887
WOODBURY 7.6% 36.6% 40.8% 0.8% 11.6% 2.5%
11 of 11   14   71   77   0   16   6   184
WORTH 7.6% 38.6% 41.8% 0.0% 8.7% 3.3%
18 of 18   34   216   159   5   96   13   523
WRIGHT 6.5% 41.3% 30.4% 1.0% 18.4% 2.5%
Totals: 7,487   35,948   26744   898   12,496   4,093   87,666
Percentages: 8.53%   40.99%   30.50%   1.02%   14.24%   4.67%   100%

Last Updated on 3/30/2000
By win95inst


 
1996 Republican Caucus Results
98% of precincts reporting
Robert Dole 25,378 26.3%
Pat Buchanan 22,512 23.3%
Lamar Alexander 17,003 17.6%
Steve Forbes 9,816 10.2%
Phil Gramm 9,001 9.3%
Alan Keyes 7,179 7.4%
Richard Lugar 3,576 3.7%
Morry Taylor 1,380 1.4%
No preference 428 0.4%
Robert Dornan 131 0.1%
Other 47 0.04%
96,451


亚洲日韩色欧另类欧美_波多野结衣家庭教师_国语自产拍在线视频中文