I'll do this because I'm bored.
Iowa: Governor PBrunsel easily wins, with over 60% of the votes as other candidates bypass the state to focus on later primaries. Don takes second.
Wyoming: I read somewhere on this forum that candidates like PBrunsel do poorly in Wyoming. It is a close race between Naso (who represents the non-Northeast "faction") and moderate-to-libertarian Berger. Naso wins narrowly.
New Hampshire: Andrew Berger scores an easy victory due to moderate and Independent voters in NH. Being from the region, he is able to defeat Don for the centrist Independent vote. The conservative vote is a statistical 3-way tie.
Michigan: Naso wins the state's conservative voters, while Berger takes the moderate vote, and PBrunsel takes the evangelical voters. Phil and Assad have lower scores, both are competing for the same votes.
South Carolina: The race is all between Don and PBrunsel, with Don having an advantage being from the same region. PBrunsel narrowly wins (by around 1-2%); Naso, Phil, and Assad take much lower scores.
Nevada: Don has focused much less on Nevada, allowing Berger to win by a decent margin against Naso and PBrunsel. Both Phil and Assad remain in the same percentage range and pressures are on one of them to drop out.
Louisiana: (using the 2008 calendar, which has LA on the 22nd) The race is like that in South Carolina, between Don and PBrunsel. Don narrowly wins, his first victory. However, it is overshadowed by Florida.
Florida: Naso has actively campaigned in the state against Don and Berger, who are competing for the moderate voters. Naso squeaks out a win, with Don and Berger almost tied for second. PBrunsel is in a close third, Phil is fourth and Assad a distant fifth.
Later on...
Maine: Senator Berger repeats his New Hampshire victory in neighboring Maine. Don and Naso tie for second. Phil gets around 9% and Assad has 1-2%.
I'll do February 5th later today or tomorrow.
