The New (Un)Conventional Wisdom on Iowa: Maybe It's Not So Important

| | Comments (20)

Earlier this year, the conventional wisdom was that Iowa might not matter as much as it has in the past. Some candidates--most notably, Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani--were not mounting major productions there. There were new early states for campaigns--and pundits--to worry about: South Carolina and Nevada. And several big states, looking for a piece of the action, were moving their primaries up to February 5 and creating an early Super-Duper Tuesday. So with all that front-loaded action, Iowa, it seemed, could become merely a throat-clearing exercise.

Then there was a shift. After months of campaigning, Barack Obama could not seem to close the gap between himself and Hillary Clinton in national and state polls. In some surveys, HRC was posting a 20-plus point lead. Obama had star power and dino-dollars, but Clinton maintained what at times looked like an unassailable advantage. Her strategists were running her campaign as if she was already in the general election. Her supporters talked of inevitability. Under these conditions, Iowa became crucial--for Obama. In order to stop the Clinton Express from shooting straight to the convention, he would have to slow her in Iowa and demonstrate that he could turn all that cash and charisma into caucus votes. It would be his first and probably only chance. Iowa was all.

Then there was another shift. As Obama surged ahead of Clinton in the Iowa polls, the state became the battleground where Clinton had to win to prove her electability. If she fell her, members of the politerati wondered, would she crash and burn?

Now I'm predicting another shift: Iowa's hype is exceeding its significance. Iowa is obviously critical, with the polls showing a neck-and-neck race there between Clinton, Obama, and John Edwards. But it's now possible to see either Clinton or Obama losing Iowa and still snagging the nomination. (Not so for Edwards.) One key reason: they both have plenty of cash, enough to keep their campaign machines humming along. I ran into a prominent Clinton fundraiser the other day and asked if s/he was worried about Iowa. "Not as much as you might think," the cash-chaser said. "This campaign is going to go on long past Iowa. Why? Because we and they can afford to. Campaigns end when you run out of money. And that's not going to happen to either one of us." And while Obama once had to prove his competitiveness, the fact that he has put Clinton on the ropes in Iowa demonstrates that he can be a contender.

So Iowa might not matter--as long as neither Clinton nor Obama end up on the wrong side of a blowout. "This is going all the way to February 5," the Clinton fundraiser said. "And maybe beyond." In other words, Iowa, you're just the warm-up.

    Comments

  1. Good old convention - As things change convention expires.

    I have always hated the idea that one state (and the first state) could decide the primaries for the whole country. It would be a healthy departure from the conventional to really shake up the old processes.

    Fasten the seatbelts and get ready for a new ride.

    Thanks

    Posted by: capt Author Profile Page | December 14, 2007 1:28 PM

  2. Wexler Calls For Cheney Impeachment Hearings

    Congressman Robert Wexler, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, is calling upon Congress to immediately schedule impeachment hearings for Vice President Richard Cheney.


    Wexler - "For the sake of history, and in order to be faithful to our Constitutional obligations, the Judiciary Committee must immediately convene impeachment hearings to determine whether the official actions of Vice President Cheney constitute 'High Crimes and Misdemeanors' and require that he be impeached. Each day we fail to act is a validation of the misdeeds of the Vice President and damages the credibility of the Democratic Party."

    *****

    If congress can grow a set - Darth Cheney is done. I predict he uses this opportunity to “retire” and Condi will be made VP.

    Posted by: capt Author Profile Page | December 14, 2007 1:45 PM

  3. There is a big difference between Senator Clinton and Mayor Giuliani, however. The latter was never destined to perform well in Iowa. For him to lose there, or in New Hampshire or even South Carolina would not be a disaster for his campaign. While the presumptive leader, he has never been the odds-on, hand-down, slam-dunk annointed one.

    Senator Clinton is a horse of a different color, with no disrespect to either horses or the good Senator. There has always been an air, an aura if you will, of invincibility (Is there another word with five "i's" in it?) about her and her campiagn. Actually, more of a coronation that a nomination. People were going to vote for her largely because they were supposed to vote for her.

    That is all about to come crashing down if the pollsters are correct.

    Posted by: Tomcantu Author Profile Page | December 14, 2007 3:39 PM

  4. Oh goody. I hope the pollsters are indeed correct!

    Posted by: David B. Benson Author Profile Page | December 14, 2007 5:16 PM

  5. I think HRC mistook inevitability for invincibility and was wrong on both counts.

    Watch Iowa surprise us with an Edwards win.

    Anything goes - Woot woot

    Posted by: capt Author Profile Page | December 14, 2007 5:29 PM

  6. Researcher: Cause and Treatment for Parkinson's "In Our Sights"


    Scientists optimistic after discovering genetic link to loss of dopamine-producing neurons

    A successful treatment for Parkinson's disease, a neurodegenerative disorder that affects 1 percent of the world's population and (an estimated 500,000 people in the U.S.) aged 60 years and over, may be "in our sights now," says Ronald McKay, a researcher at the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

    McKay's optimism stems from new research that shows that a gene, known as forkhead box A2 (FOXA2), is responsible for the differentiation and spontaneous destruction of neurons that secrete the neurotransmitter dopamine, a cell population that is progressively lost in Parkinson's disease, which is characterized by tremors, loss of muscle control and speech difficulties.

    "We have the cells; we know what controls their birth and death—we're on our way," says McKay, a senior molecular biology investigator. "It looks like we've got this disease in our sights now. We will understand Parkinson's disease relatively soon."

    *****

    WOW this is great news. Not to mention the advances against Parkinsons will also support advances in other areas.

    Posted by: capt Author Profile Page | December 14, 2007 6:31 PM

  7. Capt,

    Great news indeed. Dopamine and L-Dopa have been a standby synthetic drug used for heart and blood pressure issues for a long time. The trick of long-term absorbsion into the neuro system from the blood has been quite elusive. (remember Robin Williams and DeNiro in "Awakenings"?)

    For the nervous system to begin to re-generate ANY cells, much less the neurons that supply dopamine, could not only have parkinsonian implications, it could well lead to advances in Multiple Sclerosis an equally devestating disease.

    Re-generation of the sclera, the sheath covering nerve tissues, will be the only way to reverse MS.

    -T

    Posted by: Hajji Author Profile Page | December 14, 2007 7:33 PM

  8. Hajji,

    The future's so bright I have to wear shades . . .

    Posted by: capt Author Profile Page | December 14, 2007 7:45 PM

  9. What a difference a day makes!

    Posted by: Hajji Author Profile Page | December 14, 2007 7:58 PM

  10. That is good news. I know Parkinson's is serious business but the wording of this tickled my funny bone
    McKay's optimism stems from new research that shows that a gene, known as forkhead box A2 (FOXA2), is responsible for the differentiation and spontaneous destruction of neurons that secrete the neurotransmitter dopamine, a cell population that is progressively lost in Parkinson's disease, which is characterized by tremors, loss of muscle control and speech difficulties.
    Wasn't it already known that "FOX" damages the brain? ;)

    Posted by: eyes_open Author Profile Page | December 14, 2007 9:06 PM

  11. Ha!

    Posted by: capt Author Profile Page | December 14, 2007 11:07 PM

  12. Nobody but Iowans and the MSM gives a damned about what Iowa thinks or how it votes.

    Posted by: JoeCHI Author Profile Page | December 15, 2007 11:40 AM

  13. Air of inevitability escaping Clinton.

    WASHINGTON — She was a disciplined candidate atop a polished campaign, but Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is now mired in the most serious crisis of her 11-month bid for the White House, as a rolling series of missteps threatens to topple her as the Democratic front-runner.

    The large crowds that once came to see her have thinned. Trusted campaign surrogates have veered wildly off message. And a campaign operation that had built seemingly impregnable leads over the summer appears to be faltering, prompting former President Clinton to amp up his role as a public spokesman and campaign advisor.

    ******

    Is that the hissing sound I hear? The air escaping from the heir apparent?

    Posted by: capt Author Profile Page | December 15, 2007 12:03 PM

  14. Obama Grilled on All Things Clinton


    ABC News' Sunlen Miller reports: Barack Obama held a rare press conference today in Waterloo, Iowa. As a sign of the times, 10 of the 19 questions were on either Hillary or Bill Clinton.

    This is the first time Obama has responded, on camera, to Hillary’s apology over the Shaheen controversy, which came on the tarmac of National Airport on Thursday.

    Posted by: capt Author Profile Page | December 15, 2007 8:22 PM

  15. Leading article: The world gets the better of Bush


    Last week was the week, and yesterday was the day, when the world finally showed that it was terminally fed up with the simple-minded, short-sighted and self-serving outlook of George Bush. The moment came not, as it well might have done, amid the dust and bloody debris of Iraq or the torture and state terrorism of Guantanamo Bay, but in Indonesia's lush and lovely Island of the Gods. And, appropriately, it came over climate change – the issue on which the "toxic Texan" first showed that he was going to put his ideological instincts and oil-soaked obstinacy over the interests of the rest of the world and of future generations.

    Posted by: capt Author Profile Page | December 15, 2007 8:27 PM

  16. Obama is hitting his stride in Iowa


    The candidate once criticized for lacking specifics now peppers his speeches with policy proposals -- and confidence.

    By Mark Z. Barabak, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
    December 16, 2007
    MAQUOKETA, IOWA -- It was an unusual question at the end of a long day. What, the fifth-grader asked Barack Obama, would you do as president if illegal immigrants staged a terrorist attack on the United States while you were pulling troops out of Iraq?

    Without losing sight of his main purpose -- convincing the 200 or so adults in the crowd to caucus for him Jan. 3 -- the Democrat responded at length. He promised tougher border enforcement and a crackdown on employers who hired illegal immigrants. He called for compassion for exploited workers. He needled Republican candidate Mitt Romney for talking tough on immigration when, it turned out, illegal immigrants were tending his yard.

    Posted by: capt Author Profile Page | December 16, 2007 11:39 AM

  17. Edwards cuts sharper edge in Iowa trail speeches


    IOWA CITY - The Chevy truck song -- John Mellencamp's "Our Country" -- blared from overhead speakers as the once and former Democratic beacon of sunshine and hope prepared to drop some red meat on the carpeted floor of the normally placid Iowa City Public Library.

    "The few, the powerful, the well-financed, they now control the government," John Edwards told a tight crowd of about 350 last week. "They've taken over your democracy. And it affects everything that happens in this country."

    "Everything," he emphasized.

    Posted by: capt Author Profile Page | December 16, 2007 11:41 AM

  18. Except inflation! Serious inflation, 40% per annum:

    http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/11595

    Posted by: David B. Benson Author Profile Page | December 16, 2007 5:54 PM

  19. Captain,

    I think that, so far, there has only been one Democratic candidate who has been "few, "powerful" and "well-financed" enough to:
    Earn tens of millions of dollars on spurious, junk-science lawsuits, driving up the costs of obstetrics for every female in his home state.

    Earn over $500,000 in one year from a hedge fund that made subprime loans then foreclosed on Katrina victims.

    Give speeches on poverty at $60,000 a pop.

    Build a 26,000 s.f. residence compound.

    Incorporate himself so as to avoid hundreds of thousands of dollars in Medicare taxes.

    Pay his campagin advisors out of his tax-exempt foundation.

    I'm sorry, but, regardless of his politics, this guy is a total personal phony.

    Posted by: Tomcantu Author Profile Page | December 16, 2007 10:27 PM

  20. As opposed to all of the genuine politicians?

    "The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office."
    ~ H. L. Mencken

    Posted by: capt Author Profile Page | December 17, 2007 12:03 AM

Post A Comment


(for verification only; will not be published with your comment)