The news media paints a very exciting picture of tomorrow's Iowa Caucuses. 'It's anyone's game!' they cry as the polls indicate statistical dead-heats in both the Democratic and Republican races. Will Hillary Clinton push back Barack Obama to claim the caucus win? Will Mitt Romney fulfil the August expectations of an Iowa white-wash or will he be out-shone by the folksey Mike Huckabee's scrappy insurgency?
We'll find out tomorrow evening. But does any of it even matter? Well that's another issue entirely. Every four years the candidates and the media attack Iowa and New Hampshire with vicious fury, bringing millions of dollars into those two states as the eyes of a watchful nation turn to Iowa and New Hampshire and hope they don't screw up too badly. The inhabitants of Iowa and New Hampshire take the races incredibly seriously - they meet the candidates, 'kick the tires' as I heard one budding caucus goer describe it on CNN, and do the job of intensely vetting the candidates on the behalf of the rest of the nation.
But I ask again, how much have the Iowa Caucuses shaped the results of the presidential nominating contests since the onset of the modern primary process in the 1976 election cycle? Well, the answer is not as much as you would think. Though the stories of the candidates in both states provide compelling narratives for the news media, and allow for intimate, human interest stories of candidates in Des Moines diners or Ames town halls, the truth is that the Iowa Caucuses have nowhere near the kind of influence that everyone, except Rudy Giuliani, wants us to believe.
John McCain should know something about why Iowa and New Hampshire don't have the huge effects its inhabitants and Fox News pundits would like us to think. So does George Bush, Gary Hart and Pat Robertson. Each of these candidates won the caucuses in Iowa or the primary in New Hampshire but still went on to lose the nomination. Why? Because when Wolf Blitzer and Brian Williams move to Des Moines to cover the caucus they forget the national picture. In fact, as William Meyer informs us, in 8 out of 10 contests between 1980 and 2000 the front-runner in the national polls and money raised went on to secure the nomination. In the final two contests, the eventual winner was either front-runner in money (Dukakis - 1988) or polls (Reagan - 1980). There are only two situations in which the candidate behind in national poll ratings and money raised went on to become the nominee, Jimmy Carter in 1976 (when everyone was still figuring out what the implications were of the modern primaries) and John Kerry in 2004 (when Howard Dean vastly over-inflated his image through pioneering internet fund-raising.)
Therefore, I think there's less in this crazy game than the polls in Iowa and New Hampshire might indicate. I'd love to be surprised. I'd love a high-spirited fight from Iowa all the way to the convention. However, Hillary Clinton is the natioanl front-runner, and like Bush Snr and Bush Jnr will probably overcome an early upset to secure the nomination. There's not enough time for non-front runner candidates to raise the dough needed to boost themselves and crash a strong front-runner (because Dean was *not* a strong front-runner.) Perhaps they're right about the Republicans though - the latest polls indicate Huckabee close to Rudy.
With the Republicans we may be about to see really how important the two early primaries are. Giuliani is playing a game widely considere dangerous (but as we have seen, may not be), by placing his faith in national polls and Super Tuesday states. Huckabee and Romney on the other hand, are fighting in Iowa and New Hampshire right out of the presidential playbook. If Huckabee or Romney overtake Giuliani to nomination perhaps I was wrong. We'll see! It'll be very interesting to dissect.
My main point though is this: Look at the big picture. The Iowa Caucuses and the New Hampshire primaries receive so much attention, to the chagrin of the state parties everywhere else, but perhaps the bigger picture still plays a part. That's not a hopeful note to end on - it means that big party donors and not Iowa soccer moms choose the next President, but it's important to think about in all the Iowa hype.
One thing's for sure. It's going to be a fun few weeks.
No comments:
Post a Comment