Heading into the final days in Iowa, the lousiest excuse for democracy I can find in America, I feel compelled to at least write about the outcome or fallout from the event. It's pretty clear that I think the Iowa caucus is a joke. But I'll try to leave all that aside and write some pre-caucus analysis; primarily for the sake that this is a political blog. As we can see in the chart below (kudos to the fine work at Pollster.com) that the top three Democratic candidates have stuck it out at the top for much of the year. Obama moving and shaking a little over the summer and then Hillary's machine kicking in in late August. And then as the one half of one percent caucus goers begin to make their minds up, Edwards begins his ascension with the year ending. What we see is a tight race, with no clear front runner. As is the nature of a very undemocratic thing as the Iowa caucus.
As I've always said, primaries are about favors. And no one is owed more favors than the Clinton's. That being said, Iowa isn't a primary. It's a caucus, and it's a very public event. Meaning that a vote requires a person to go and stand in a group with other people who support the same candidate as them. Peer pressure isn't measured in to the polling. There's no private booth to stand in, no curtain to pull and no silent voting. It's physically, emotionally and psychologically draining. And it's retarded.
On the Republican side we see much more movement. The unexpected rise of Huckabee. Well, not to me. I said six months ago that the only true conservatives in the race are Ron Paul and Huckabee. And I distinctly mentioned to many friends that Huckabee stands a real shot long before he ever officially entered the race. We also see Romney sitting amongst the top. Interesting enough to note that he has spent more money than all the other Republican candidates combined.
So my final conclusions? Get rid of the Iowa caucus. I know I said I would leave out my tainted personal qualms with Iowa but I failed. Really, the Dem side is way too close and Hillary has all the right operation in place. For the Repubs I can't help but think Romney is going to come out on top. Then again I'm usually wrong about all this stuff.
*Update: Reader LL from Iowa emailed me concerning my tirade about Iowa. For the sake of argument I'll reprint some of his email here.
Iowa is a great place. It has a tremendous educational system, probably one of the best in the nation. Its the heartland. We feed the country. Maybe our caucus isn't perfect but what about democracy is? Instead of trying to knock something you know nothing about maybe you should try and understand politics and the process before giving your "analysis."Fair's fair. My "analysis" was anything but. I told you I tried and failed at staying objective. My belief that the Iowa caucus is retarded and undemocratic is my opinion. It's also backed up by the fact that democracy is the rule of the people and when less than one half of one percent participate, calling the system democracy is a stretch. Keep the caucus if you want, just get rid of its importance. Primaries are much more suitable for national elections. Caucuses are great for small groups and local politics but to declare that a caucus is the model for choosing an American president and probably the most powerful person in the world is not a practical way to showcase our democracy to the world.
To clarify I wasn't trying to degrade the state of Iowa. Not in the least bit. I'm sure Iowa is a great place and I have nothing against it at all. My wife is from Iowa and I've spent plenty of time traveling across that flat land. It's a beautiful place, especially on Saturday morning when the Hawkeyes are playing. The Iowa caucus is a completely different matter. Please see my distinction between the two.
0 comments:
Post a Comment