Realistically, the Iowa Caucuses are a ridiculous measure of the electorate. It’s a massively flawed system in an absurdly unrepresentative state. But none of that matters. What matters is how the media spin it, and what happened tonight will be easy for their simplistic framing: Obama won big, Hillary sputtered to a weak third place, not even breaking 30%. Edwards really needed to win, and didn’t.
Keep an eye on the New Hampshire polls. The media want this to give Obama a big bump. It probably will. The size of his win in this massively flawed system in this absurdly unrepresentative state makes him the clear frontrunner for the Democratic nomination. Hillary polls far ahead, in later states, but that could quickly erode. The pressure is on her to do much better in New Hampshire. Even a close loss might not be enough. If Obama carries this big win into a second win, next week, he may be unstoppable.
It’s tough to see where Edwards goes, from here. He’s not polling well in New Hampshire or South Carolina, and he needed a big boost, to get any traction in either. He didn’t get it. His campaign is in serious trouble. Should he be out, after South Carolina, it will be interesting to see what his supporters do. None are more passionate. If they move as a bloc, they could make the difference.
Obama’s centrist strategy worked, in Iowa. It’s not popular with many die-hard liberals. If the only alternative turns out to be Hillary, where do they go? Obama also proved enormously inspiring to young voters. Should he win the nomination, they could help sweep Democrats into all levels of offices. Such a Democratic landslide could mean a much more liberal Obama Administration than many now fear.
In the end, though, this race is far from over. Bill Clinton was known as the Comeback Kid. We’ll now find out if Hillary has similar skill and tenacity. She won’t go down easily.
24 comments
Skip to comment form
…your analysis is warped by too much time online. My read is that most Obama supporters are simply not bloggers. If they were, clearly, we would have seen this coming a lot more clearly. Having met many of them, I have to say that the Edwards folk have nothing on them in terms of passion.
Edwards was finished already, but now everyone can see it. It is now a two person race in the Dem field, and a three-way race for the Republicans (McCain, Huck, and Romney) which will result in no clear winner. It is Obama v. Clinton for the Cup.
agreed terry
… for Edwards. It goes to New Hampshire, and a fight to get positive traction while Clinton slumps.
The press have handed him the comeback kid card … since they have mostly declared him basically finished … and that’s his opportunity to play it, if he can.
And if Senator Clinton finishes third twice in a row, then that is a serious blow to her campaign, the way she has framed it, as being In It To Win and Ready (to be President in the 1990’s?) From Day One.
since (of course) the results are less significant than the media spin, Obama just won a rockin victory. NH is his for the taking.
I like Edwards, but I think he’s done. only thing that saves him is if he gets a fundraising bounce, and maybe he catches some NH Clinton voters as they jump ship and makes a strong showing… otherwise, I don’t see how he can make it to 2/5. he’s polled poorly in practically all the other early states.
Clinton’s not done yet, duh… she’s polled way too strongly in way too many places for way too long to be written off by an Iowa loss. but she’s definitely going to take hits in the polls… say, X points per state, and if she loses NH, maybe 2X points. she better get it together in NH or else there could be a snowball effect.
I wonder if Biden and Dodd will make endorsements. I didn’t see anything about Richardson — is he considering dropping out? what will their supporters do? I was really surprised how few Iowans supported the lower tier Dem candidates.
Edwards is best suited to win in the south and mountain states, overall probably the best dem candidate in the general election. Unfortunately, Edwards did really need to win in Iowa. He will not have money coming close to matching his opponents from this point forward. I seriously hope he stays in the campaign thru super Tuesday.
As an Edwards supporter, I don’t know who I would support if he dropped out. I don’t really don’t feel I know Obama and can’t trust him. I know Hillary, but don’t really feel very enthusiastic about what she will do for the country.
and others who have done unexpectedly well in Iowa, Obama adapted well to the rules of the caucus; his community organizing background actually turned out to be a huge plus, and now we know why he’s been going after moderates while neglecting the likes of us. (On the GOP side, there may never be another non-evangelical who tries to compete in Iowa. It’s a fool’s game, as Huckabee showed.)
The question is whether New Hampshire — a state requiring a very different strategy — follows Iowa. The answer, notwithstanding 2000 and 2004, is: except when there is an incumbent running, usually not. I have a chart buried in DKos about this:
1972: IA, Muskie; NH, McGovern
1976: IA, uncommitted (then Carter); NH, Carter
1980: incumbent
1984: IA, Mondale; NH, Hart
1988: IA, Gephart; NH, Dukakis
1992: IA, Harkin (uncontested); NH, Tsongas (then Clinton)
1996: incumbent
2000: IA, Gore; NH, Gore (but by only 4% over Bradley)
2004: IA, Kerry; NH, Kerry
New Hampshire is a very different state than Iowa. Huckabee will likely lose there. (Among Republican races since 1976, a different person has won Iowa and New Hampshire in every race without an incumbent.) If Obama wins, NH it will be because he has neither elicited great dissatisfaction as a frontrunner (as did Mondale or Gore) nor doubts about electability (as did Gephart and Harkin) that brought down previous Iowa victors. But NH does not play to Obama’s organizational strength the way that Iowa did; you can’t likely community-organize your way to a general election victory. (Though it would be sweet if he could!) The main thing benefitting him, and the thing to watch for in the polls over the next few days, is that Edwards may falter now, and his voters are more likely to go to Obama, just as people long predicted before it became too much predicted to be worth predicting.
But this is likely to be a long race: Hillary simply will not drop out before Tumultuous Tuesday unless she’s losing so badly that it hurts her image to continue. In fact, I’ve argued that if she isn’t knocked out on Feb. 12 (VA and MD), with this primary calendar it doesn’t really make sense for her to drop out before March 4 (OH and TX), and if she’s still in the race at that point it makes sense to wait for Pennsylvania on April 22. The races in between these benchmarks — respectively Wisconsin and Hawaii, and then Wyoming, Mississippi and the territories — are just not big enough to settle things. If her argument is that Obama is green and liable to be torn apart under press scrutiny, it’s better for her to wait and see if he stumbles over this two-and-a-half month period as the presumptive nominee, after which she can try to salvage the day in PA, IN, NC, WV, KY, and OR over the following month.
If Clinton wins the early races, by contrast, the pressure on Obama to withdraw will be huge. I don’t think we’ll have a sense of how this comes out before Feb. 5. I agree that Edwards won’t likely come back barring some meltdown by one of the other two, but that’s possible.
is about how all of this might play out differently than other primary seasons due to the different calendar. After all, NY and CA are only a month away. And in those states, money means everything and it seems that if Clinton can hold on for that month, all these small states (and small #’s of delegates) won’t really matter. She would seem pretty certain to win NY and if I remember correctly is polling really well in CA. I know the media last night were writing Guliani off, but it seems that is his strategy – wait for Feb. 5th.
I might just add that I am presently one of the “anyone but Clinton crowd” so I’m not hoping for this outcome, but it seems to be the “establishment candidate’s” strategy.