The Iowa Caucuses Are a Very Minor Primary Event

[MineralMan]

That we spend so much time and write so many words about it is laughable, really. At one time, Iowa sort of mattered when it came to presidential primaries. Now? Not so much, really. Here are some of the reasons we shouldn't be paying that much attention to Iowa.

1. Iowa has proven itself to be a red state in Presidential general elections. Its electoral college votes will probably go to the Republican candidate for President.

2. Iowa sends only a small number of delegates to the Democratic nominating convention. Just 56. That number will not materially influence the results there.

3. Iowa is a state with overwhelmingly white demographics.

So, why do we pay so much attention to Iowa? Because it's the first primary event. That's not a good reason, really. Yes, it's first, but it's also not in any way representative of the nation.

I suggest we pay less attention to that single state and more to the other three early states and the March 3 primary states.

[brooklynite]

1. So we should be supporting Bloomberg?

As the only candidate who apparently recognizes this truth?

For the next month, every major candidate will be spending the bulk of their time in IA or NH. What do you know that they don't?

[MineralMan]

3. What I know is that the nominee will not be chosen in Iowa.

Nor in the other three early states.

[brooklynite]

9. Iowa may not decide who the nominee is...

...but it will likely help decide who the nominee is not.

[MineralMan]

13. Actually, we already sort of know that.

Biden, Sanders, Warren, and maybe Buttigieg or Bloomberg will survive the four early events. The rest are done, frankly, and should walk away. Following Super Tuesday, we'll be down to just the first three. I think that's certain.

Then we'll see how people who supported non-finishers parse themselves out. By mid-March, the polls should clearly reveal the nominee.

That's my opinion, of course, for whatever it is worth to anyone but me.

[thesquanderer]

22. If Biden wins Iowa, I think it will go a long way to assuring that he is indeed the nominee.

And if he won Iowa and the other three early states you mention, I think nobody would be able to stop Biden (with the possible exception of Biden).

[MineralMan]

26. And if he doesn't win Iowa, it won't mean he's out of the race, either.

I'm pretty sure he'll have a delegate count lead going into Super Tuesday, though. South Carolina.

Coming out of Super Tuesday, I expect him to be doing much better than that. In fact, I think his results will surprise many people, as some forget about the candidate they were supporting before then and switch their votes.

Really, we don't have all that much time to worry about all of that, though. Things are accelerating, now that it is actually Election Year.

Thank goodness!

[thesquanderer]

28. Agreed. If Biden wins Iowa, that's huge for Biden, but if he doesn't, Iowa won't tell us too much...

...beyond who is likely to be be dropping out. But it could help someone get a week of strong press.

[MineralMan]

30. Well, I repeat my statement. Iowa doesn't really matter much.

For a lot of people, the primary race hasn't even begun yet. Maybe for most people. Still, now that it's 2020, people will start thinking about it in larger numbers. DU is not reflective of the general population. Not even a little bit.

[DownriverDem]

29. Look at the folks participating in Iowa

Do they reflect the country? Caucuses are not the same as primary elections. I prefer the primary elections and a more diverse state to choose the Dem nominee.

[Skya Rhen]

2. I completely agree!

[Funtatlaguy]

4. My biggest problem with Iowa is the caucus.

It takes too long.
It has to be done vocally and publicly rather than a secret ballot.
Locations are often difficult to reach and too far to navigate in inclement weather.

[crazytown]

5. IA has correctly 'picked' the Dem nominee 7 times of out 9 since 1976.

The last time they 'got it wrong' so to speak was 1992 with Tom Harkin - not a surprise.

If Biden was leading big time in IA, and NH, polls we would not see these OPs. The only thing "laughable" is the depth of apology. 'Just you wait till SC' gets just as tiresome. HRC won 82% of the AA vote on Super Tuesday 2016. Biden is leading with AA voters by miles, but he is not as strong as 'the lady' was.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

11. I think things have changed since Super Tuesday got to be a bigger deal.

The main reason IA and NH are a big deal is that media make them into a big deal.

[MineralMan]

14. Yes. They're media events.

[crazytown]

17. "If Biden was leading big time in IA, and NH, polls we would not see these (DU) OPs"

Don't pretend otherwise.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

19. I have no opinion on that. I have always thought the emphasis on IA and NH

was excessive, for exactly the reason I've mentioned and regardless of who's ahead in those states.

[crazytown]

23. 2004 and 2008 show IA can be a game changer

... if there is an upset result.

If, for example Biden won big in IA, you would be falling over yourself to emphasize the victory.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

25. Where did I say I was a Biden supporter? Note that I am listed as undecided.

Right now there are several candidates I favor (including Warren, btw) and one that I do not. I don't like the emphasis on IA and NH for exactly the reason I stated, and I'd feel that way regardless of who was leading.

[crazytown]

27. If Biden won IA in a big upset

are you telling me, you would not post it up as a highly significant result. I would. It would show the others are weaker candidates than we thought - and make me feel better about him as the prospective nominee.

It's a game of expectations. The OP is massaging them - for a reason.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

31. Actually, I wouldn't. If I were already a committed supporter of any candidate -

for the sake of neutrality let's say Senator Etaoin Shrdlu - and Senator Shrdlu won Iowa, my reaction would be, that's great but it's not enough, we need Super Tuesday. That would be especially true if Senator Shrdlu's archrival Senator Cthulhu was polling strongly in the Super Tuesday states. The results in IA and NH (small, rural, mostly white states) mean that the winner had a particularly strong ground game there and was able to appeal to the interests of the residents of those states. My point is that the results are given more weight than they deserve and are magnified by the excessive interest of the media. That's all.

[crazytown]

35. Senator Etaoin Shrdlu?

You never know. IA might be the making of Mayor Axolotl

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

37. Etaoinshrdlu is what you get if you run your finger across the first two rows

on a Linotype machine. It's a useful name for a made-up person because nobody knows what a Linotype machine is any more.

[crazytown]

39. Yes.

I did IT with pre-press people in another life. Iodine metamorphoses Axolotls into Salamanders - hence my choice of candidate.

[beastie boy]

21. We probably would anyway. Fewer would come from Biden supporters, but they would come.

[MineralMan]

16. Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

[treestar]

53. Meh. Delaware used to always pick the winner with its three electoral votes going

to the winner for many elections. Until they didn't. (Dotard).

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

6. It gets disproportional weight and publicity

because it's the first (with NH). The candidates campaign hard in those states because they want the boost, or at least the illusion of a boost, that early publicity gives them. There will be headlines: "Etaoin Shrdlu wins Iowa!" "Shrdlu takes the lead in New Hampshire!" "Can Shrdlu keep up the momentum?" We've seen it before. Sometimes it helps, sometimes it doesn't.

The whole system is kind of dumb, if you ask me.

[2naSalit]

7. I agree and

I think a bit too much is made of NH as well. I lived there for many years, almost ran over Richard Nixon when he was campaigning there. I also think the impeachment will change it up a bit. I expect IA and NH to almost turn out to be "write-offs" due to the possible consumption of time from half the candidates and the fact that the populations of these two states is small enough to not matter by the end of super Tuesday. That's the sense that I'm getting about at this point.

Once the Senate trial gets rolling it will be easier to get a feel for what the path forward might look like. And so much happens in a short time anymore that I think that IA and NH might quickly get lost in the dust as we go bulldozing forth through this unbelievable time. Nothing will be normal in this election cycle.

[bullwinkle428]

8. Re: point #1 - the Democratic candidate won 6 out of the last 8 Presidential elections in

Iowa. Yes, Chump won in 2016 by 10 points, but their only other victory was Shrub's re-election, by a margin of 0.6%.

I still believe it would be a huge mistake for the DNC to not fight for Iowa in the GE.

[MineralMan]

15. Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

[aikoaiko]

10. DU translation: My preferred candidates is blowing it in Iowa.

[beastie boy]

24. "Blowing it" is a curious definmition for being tied for first.

Even if it's a four way tie for first. Sounds like Biden is expected to be way ahead of everyone else, and if he is not, he is "blowing it".

[snowybirdie]

12. And it's also very odd

in the way you have to show up at a private home, take a side and then change sides as candidates are eliminated. No straight out vote for your favorite. Dumb!

[Voltaire2]

18. best to lower the expectations now.

that way your guy can exceed!

[Peacetrain]

20. Well its important to us. We put our hearts and souls into it.

Bill could not make it here.. But Barack and Jimmy sure did. Hillary got it by a hair. Hmph! sounds like Iowa is on the winning side of the odds of who eventually gets picked. But everyone has their day with the candidates.. we have up to two years with them.. But everyone has to start somewhere as it were. Proud to be the state that does it

edit to add on: before you share a latin lesson with me with false conclusions to my statement. Can you imagine how many people would never have a chance if we started in a place like California, or NY.. the expense to get to people and get your name and policies out, would be so overwhelming, truthfully all we would have are Bloombergs, Steyers etc..

[crazytown]

32. "Bill could not make it here"

A big ask. Did anyone stand a chance against Tom?

If Joe wins IA, I will be the first to congratulate you Peacetrain. You are a magnificent advocate for your candidate.

[Peacetrain]

36. Ahh thanks.. I have a tremendous affection for a number of the candidates..

Well Bill did not put a lot of time here, because Tom was a force, I understand that. He (Bill) never liked us after that.. but we liked him, it was okay.

[Demsrule86]

49. But he won the general and saved us from 16 years of uninterrupted GOP rule.

[MerryBlooms]

48. The massive media coverage in Iowa will give the winner a bump in New Hampshire,

also a surge in campaign funding.

[Demsrule86]

50. New Hampshire is not important this year except to those who are neighbors like Warren and

Sanders...they are expected to win there and if they don't, it will be a big deal.

[JT45242]

33. Agreed from someone transplanted to Iowa

I agree. I lived most of my adult life in Ohio. I always hated that by the time that I got to vote in a primary it was already decided...then I got a job that moved me to Iowa.

Democrats ...seriously why do we care what Iowa and New Hampshire think. They are both over 90 percent white. They have virtually no electoral votes. And for Iowa, it is likely to go winner take all to the opposition.

We let these tiny states have an inordinate amount if say and end up with good candidates,like Kamala Harris, not resonating with the white Iowa voters. She wasn't my first choice, but you no what... since white voters in Iowa and New Hampshire didn't respond to her...states that actually matter like Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Virginia, etc will never get a chance to vote for or against her.

On top of that, the independent who is a Democrat for convenience every four years us a white guy who resonates well in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Let's use some common sense and move up states that might actually make a difference in the electoral college. Iowa is so proud to be the first to caucus with two Republican senators who are unabashed Trump supporters. Our governor had the known neonazi Steve king as her campaign manager. If that doesn't disqualify you from state office, then that state(where I am ashamed to live) should be moved to some inconsequential time because you are more likely to elect someone openly supported by neonazis than a Democrat for president.

[BeyondGeography]

38. Well said

The whiteness of the first two states distorts the whole process. Warren is my candidate and she has a very strong message for the black community but, apart from the occasional visit to SC and a major speech at Clark University in Atlanta, that had to take a back seat in 2019 while she held 96 friggin events in Iowa and who knows how many more in New Hampshire. Meantime, Biden skates by on name recognition and his AA numbers have held up in no small part because he hasn’t had to compete for them. If I was a younger engaged black voter looking for another option I’d be out of my mind. The process is narrow and unreflective of our base. It is an enthusiasm-killing relic that needs to change.

[crazytown]

41. It's not IA that is the problem IMO

it's NH. They are the lily white state that insists on being the first primary. CT would be a fairer gig.

[BeyondGeography]

43. I actually agree with that

Iowans are sensitive to the bigger picture and take their role seriously. It still takes up too much time but its outsized role is compounded by N.H. being held one week later. I’d prefer NJ over CT but, whatever, the twin effect of IA/NH has got to go.

[crazytown]

44. After 2000, NH has a special spot in my soul.

[The Blue Flower]

34. Remember when Michelle Bachman won?

Right. No one else does, either.

[Midwestern Democrat]

40. She didn't - she won the meaningless Straw Poll (which no longer exists) but she came in SIXTH in

the actual caucus.

[crazytown]

42. But she ran away with corn dog photo OPs, eom.

[ritapria]

45. A win in Iowa has been a big leg up towards winning nomination

Carte won in 1976 an 1980 ….Mondale in 1984 ...Gore in 2000 , Kerry in 2004 , Obama in 2008 , Hillary in 2016 ….Iowa wasn't contested in 1992 ..Harkin was ceded his home state …… Gephardt's victory in 1988 is the lone exception to the rule ...Iowa matters because the media make such a big deal over it ….. The media are obsessed with Iowa and NH ..They shouldn't be , but they are.. It is true that Muskie won Iowa in 1972 , but the contest received virtually zero media coverage …..The focus on Iowa began in 1976 ………………..

[Gothmog]

46. I really do not give a great deal of weight to the results of the Iowa caucuses

Iowa is all white and caucuses are not democratic.

[MineralMan]

47. I know you don't.

You actually understand how all this works. I'm afraid that most people who are participating in this particular forum really don't understand the whole process that well. They follow the news, but not the process. Not everyone, of course, but many.

My eyes will be on the delegate count, and not much else. Oddly enough, the media doesn't really talk about that all that much until very close to the convention. We hear about primary election voting results and polls, but very little about the actual process that ends up selecting the nominee.

I think it's a shame, really. I know the candidates understand it. I know that party regulars who have been delegates at some level understand it. But most people just watch the news and see only the surface of things.

It's frustrating.

[Gothmog]

51. I understand that it is frustrating

Running for a national convention slot was interesting and caused me to read all of the rules. Iowa and New Hampshire have only a comparative few delegates to the National Convention. In addition, I saw how caucuses worked during the Texas two step back in 2008. I am so glad that we got rid of the caucus portion of the Texas two step in 2016 and I am really glad that there will only be a few states with caucuses this cycle

I am still somewhat hopeful that there will not be a contested convention this cycle. The 15% rule will help a great deal and the fact that Biden has such support with African American voters will help in a number of Super Tuesday states.

Again, come the national convention, it is delegates who count and the results of two small mainly white states will NOT determine the nominee.

[MineralMan]

52. I'm sure it is for some.

However, the presidential election takes place in 50 individual states and a few other jurisdictions. Each is unique. Each sends delegates to the convention. The more delegates, the more important their results are to the outcome.

[genxlib]

54. And yet...

We still can't formulate a food policy or energy policy that doesn't give undue weight to corn.