What Did We Learn About the Iowa Caucuses Posted by David Shorr

Now that we Caucus-goers have spoken, what do the results tell us about the recipe for victory here in Iowa? First, to paraphrase Woody Allen, it's all about showing up. Pollsters struggle with finding samples that are reflective of who will actually take part on caucus night, and we see that the polls predicting a tight Democratic race didn't do a very good job. Hat tip to The Des Moines Register's Iowa Poll for foreseeing Obama's strength, in significant part by predicting large participation by independents. All due credit also to a colleague who said "I trust the Des Moines Register when it comes to understanding Iowans." For my own part, I only went so far as predicting that a decisive Obama victory was possible, not probable. (I was a little more decisive in predicting that the evening would be decisive - I just didn't believe the candidates would bunch up within a few points of each other).

Second, timing. Caucus goers really do tend to break one way or the other in the final weeks and days -- which proved true for both Obama and Huckabee. In that way, 2008 was like 2004, when Kerry won a lot of support at the end of the run-up. Conversely, Dean peaked too early.

Third, you have to ask. Most of you know Tip O'Neill's classic anecdote about his longtime neighbor who he was sure voted for him in a tough defeat. She didn't, she told Tip, because "you didn't ask." Giuliani suffered the consequences of not playing in Iowa. Somehow McCain paid less of a price, perhaps because he had some of that late-breaking momentum. I'm not sure Hillary Clinton really got into the retail politics mode. The cliche is that Iowans like to 'kick the tires,' and I don't know whether we had enough exposure to her to give us that chance.

As promised, this post is a dry analysis of what it takes to win here. Any further substantive content are bound to be colored by my own personal leanings. I'll get back to meaty foreign policy stuff very soon, but first a few final words as a patriotic Iowan. Many of you are resentful of the first-in-the-nation role that our small (and largely white) state plays. I can only respond that we do take treat this very seriously as a sacred trust and put a lot of effort into vetting the candidates. Now you have our advice - do what you will with it. Meanwhile, thanks particularly to all of those who came into our state to be involved.

Comments

[Zathras]

I must say David Shorr makes himself sound somewhat ungrateful by thanking the candidates, their entourages and the attendant media circus only for coming to Iowa and not for all the money they spent there. This is, after all, the primary reason Iowa defends its absurd position in the Presidential election process with such fervor, even forcing the race to start just after the New Year rather than risk having some other state jump its claim to be first.

Sacred trust, my left foot. As if Americans in no other state could be trusted to kick Presidential candidates' tires -- or as if the Presidents the Iowa caucus system helped produce represented an improvement over those elected without its help.