Iowa Caucuses Only Relevant For Their Near-Total Irrelevance

Reaganite Republican ^ | January 4, 2012 | Reaganite Republican

[Reaganite Republican]

Keeping-in-mind the state's pitiful track record at picking eventual Republican presidential nominees, here's considering the Iowa Caucus results and what they mean (if anything):

Santorum and Romney are locked in a dead-heat late into the night, nearing 25% of the vote each.  Romney appears to be pulling into the lead with a late surge, though. 

Ron Paul is third and Newt a battle-weary fourth, the take-away for Team Doughboy being "attack ads work", shame that it is. 

The rest are left licking wounds and re-assessing hopes in the wake of disappointing finishes, particularly Michelle Bachmann (who actually won the Iowa Staw Poll five months ago) and 
snotty liberal-Republican John Huntsman with 742 votes (lol)

How many people voted in this one small state deep in the heart of Korn Kountry?

Results are still coming in this year, but last time in 2008 a grand total of 119,188 people -only 4% of the population of sparsely-populated Iowa-
took part in the caucus process that selected Mike Huckabee (Super Bowl XLV attendance was 103,000+)

Alas, the caucuses are not even representative of the state's Republicans as a whole: later that same year (2008), John McCain received 677,000 presidential votes in the Iowa... 
5x the total number of caucus-goers. And paltry sums seen in the (above) chart appear almost identical to 2008's Iowa turnout.

That means this Iowa vote that a ludicrous amount of importance is being slathered upon -with some deeming certain campaigns rendered "confident", "surging", or even "demoralized" by this minor event- represents the voice of just 4/100ths of one percent of the United States population, a mere gaggle that couldn't even half-fill the Indianapolis Motor Speedway.

And the delegate count?

Even if Mittens pulls it off in Iowa and goes on to take New Hampshire (where he owns a home/enjoys a large lead), that would find him with  just 12 delegates of the 1144 he needs for the GOP nomination... big whoop-dee-doo.

What's the landscape look like after that?

Newt Gingrich leads the RCP poll-of-polls nationally by 2.4%, continuing a rebound that began last week, and reversing a trend that Romney and pro-Romney PAC-men had instigated with their withering $3M attack-ad offensive. That unprincipled and largely dishonest effort was enough to have Mitt up 1.8% for a few days nationally, but the game's not going to work quite the same in the American south and southwest that dominates the primary schedule from NH-on. Newt's taking the gloves off... and southerners never much cottoned to Mittens in the first place.

Team Romney may soon come to regret how early they chose to go nuclear on Gingrich… he’ll come out both barrels blazing now, and woe be unto the unholy target. Romney should be easy to shred this way in the south, he’s not their kind of guy and all Newt has to do is remind them just why that is. Polling suggests a possible Gingrich sweep of the south, with Newt up 16% in South Carolina and 7% in Florida. Nabbing that delegate jackpot would put the former Speaker instantly out-front, with the remaining primary schedule (south/west) overall friendly to Gingrich imho.

If you're expecting the 'Santorum Surge' to amount to anything from this point on, you're due for some disappointment: He doesn’t have the money or infrastructure to keep up with Romney in New Hampshire, and he hasn’t even been in South Carolina since early November. As I said yesterday, a vote for Santorum is a vote for Romney, in-effect.

Although fundraising should improve overnight and he'll be getting a lot more press now, Santorum will have to dramatically expand his campaign organization as fast as humanly possible. He may even be wise to abandon NH to concentrate on more-friendly environs of SC and Florida. 

Trouble for him is, that's Gingrich Country... Video/toons/more at Reaganite Republican

___________________________________________________

Politico   RightKlik   CBSNews   The Other McCain   American Power Legal Insurrection   Real Clear Politics   Otherwise

[Cringing Negativism Network]

I’ll take that bet.

[verity]

Jim Rob should impose a six month posting ban all Iowan freepers. lolol

[dfwgator]

In the age of the Internet, throw out all of the old conventional wisdom.

The media might have been able to squelch the Iowa results from the masses, with the Internet, that’s not possible.

Santorum’s campaign will skyrocket because of Iowa.

[GonzoGOP]

If they do, will they endorse? Reports on morning shows say McCain is going to endorse Mittens today. We shall see.

McCain's endorsement isn't going to mean much. Anyone who actually liked McCain would be voting for Romney already. As for Bachman and Perry their people have already made one decision, they aren't voting for Romney. Now they may go Gingrich or Santorum or split up. But I don't see anyone who stuck with Bachman this long suddenly becoming a Romneybot.

[US Navy Vet]

verity
Since Jul 26, 1998
verity hasn’t created an about page.

verity, an unknown COWARD since 1998

So WHY don’t you post SOMETHING about yourself??!!

[verity]

lol

[norton]

" Romney appears to be pulling into the lead with a late surge"

What was the deal with that anyway?

When I shut down the TV someone had lost the official tally but local officials had "agreed" that Romney had the most votes..?

[ngat]

“Is there is a reason to trust a pundit claiming a candidate is “finished” after this “surprise”?”

It’s not a matter of “trusting” Pundit Reaganite Republican; its just deciding if his political analysis is sound or not. The point of his analysis seemed to be the media has it all wrong and the momentum factor out of Iowa is negligible and does not lead to a Santorum victory as the eventual nominee. You said the following yourself: Santorum and Romney 25% (each). Since Santorum is the only one Romney and the media have not applied scorched earth campaign tactics onto - it looks to me like we have a Romney-Santorum ticket to look forward to. What could be more establishment than a team of two northeastern Lawyer-MBAs?

“Are we to trust these pundits who claim that Gingrich will sweep the South or that Santorum’s rise was only one time?”

Well, if Reaganite Republican was right that the Iowa caucus results involving four one-hundredths of 1% of voters and Iowa and New Hampsire delegate results for Romney would be a total of TWELVE delegates of 1,144 needed for nomination - perhaps he has made some very valid points. I don’t think voters in the remaining states are impressed with Iowa OR New Hampshire. Jim Robinson had a thread going yesterday regarding Gingrich and the long haul in this 2012 primary process that had a lot of excellent analysis in it.

[Dr. Ursus]

Diner owners,Motel 6’s and TV stations stock up before they
begin their four year hibernation.

[qman]

NDAA McCain will endorse Romney. Thank God McCain has his finger on the pulse of America.

[qman]

I’m never going to vote for santorum, but I wanted to see how he’s doing today in campaign donations, not knowing his web address I tried googling him and his web site is un-searchable, all I get is web sites professing his views on homosexuality, that seems like it might be a problem!

[ngat]

“But I don’t see anyone who stuck with Bachman this long suddenly becoming a Romneybot.”

What if Bachmann becomes, or IS a Romneybot? I’ve seen a whole slew of posts saying Bachmann’s run is really aimed at the vice-presidency and she was being a Romney surrogate in her over-the-top attacks on her rival conservatives.

[GonzoGOP]

What if Bachmann becomes, or IS a Romneybot?

Well that is one more vote Romney will get, but the problem is that it would be very hard to sell Romney to a Bachman voter. Even if she endorses Romney. If it had only been a choice between Gingrich or Romney the endorsement would have mattered, as moral conservatives don't feel comfortable with either. But Santorum is such a perfect fit my gut tells me he will pick up the bulk of her voters no matter who she endorses.

[ngat]

>>“He may even be wise to abandon NH to concentrate on more-friendly environs of SC and Florida.”<<

“Why? If he finishes second, he gains even more delegates on Newt.

Because the actual number of delegates available to him in New Hampshire is miniscule - and if Santorum is trying to eclipse Gingrich as the conservative alternative to Romney, he has to stop Gingrich from assuming that role in the South.

“So far it’s Santorum 1, Newt 0.”

Not exactly. If you are focused on delegate counts, in proportional representation states, Gingrich does not get “0”.

“Doesn’t matter what the national polls say, it’s all up to the individual states.”

Yes, and these polls broken down by the individual upcoming states, post-New Hampshire, indicate Gingrich having a better chance to take these states than Santorum.

[ngat]

Good thoughts, especially now that I’m seeing on the sidebar she dropped out. And Perry going on to SC!? On TV they were saying it was Perry who was about to go home. I guess Perry thinks those Bachmann votes are his, not Santorums’!

[fight_truth_decay]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2828546/posts

Makes me think of two guys in a race, one wins and the other disgruntled says:
.." it didn't mean a thing, as I hurt my foot on the down-slope, so I gave up the win...I didn't TRY to win..I have to be careful; as I have a big race coming up soon!"

I can truthfully say I “am undecided”, but Iowa made a difference to me in leaning toward a candidate who I have watched and admired over the years— hard working, beat the payment-meet the people, principled guy, Santorum, and hope he gets more media attention and picking up votes in “the BIG states that matter” that people tout about.

I gained further respect for the guy. Deserves a toast for his performance against a guy who probably owned the vineyard.

Everyone likes the underdog—without big money, or flashy big ads to easily see one through.

The MSM, all the political pundits were all out for Iowa, and moving on to NH, SC;

so must have meant something to someone, somewhere!

[verity]

Perspicacious..;-)