Posted on 01/04/2008 5:47:15 AM PST by shortstop
I love Iowa.
I just wish it would go away.
For the life of me, I can't figure out why anybody gives a darn who the various corn farmers and college professors of Iowa want for president.
Today's caucuses in Iowa are the largest exercise in unwarranted self-importance in the history of our Republic. Every four years our nation's presidential aspirants spend months and millions kissing every Hawkeye fanny they can find, and I think we've just about had enough.
It is ridiculous to subject the selection of the most powerful person in the world to the peculiarities and arrogances of any one state, particularly a square state. And, yes, that is both a geographic and sociological reference. But shape notwithstanding, we are a union of 50 states, with the people of each state enjoying in equal proportion power and influence in the selection of our chief executive.
At least that's how the Founding Fathers envisioned it. Unfortunately, they were all dead in 1972 when the egomaniacs in Iowa insisted on being at the front of the line. That was the year Iowa decided it would, no matter what, have first bite of the apple. Unfortunately, Jimmy Carter siezed on that development four years later to win the heart of Iowa and the hand of the country. He theorized correctly that if he won Iowa, that would give him a prominence on the evening newscast that would help him in subsequent primaries.
That same game has been played every four years since.
Only it hasn't been the politicians doing the playing, it has been the Iowans. Somehow, being an undecided voter has turned into a vocation for half the people in that state and they have developed an entitlement attitude about the national political process that is rivaled only in New Hampshire. Every numbskull pundit wannabe rakes this senator and that governor over the coals. Suddenly, waitresses in Iowa are the most politically relevent people in the country. Folks who -- some of them -- don't have two brain cells to rub together are driving the national debate.
It is insane.
It is also humiliating.
Because the next president of the United States should not have to sell his or her soul to a bunch of country bumpkins. This "first in the nation" thing has so effected Iowans that many of them have their noses in the air. They know the candidates need their votes and they make the candidates act like beggars to get them. There is honestly a very debasing aspect to the Iowa and New Hampshire process. Where as a candidate can speak his or her mind if they're speaking to the entire nation, when they are talking to a very small and very important constituency -- the hobnobbers of Iowa -- they have to be currying favor from beginning to end.
Some people think that is a good idea.
They shouldn't.
Because, unless you live in Iowa or New Hampshire, this process doesn't serve you or your nation. Instead, it makes extremely important the perspectives, priorities and peculiarities of a tiny fraction of the American electorate. It makes candidates kowtow to people who, though wonderful Americans, are not representative Americans. Iowa is not a thin slice of America, it is a thin slice of Iowa. Answering the questions of New Hampshire does not answer the questions of America.
And it is preposterous and insulting to think that cautious Iowans perform a national service by vetting candidates the rest of America can only see on TV commercials. The argument is put forward that Iowans have learned how to divine the hearts of the candidates, to look in their eyes and take their measure. That's ridiculous.
Each American has the ability and -- with today's computer and satellite news -- the opportunity to take their own measure of the candidates. Sitting in an Iowa diner does not give you any particular insight into the issues of the United States, in fact it may warp your perception of issues of great importance to others.
Neither Iowa nor New Hampshire has any geographic or cultural ties to the nation's population centers. Things that are important to Iowa -- like the insanity of using food corn to make fuel ethanol -- come out ahead. Things that are important to America -- like not wasting our tax money and inflating our food bills by using food corn to make fuel enthaol -- get left behind in Iowa. The issues of big city America -- which are especially important to Democrat candidates -- are of no significance in Iowa and New Hampshire.
And more broadbased issues, like illegal immigration and welfare reform, don't hit these two states as much as they hit most of the other 48.
If nothing else, we should take turns. Let a different state go first every four years. That would be better than this.
The tyranny of the "Des Moines Register" must end. I'm sick of these snooty, ignorant, dimwitted rubes taking it upon themselves to play such a role in selecting our leader.
We live in a "one-man, one-vote" country, where all Americans are created equal, even if they live in any of the states that aren't Iowa or New Hampshire. On behalf of the rest of the country, I'm tired of being slighted. I'm tired of 48 states being ignored by presidential candidates so that favor can be curried in two of our smallest states.
It's simply not right.
I love Iowa.
I just wish it would go away.
I'm not sure who's going to win in Iowa, but I do know who's going to lose.
We all are.
Exactly.
The idea of Iowa starting the presidential process is just silly. What it does is allow the MSM to “interpret” the results; and guess what? John McCain is the “winner”.
The Huckster can’t win the nomination, Thompson is frozen out by the big networks who are openly pushing McCain.
Now the push for McCain really begins. He’s the media party’s real candidate.
Keep dreaming. Each time one state moves its primary to before New Hampshire or Iowa, both of these states just move their primaries further back. In the end, we will end up starting the primary season for the next president the day after the current president is elected.
“Because the next president of the United States should not have to sell his or her soul to a bunch of country bumpkins.”
Feel the love.
Thompson is just “frozen”, and I know that you are right about McCain and the media.
What state should be the first?
Oh shoot. Did Lonsberry fail to mention he share the same religion as Romney?
Just wondered.
Iowa is like a one night stand. They are waking up this morning and they are hearing the crickets chirping.
Everyone is moving on and all the politicians and MSM couldnt care less about Iowa. They are just a bunch of hicks in their eyes.
I don’t think any state should be first. I think the best measure of the frontrunners would be primaries or caucuses in four or five states, representing different parts of the nation—say Iowa and New Hampshire, if need by, but also Florida, Arizona, Washington and Colorado. The other events could be a week or two later. I realize that dissipates the resources and time of the candidates but this process is kind of ridiculous where millions are spent wooing Iowa or New Hampshire during the holiday season and no one gets a true look at the candidates since they are only trying to brownnose special interests in those two states.
I like the way he writes “I Love Iowa” then proceeds to insult every Iowan. Spit.
I really dislike the smell of whining in the morning.
Hey Bob Loonberry ...Americans get the government (elected officials) they deserve.
When Socialism is inevitable, just lay back & enjoy it.
You earned it.
Ohio or Michigan would be much better choices. Both are diverse with large numbers of minorities and huge problems with a fleeing manufacturing base.
Iowa makes no sense at all.
It’s all in being first, like do we want that woman to be the bench mark of female presidents. Oh, all that money spent could have gone to a worthy charity.
Should just start with the four most populist states California, New York, Texas and Florida. Because lets face it whatever Republican wins Texas and Florida will more than likely win the South and Midwest. Whatever Democrat wins California and New York will more than likely win New England, California and King County. Otherwise the caucus elections should be on the same day for all 50 states. If we did the latter than we could greatly shorten the whole election time frame. Stump for nomination votes for six months, vote. Then stump for presidential election for three months and do the finally vote.
I think that 'honor' should be rotated among states that are at least somewhat representative of the entire population. PA, OH and FL for instance. All three have a good mix of rural and urban areas and I think are more reflective of the country as a whole.
Savage did a good show on this yesterday. The caucus is irrelevent it is not a primary. I think he said the only one that won the caucus and the presidency was W. nice track record they have.
That's a pretty broad brush. We live in Missouri, and there are plenty of people here who don't fit that description. Of course, there's a few who do.
Carolyn
The Conservatives in Iowa are TOTALLY different than the Conservatives in real America.
Huckabee has the Iowa Consvervatives “BULL SH-tted”
Iowa’s ‘influence’ isn’t ‘wrong’ its fleeting, at best.
What should worry everybody on this board is Huckabee can’t beat Obama head to head in a General election.
Its not a square state in Lonsberry’s geographic reference. Des Moines Democrat Tom Whitney, when he was running for governor in the 70s, made note that “if you gave Iowa an enema, it would go in in Clinton.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.