Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MineralMan

(146,286 posts)
Sun Jan 1, 2012, 12:48 PM Jan 2012

Iowa Doesn't Matter.

Right now, the upcoming caucuses in Iowa are blitzing the news. Frankly, that's because it's the only game that's on. But, Iowa doesn't really matter. Its caucuses are not in any way reflective even of Republican voters in that state. It's little more than a popularity contest for the most conservative of voters. There's lots of free food and handshaking by the candidates, and it makes Iowa caucus goers feel really important. That is enhanced by the attention given to their antics by the national media.

It's the only game being played just now. The media wants desperately to move into the lucrative campaign season, and there's Iowa sitting there with all the GOP candidates scrambling to win what is a meaningless vote. The real selection process begins with New Hampshire, where real voters turn out and actually cast ballots in a primary election. Then there's South Carolina, and all the other states that do more than gather in people's living rooms and hotel conference rooms to get counted.

But, when there's only one football game on television, football fans watch it. When there's only one piece of election news happening, the media covers it. And there it is.

Oh, there will be fallout from Iowa. Michele Bachmann will finally drop out, after getting no further support, even in Iowa. It may be that another candidate or two fall back to non-competitive status. But, it won't make any difference in deciding who the Republican candidate will be in November. Not a bit of difference.

Iowa Doesn't Matter.

18 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

BootinUp

(47,141 posts)
1. I thought it mattered in 2008 though.
Sun Jan 1, 2012, 12:52 PM
Jan 2012

I am not a historian on elections or anything, but it seems to have played an important role at times. What about in '76?

I am most familiar with the Dem side primaries

Jackpine Radical

(45,274 posts)
2. I'm not even convinced that the Republican Primary season matters.
Sun Jan 1, 2012, 12:53 PM
Jan 2012

This could well end up as a brokered convention, with some now-unsuspected candidate coming out as the candidate.

MineralMan

(146,286 posts)
3. You may well be right.
Sun Jan 1, 2012, 12:59 PM
Jan 2012

If Mitt Romney ends up as the candidate after the Convention, then it was all a waste of time for the GOP. He's been the presumptive candidate from the very beginning, as far as I'm concerned. He's surrounded by fellow candidates, each of whom has at least one fatal flaw in November. Each of those candidates has a small following that is very vocal and very stupid, for the most part.

I cannot imagine Ron Paul or Newt Gingrich becoming the candidate at the Convention. I don't think there's a chance in hell of that. The rest are minor players, with no hope of a win. Santorum has no Presidential qualities, and is massively boring. Huntsman has the same issues. Bachmann? Well, she was a cartoon candidate from the very beginning. A little spike for a moment and back to oblivion.

I'm about 90% certain that President Obama will be facing Mitt Romney in November. The only possibility other than him is Gingrich, and his star faded before it even reached full brightness. Paul is not really a Republican in the first place. I think this is finished.

gateley

(62,683 posts)
7. Kind of OT -- but what precipitated Newt's downfall?
Sun Jan 1, 2012, 01:31 PM
Jan 2012

We were hearing he was kicking butt, he was the darling 'o the day, then I began hearing he was slipping in the polls.

I missed how/why/when.

I have to agree that this caucus doesn't really mean anything is a lock (as evidenced by Huckabee's win)- and I love how you described it.

I'm uncomfortable with any of the Republican candidates, but maybe least afraid of Romney. Sigh. All I know is we have to keep anybody with an (R) behind his name far, far away from the Oval Office.

BootinUp

(47,141 posts)
10. The attacks from within his party really
Sun Jan 1, 2012, 01:37 PM
Jan 2012

He took some missiles from several directions as I recall. Not being a good leader when he was in congress for example.

gateley

(62,683 posts)
17. Yeah, when the Big Name Republicans started publicly trashing him, that had to
Sun Jan 1, 2012, 02:15 PM
Jan 2012

make those who were paying attention re-examine their enchantment with him.

 

RevStPatrick

(2,208 posts)
11. Newt's downfall was caused by Newt.
Sun Jan 1, 2012, 01:46 PM
Jan 2012

He was never in it to win.
He does not have a serious organization.
A big chunk of his campaign staff quit months ago, because they could tell he wasn't in it to win.
He's not on the ballot in some states.
It's a vanity run, designed to jack up his speaking fees.
He just got a little further than he expected in the polls, and has had to pretend that he's serious.
Actually, I think he's really running for Vice-President.
He wants to be the evil behind the scenes, like his hero Darth Cheney.

gateley

(62,683 posts)
14. I was actually wondering if he was pissed that he might actually
Sun Jan 1, 2012, 02:07 PM
Jan 2012

have to become the candidate! I was surprised he didn't drop out a while back. Must have had a few more books to sell to finance the trip to Greece.

MineralMan

(146,286 posts)
12. Newt, himself, precipitated his downfall.
Sun Jan 1, 2012, 01:50 PM
Jan 2012

Once he starts opening his mouth, people flee from the foul odor that comes from the excrement that appears.

gateley

(62,683 posts)
16. But too many people slap on the nose plugs and pretend they don't smell anything, so
Sun Jan 1, 2012, 02:12 PM
Jan 2012

I'm glad for whatEVER reason, he's going down.

The Magistrate

(95,244 posts)
13. People Started To Recollect Who He Was, Ma'am
Sun Jan 1, 2012, 01:52 PM
Jan 2012

"You only get two mistakes, and usually your second is someone remembers your first one."

gateley

(62,683 posts)
15. I was wondering where you were!
Sun Jan 1, 2012, 02:10 PM
Jan 2012

But as we know, Your Honor, people choose to see/hear what they want to see/hear, and I feared they'd convinced themselves that this was the New Newt. Thank God I underestimated them. He scared me a LOT.

customerserviceguy

(25,183 posts)
18. Two weeks ago, I would have agreed with you
Sun Jan 1, 2012, 02:34 PM
Jan 2012

And wholeheartedly, at that. I've long wanted a brokered convention where Romney is seen as 'stealing' the nomination, that would permanently piss off the fundies and the tea partiers, both groups would then set about the task of tearing the GOP up so they could remake it 100% in their image.

Then came the Santorum bubble. His hot blob hit the top of the lava lamp just at the right time. There are no more debates to skewer him before Iowa and New Hampshire, and while Romney and the others may well try in the lead-up to SC and FL, those states are a natural for him.

I really do see a scenario where he can grab the brass ring (or be considered inevitable for it) by the end of March. He's got two full US Senate terms and four more years in Congress under his belt, his credentials with the fundies are as solid as anyone's could ever be, and the establishment Republicons are OK with him, even though his homophobia makes some of them a bit nervous.

The only thing that might derail him is how the tea partiers feel about his earmarks. He can do a come-to-Jaysus moment on that, and simply state that it was wrong to have earmarks, and that he no longer supports them, we just have a new political reality where we've got to balance the budget and reduce the deficit. That's at least as easy to sell as any of Romney's flip-flops. I saw him make noises in that direction on MTP today.

I'm actually a bit afraid this morning, sort of like what I felt when Newt's campaign imploded last summer, and his experts went to Rick Perry, and Rachel Maddow showed me just who Rick Perry was. I sure hope she can go after Santorum when the time comes.

 

4dsc

(5,787 posts)
4. You're wrong
Sun Jan 1, 2012, 01:06 PM
Jan 2012

Iowa does matter because it showcases the nutjobs of the GOP to the American people. We are given a look into their how they want this country to be run and its not pretty to most intelligent people.

Iowa does matter.

MineralMan

(146,286 posts)
6. The candidates will showcase their idiocy with or without
Sun Jan 1, 2012, 01:26 PM
Jan 2012

Iowa. I'm saying that Iowa doesn't matter in the process of selecting the GOP candidate this year.

gateley

(62,683 posts)
8. But I don't think The American People really pay that close attention until there's a name
Sun Jan 1, 2012, 01:33 PM
Jan 2012

on the ballot.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Iowa Doesn't Matter.