What Do the Iowa Caucuses Mean?
Don’t read too much in to Mitt Romney’s narrow victory in the Iowa caucus. There’s no question that the relatively small state of Iowa has an outsize influence both on the presidential nominating process and—as a result—on the national political agenda. But that doesn’t mean that the roughly 120,000 Iowans who voted in this year’s caucus will determine by themselves who the eventual Republican nominee will be.
As Fordham professor Monika McDermott explained earlier this week, winning the Iowa caucus hardly guarantees winning the Republican nomination. Consider that the winners of the last five contested caucuses were George H.W. Bush in 1980, Bob Dole in 1988, Bob Dole again in 1996, George W. Bush in 2000, and Mike Huckabee in 2008. Of those five just two—Dole in 1996 and George W. Bush in 2000—went on to win the Republican nomination that year. Of course, both George H.W. Bush and Bob Dole won the Republican nomination 8 years after winning Iowa. In other words, the winner of the Iowa Republican caucus is just as likely to win the Republican nomination 8 years later as they are the year they actually win the caucus. So maybe, as McDermott said—I think she was joking—we should expect Mike Huckabee to win the Republican nomination in 2016.
It’s not that I have doubts about Mitt Romney’s ability to win a national campaign. Nor is it that the race was a virtual tie, which in a sense is victory for Rick Santorum. The truth, as McDermott said, is that it’s still early in the nominating process. Iowa caucus voters are hardly representative of the party as a whole. Among other things, as Big Think’s Kris Broughton says, Iowans as a group are considerably more white than the general electorate. In addition, the way the caucus is structured tends to discourage ordinary rank-and-file voters from participating. As a result, the Iowa caucus tends to be dominated by more politically active—and more conservative—Republicans. In 2008, 45% of Iowa Republican caucus voters identified as themselves as “very conservative,” compared to just 21% of New Hampshire Republican primary voters. That may be why conservative candidates tend to outperform their poll numbers in the Iowa caucus.
Mitt Romney may yet win the nomination. Like most political observers, I think that he has fewer serious weaknesses than his major rivals. But the Iowa caucus is the just the first part of a long winnowing process. It provides a substantial boost for candidates like Santorum who outperform their expectations. And candidates who can’t compete at all in Iowa—particularly conservative candidates like Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann—probably don’t stand much chance of winning the nomination. But whether Romney will actually go on to win himself it is still anyone’s guess.
Upstreamism advocate Rishi Manchanda calls us to understand health not as a "personal responsibility" but a "common good."
- Upstreamism tasks health care professionals to combat unhealthy social and cultural influences that exist outside — or upstream — of medical facilities.
- Patients from low-income neighborhoods are most at risk of negative health impacts.
- Thankfully, health care professionals are not alone. Upstreamism is increasingly part of our cultural consciousness.
It marks a major shift in the government's battle against the opioid crisis.
- The nation's sixth-largest drug distributor is facing criminal charges related to failing to report suspicious drug orders, among other things.
- It marks the first time a drug company has faced criminal charges for distributing opioids.
- Since 1997, nearly 222,000 Americans have died from prescription opioids, partly thanks to unethical doctors who abuse the system.
A new study shows that some men's reaction to sex is not what you'd expect, resulting in a condition previously observed in women.
The real Game of Thrones might be who best leverages the hit HBO show to shape political narratives.
- Sen. Elizabeth Warren argues that Game of Thrones is primarily about women in her review of the wildly popular HBO show.
- Warren also touches on other parallels between the show and our modern world, such as inequality, political favoritism of the elite, and the dire impact of different leadership styles on the lives of the people.
- Her review serves as another example of using Game of Thrones as a political analogy and a tool for framing political narratives.
SMARTER FASTER trademarks owned by The Big Think, Inc. All rights reserved.