Caring About the Caucuses
by Ted Slater on 01/04/2008 at 9:18 AM
I confess that I get a kick out of the Presidential primaries. Enough that in order to save a few minutes of time, dinner consisted of a microwaved sandwich dipped in a variety of sauces pulled from the recesses of my fridge.
I sat on the couch, alternately dipping the convenience store Philly cheesesteak in creamed horseradish, barbecue sauce and chicken wing sauce, watching the results come in. Though some say that the Iowa caucuses don't reliably foretell who'll become President, I was nevertheless intrigued by the final tally:
Democrat:
- Barack Obama
- John Edwards
- Hillary Clinton
Republican:
- Mike Huckabee
- Mitt Romney
- Fred Thompson
What do you make of this? Who captures your imagination? Do you think we'll see much volatility in rankings over the coming weeks as other states have their turn in the primary process?
1. Steve Dangaran said the following at 9:39 AM on Jan 4:
Ted, I too was intrigued by the Iowa caucus results; so much so that I went home and googled presidential history websites to get a better understanding of the effect of winning Iowa: since the early 70's, Carter, Reagan, and Clinton (I think this is right) won in Iowa and obviously went on to greater things. I am impressed with Obama on a variety of levels, not impressed with Huckabee tho he so boldly professes Christ. I will follow more closely now that there appear to be front-runners.
Anticipating great things in Oregon
2. Jason Ganzer said the following at 9:39 AM on Jan 4:
You forgot Republican candidate Ron Paul! He is the only one that captures my imagination. Well I guess Huckabee if you count his cheesy Chuck Norris endorsements, but it's that very reason that make me leary of the guy. I heard the made the ad thinking he didn't stand a chance. Who wants a President that thought they didn't even stand a chance?
3. erin said the following at 11:59 AM on Jan 4:
I was highly amused by Chuck Norris' constant smiling after Huckabee was declared the winner. His teeth have to be fake. And one of the political pundits referred to Huckabee once as "Huckability" when talking about viability. Who knew the caucus could be so funny?
4. Carrie (the original) said the following at 12:00 PM on Jan 4:
My stomach got queezy when I heard what reporters were saying about the results. They turn into an issue of race, gender, and religion. That is just sad.
If people are voting for Obama simply because he is black or Clinton simply because she is a woman or Huckabee because they heard him profess Christ, they are emotional voters who are refusing to think about who they are voting for. The only questions we should be asking about candidates, democrat or republican, are (1) what do they stand for? (2) what is their record? (3) are they who they say they are? (4) what is their plan?
The only candidate that I have heard lay this out without ever changing their story is Ron Paul. I've only been paying attention to Republican candidates though. Without even really consciously paying attention to Hillary I can see she would be a bad choice. That is why I'm astonished that people actually support her.
I'm not too big on voting Democrat though because I don't want more government and more taxes. I want less. The only one who really promises that, in word and in record, is Ron Paul.
5. Randy said the following at 12:49 PM on Jan 4:
I blogged about this but in general I think it is obvious that the country wants real change. We also want authenticity. I personally don't like Barack but I trust he says what he believes and the same with Huckabee. Even Thompson and McCain pulling up quick speaks to the fact that you know you get what you see.
6. Andrew R. (aka Canadian Boy) said the following at 1:30 PM on Jan 4:
Obama's speech last night was the first of his that I've ever heard. Until then, I was rooting for Clinton, and I didn't see Obama as having a chance.
My mind is changed now. I can fully see him moving into the White House in a year.
7. John said the following at 8:36 PM on Jan 4:
Carrie makes a good point, the vote should be reserved to land holders. (Maybe extending what she said a tad)
Looks like we're going to get a Bush Redux for the Republican nod and an empty suit for the Democratic nod.
Huckleberry is a "compationate conservative" at best and a two faced liberal at worst (or in actuality)
It's sad to see so many christians duped again by a nominal again.
But I guess the pickins is slim.
Ya gotta be a Governernor or vice president to win. (I guess rich and good looking doesn't hurt) Too bad Romney's got such a liberal past and is a cult member.
I really don't think Huckaberry can win moderates, undecideds nor indepedents in the general election, especially with smooth talking B. Huss
I predict a split vote for some indepedent and republican like in 1992 and the dem gets the white place.
8. Jared said the following at 9:11 PM on Jan 5:
I was very interested in Huckabee's win because I decided to support him many months ago before he was polling good numbers in the country. Here are a few reasons I like Mike.
First of all, I agree with his stance on the issues that are important to me more than I agree with any of the other candidates. What are these issues? Namely the sanctity of life at ALL stages, the support of our military and commitment to fight global terrorism, immigration reform, tax reform and the promotion of government policies which foster the growth and health of the traditional family.
Secondly, of all the Republicans in the field I believe he is the most electable nationally. Giuliani is frankly too impulsive, comprimising, double-minded and, well, liberal. Romney is, I believe, a very good man and a proven manager and administrator, but his campaign is not well-run and he doesn't have what it takes - in either experience or personal strength - to stand toe to toe with Hillary on the national stage. McCain would make an excellent Vice-President - that's all I'll say about him...and Thompson is a joke...does anyone know why 1) he entered the race or 2) why anyone thinks he'd be a good president?
Compared to these other four candidates Huckabee is not the most experienced in the area of foreign policy. He's not the most experienced in the area of federal monetary policy. He's not the most experienced when it comes to directing a national campaign....I could go on and on. We've all heard these slams on Huck. But isn't that what they said about Reagan? He wasn't experienced? He was too funny? He didn't have enough ties in Washington to form an effective government against a Democrat Congress? Blah blah.
The reason why Reagan was great, and why I believe Huckabee is/will be great, is because of the principles by which he lives - the principles that guide him in public office. Faith. Family. Freedom. He's proven as a governor that he's not out to impose his personal religious beliefs on the electorate, but he does use the noble values and principles of his Faith to guide his decision making - Love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength and Your Neighbor as Yourself. He embodies these things. And as a result we see the record of a man who looked out for the best interest of the people he governed instead of just his party or bank account.
I'm rambling, but the long and short of all this is that I don't think the man's perfect, but I think he's the best for the job. By far. And he's got my vote in Maryland on February 12th whether or not he's still in the running at that time.
9. Karen said the following at 3:22 PM on Jan 6:
I was very interested in the results, mainly because I have been a fan of Huckabee since his very first televised Republican debate. He presented his views very clearly and articulately (while that should be a given for any presidential candidate, sadly for too long it has not been).
My thoughts on the reasons behind the results in Iowa are that Huckabee and Obama to a certain extent represent, in the words of the media, "two sides of the same coin" I feel that they both have run largely positive campaigns, with positive messages, and in my personal opinion seem like the most sincere candidates. Obama, though pretty left-wing, seems to want to position himself as a uniter. I also think that some of Huckabee's more liberal views on issues such as immigration, for example, position him as a uniter as well. They both seem to want to move beyond the dividing lines of this two party system that has become, in a word, silly. I have observed that, rather than telling people what they want to hear, both candidates have articulated their visions for the country and are banking on their messages being what people want to hear. I think most people recognize, appreciate, and respond to that level of honesty and sincerity, whether or not they agree with each candidate's particular vision across the board.
I am now even more interested to see how Huckabee fairs in New Hampshire.