Iowa wins for Huckabee and Obama

Iown Wins for Huckabee and Obama Source: BBC News, Friday 4th January

Mike Huckabee and Barack Obama have won the Iowa caucuses - the first nominating contest of the 2008 US presidential election.

Mr Huckabee won for the Republicans, defeating Mitt Romney.

At the Democratic caucuses, Mr Obama won by a clear margin, defeating John Edwards, who edged Hillary Clinton into third place.

The Iowa caucuses can give big boosts to candidates' campaigns. The next contest is on Tuesday in New Hampshire.

Loathe as I am to post this story as a non-America (I half-hoped someone else would have done already) but I am really excited about the US Presidential Primaries. I'm getting into Politics a lot more recently and the American election is far more interesting than our own elections.

The real talking points of the Iowa result are: a) Obama grabbing the Democratic momentum, and Clinton being a surprise third behind Edwards and b) Huckabee winning by by a significant margin over Romney. Clinton had enjoyed a significant lead in Iowa polls and so has suffered a big loss. Another talking point is the fact that the two winners, Obama and Huckabee, have zero foreign policy experience -- as noted in [url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/justinwebb/[/url]Justin Webb's blog here.[/url]

Can't wait for the rest of the Primaries to unfold. The lack of incumbents and the potential for a black or female candidate, added to the fact that there is no clear front-runner makes this a very enthralling contest. My hopes lay in Barack Obama, but then, it's not my country and the changes aren't going to affect me to any sizeable impact.

Me? I want Ron Paul and word is he's doing exceptional and so many people want him in power.

I'm not too sure on politics, but as long as Bush is gone, then YAY!!!

As far as I'm concerned, the only presidential candidate worth even talking about is Duncan Hunter, who has done spectacularly at the local and state level but has not yet grabbed the attention of the national media--probably because he knows what he's talking about.

The democrats are not producing any candidate I would vote for, and the republicans are very closely behind that. Obama is a walking Hallmark card, and Huckabee is a faux-conservative whose legislative actions in Arkansas do not promise a strong conservative trend when he's in command. As far as Ron Paul is concerned, I agree with many of his points on the Constitution, but he must have failed Political Science 101, because constitutional issues are not the President's concerns or objective. I feel like RP is using the Constitution (falsely) as a platform to get him in a position where he will be powerless to do anything about fixing it--which either connotes to me that he's an idiot, or that he is well-aware that his talking point is a charade and he is simply using it as a way to get in power where he can do other things. At any rate, I don't like his views on anything non-Constitutional, from what I've heard of him.


Support Duncan Hunter!

lol, it's funny that a Brit is posting this! But then again, I love following UK politics myself.

In any case, here's the Inside The Beltway wisdom for everyone:

Firstly, the Iowa Caucuses pick the eventual loser a lot of the time. Not always, but enough so that it really hasn't cleared up a lot. However, there are a few things we can say with some certainty.

Republicans

The biggest loser was Mitt Romney. He poured $7 million into Iowa on just ads, and was estimated to have spent over $17 million in the state. Huckabee, on the other hand, spent almost six times less as Romney. If Romney had finished a strong second, then he would still be alright. Instead, he finished in a very distant second. He now needs to win New Hampshire, which is looking doubtful because...

...the biggest winner of the night on the Republican side was McCain. McCain finished in a very strong fourth position, very nearly third. Why is that good? Because the average Iowan hates McCain. He's been one of the most vocal opponents of ethanol subsidies, and those subsidies have been very, very good for Iowa. But, he still managed to finish strongly.

Now the combination of a good finish for McCain and a bad showing for Romney means Romney is now in bad shape to win New Hampshire. Before the caucuses, McCain was closing in on Romney (Huckabee is nowhere in sight in NH), and now he might begin to overtake the man. If Romney loses New Hampshire, he's done for. As a former governor of Massachusetts, people in New Hampshire know him well so it's almost like a home-state for him. If he can't win it, his campaign is over.

But after New Hampshire, all bets are really off. In any case, by then it'll be narrowed to just three. One of those three will obviously be Guiliani, but the other two remain up in the air (it'll be some combo of McCain, Romney, Huckabee).

And Huckabee? He won Iowa, but unless he can turn that into cash, he still isn't going far. The base loves him just enough to vote for him, but not enough to give money to him. Yet, he would make a good VP candidate for a liberal Republican nominee, such as Guiliani or McCain, as he is quite conservative and very affable.

Democrats

While the Republican field is still wide open, the Democrat field is just Clinton, Obama, and Edwards. The biggest loser from the caucuses? Clinton by far. She has spent an enormous amount of time and money in the state, but still finished in third place. It was a good third place, just behind Edwards, but she's a figure with a national reputation and should've done better.

But troubling for her is that Obama won. If it was Edwards, then things would've been different. But Obama's win changes the dynamics of the race as it pertains to Blacks. Prior to the caucuses, Blacks were still favoring Clinton, partly because Obama was seen as unelectable even in a Democratic primary. But now that Obama has won Iowa, a mostly White state, you may start seeing a shift in the Black community from Clinton to Obama. If that happens, then Clinton is pretty much done for. She is already losing among female votes and younger voters. If she loses Black voters, then all she has is geriatrics.

So Obama is actually the biggest winner from Iowa (in contrast to Huckabee who isn't very likely to do well) and he can now take this win into New Hampshire. If he ends up winning New Hampshire, then Clinton is in very sorry shape indeed. She won't be out at all, but she will have to struggle.

Yet, Clinton is still the favorite. Nationally, she still does very well and the Clinton machine is right now the most feared political machine in American politics.

Edwards? Edwards is like Huckabee. The base loves him, but he's going nowhere. What's funny is that he'd make a good VP candidate again.


To summarize:

Biggest Winners: Obama and McCain
Biggest Losers: Clinton and Romney

(Well, if I would've posted it if I wasn't at school all day ^^)

I heard on NPR this morning that Obama got 60% of the youngest demographic (can't remember the exact age range), who make up about 20% of overall voters. Which is rather amazing, because getting us young people to agree on anything in such a majority is a feat in itself (at least, according to the older generation ) And that most of the people who voted for Clinton were over sixty-five XD So much for her 'inspiring the next generation of women' angle. In any case, I don't like her.

Glad I don't vote in the primaries. There are so many people, my head starts to spin.

Just like Rickage, I'm glad that Bush is gone. I just want to put it out there that just because there is a black person running for office doesn't mean that we (the blacks) are going to vote for him just because his skin color. Even though it would be a big change up, but we need to see who is the better canidate. I is going to be my first time voting, so I need to hear all of them speak. Can anyone tell me whose against or for gay marriage.

-_-

Obama is an idiot. I really really really REALLY hope he doesn't win.

Why do you think he's an idiot?

I watched the caucus all night. My dad and I are big politic people so we really get "geeked" at these times. My parents are mostly Republican and want Ron Paul or Mike Huckabee to win. I'm not really sure who I want to win. I'm leaning towards Huckabee but who cares. I can't even vote yet.

Support Duncan Hunter!

*snorts* Hunter for president...

You know, this will be my first time voting and honestly, I'm not impressed with any of the candidates -- Republican or Democrat. I really dislike Clinton, and I think Obama is putting on too much of a show. Yet the Republican candidates seem like bumbling idiots to me as well.

If I were 35, I'd totally run for president, just so we'd have a decent candidate this year.

(Really, though, Brad... Duncan Hunter? I'll have to look him up.)

Obama FTW. Largely becuase he's charismatic (and let's face it - after Bush, America needs a charismatic leader, if only to help America mend its public image).

Huckabee is offputting for me, if only because he rejects evolution. I don't know about the rest of you, but the idea of the leader of the most powerful country in the world favouring a bronze age myth over evidence-based modern science is nothing short of terrifying.

His opposition to same sex marriage - even same sex civil unions - is also a very large black mark against him. He even stated: "[H]omosexuality is an aberrant, unnatural, and sinful lifestyle, and we now know it can pose a dangerous public health risk."

And back in 1992, he wanted to isolate HIV/AIDs patients from the general population, even though it was well known at the time that the disease couldn't be passed by casual contact (then again, he doesn't appear to bother to keep up with science, does he?).

So yeah, Huckabee FTL.

MadHatter wrote:My parents are mostly Republican and want Ron Paul or Mike Huckabee to win

Yay, finally someone admits to being Republican!
Personally, though, I think Huckabee could be good--especially for a VP candidate. However, I (and my parents) don't think anyone should count Fred Thompson out yet. He, unlike McCain, finished third (yes, a close third/fourth, but a third none-the-less) and he has the best conservative views out of the whole Republican field.

Unfortunately, he doesn't come across well...unlike Ronald Reagan and now Mike Huckabee. If he expects to do well at all, he better get some speech/debate 'classes' now, before it comes too close to end-of-primary times and he loses the nomination.

Also, I don't think the Iowa caucuses should count much. There are still 49 states to go (48 if you don't count NH), and anything can happen.

Oh, on a Democratce note--electing Hilary would be like putting a loaded gun to our heads and pulling the trigger. Not to mention the fact that there are questions if she even can run because her husband (Bill) was already in the White House--twice, I believe. Obama isn't much better, but anything is better than Hilary.

Firestarter wrote:Why do you think he's an idiot?

In the early part of the race, he seemed to have absolutely no clue what he was doing and very unsure of himself, at least politically. For example, I went to his website and, instead of telling me about the issues he believed in and what he wanted to do, he basically had a bunch of questions like, "What do YOU think about this?" Which was pretty useless because I wanted to know if our ideas and ideals matched up, NOT wonder at what his stance was.

Maybe it was just inexperience and he's getting better, but I am slightly skeptical and I am afraid that he will be too busy appeasing everybody rather than taking the initiative to come up with and implement his own ideas. And I value creativity and guts.

So yeah. Terrible first impression. Now I won't vote for him.

Snoink: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_ ... rack_Obama