Sometimes Iowa picks 'em -- and some times not. Today NOT.
In the GOP-sort out straw poll held in Ames, Iowa, Tea Party diva Michele Bachmann bested libertarian favorite Ron Paul as the winner. But more importantly, no one in the top 5 had any real chance of leading a 2012 GOP ticket. Iowa is making itself irrelevant in the hard political choice department.
When Michele Bachmann performed well above expectations in the first Republican presidential candidate debate, she destroyed Sarah Palin's chances for the GOP nod. With Texas Governor Rick Perry's lethally-timed announcement of his candidacy, he has wrecked any real hope Bachmann had of spending time in the political sunlight. She never could have clinched the title.
But what this straw poll really says something about is the State of the GOP in the State of Iowa. This straw poll result shows that a group of people are willing to place bets on people who have virtually no chance of really winning on a national ticket. My view anyway.
Let's look back at butter cow territory history and see what Ames has produced in the past.
In the first straw poll in 1979, most of the straws went to the Kennebunkport-sculpted George H.W. Bush. Ronald Reagan came in 2nd. Both of these guys were legitimate, possible contenders for the top GOP slot, and the Ames poll did what it was supposed to do -- tried to sort out for a Iowan Republicans a serious choice. While Bush did not win the nomination ultimately, he was the real thing.
In 1983, no straw poll was needed as the GOP was solidly behind Reagan's reelection.
In 1987, Pat Robertson who often blames the gays, or feminists, or anyone of a religion other than his own for big natural or unnatural disasters -- as he did after 9/11 -- won the most straws. So, like Bachmann today -- Ames produced an unlikely candidate, someone who really had no chance of winning nationally. BUT, the #2 slot went to Bob Dole -- who while he didn't win, was someone who legitimately could have won the presidency. At least Ames got the equation half right.
In 1995, Bob Dole and Phil Gramm won. Dole again was the real thing -- and while I'm sure I'll get hate mail for this, Gramm was also someone, in certain circumstances and with better organization, could have eventually won the presidency. Problem was that Phil Gramm got in his own way. Still, Ames was on a steady, reasoned course that year and the outcome made sense.
In 1999, George W. Bush -- the man everyone wanted to hang out at a barbecue with (or many folks anyway) -- swept the straw poll. "W" won the presidency -- so that was a real vote of confidence for Ames. Steve Forbes, who I believe never was a real national-level option, placed 2nd -- illustrating yet again Iowa's penchant for hanging together a real possibility for president along with a pipe dream candidate.
In August 2007, Romney took the straws with Mike Huckabee closely following. Again, from my personal vantage point, both of these were legitimate candidates and could have won nationally. In fact, if he were running today, I think Huckabee would probably have kept Rick Perry from having the space to get in the race and Bachmann would not have risen to the level she recently had.
But something has gone wrong in Iowa. First place to Michele Bachmann -- someone I feel is not a real contender. Second place to Ron Paul -- who while being the libertarian movement's most loved spear-carrier -- also has no chance of winning nationally. And then 3rd went to Tim Pawlenty, who was momentarily a national possibility but whose chances cratered after the first GOP debate not to improve since. 4th place went to Rick Santorum -- not a real possibility at a national level.
Shall I go on? The anti-Muslim Herman Cain, all but out of the race, came in 5th.
Then in 6th and 7th came Rick Perry and Mitt Romney -- who probably are going to be the Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton of this next GOP primary contest. They were the ones that needed some sorting out in Ames -- but the straw poll ducked them rather than milk the situation (sorry, couldn't help).
What does this say about Ames? About Iowa in general? About the butter milk cow centennial anniversary?
Well, at least tomorrow the buttermilk pancakes will still be great.
-- Steve Clemons is Washington Editor at Large at The Atlantic and is publisher of the popular political blog, The Washington Note. This article also appeared at The Atlantic.
Follow Steve Clemons on Twitter: www.twitter.com/SCClemons
Robert Kuttner: Looking for Some Good News
Charles Franklin: Why Ames (Apparently) Doesn't Matter
ARTINFO: A Hit at the Straw Poll, Iowa's Butter Cow Sculpture Enters the Republican Primary Race
23,000 Iowans spent $30 each to cast a straw-vote for one of seven oddball Republicans to be the party's 2012 presidential candidate. The winner got about 4,000 of the votes. Why would ANYONE ... possibly excepting those 23,000 Iowans and the winner of the poll ... care WHO 4,000 Red State Iowans would like to see as president?
Obama will be beaten in 2012 REGARDLESS of who the GOPs run ... because voters in this country have degenerated to the level of Pavlov's dogs ... and since Obama has failed to sufficiently "feed" them ... they will vote for the other guy or woman ... in the continuous but too-often-unfullfilled search for someone who WILL feed them!
And ... these same silly voters also have very short attention spans and memories ... and they will ignore the immediately preceding reality that they WERE NOT PROPERLY FED from 2001 to 2009, either!
I sure hope so! Isn't it well past time that Iowa and NH stopped having so much sway in presidential elections?? Every 4 years candidates and media rush to these two barely-relevent states who COMBINED have teh population of Kentucky and fewer electoral votes than little Massachusetts for no other reason than "that's the way its always been".
Iowa and NH have more than had their turn - time for them to take a back seat and let other states lead the way at election time.
We should have a simple primary schedule with 5 super Tuesdays - one a month, March-July, 10 states at a time, on a rotating basis.
It's all part of the many lessons we failed to learn in the past 20 years of elections:
1) The electoral college should be eliminated
2) There should be run-offs if no one achieves 50% of the popular vote
3) The primary system is a mess and should be scrapped and rebuilt
4) Misogyny is alive and well in politics
5) Never let the MSM pick your candidate
My speculation differs from Mr. Clemons' rejection of the straw poll results. He states that these voters simply bet on losers. What a terrible simplification of the facts.
No these First Responders to the political field-fire wanted the country to know that they reject Republican BeeS of the traditional candidates. What really happened and has yet to be noticed by the media is that the grassroot voters want an alternative candidate who doesn't parrot the Republican No Party or consent to the Welfare For All Party of the Dems. A new wind stirs in the households of Iowa which rejects the traditional party policies & solutions. That new wind stirs in the households of the rest of the 49 States according to the Comments Board of every newspaper.
Our country is so ripe to bury both parties because of their proven uselessness. Maybe a new party, such as the Peoples' Mandate, will arise out this Mad-As-Hell Generation of voters. That party will trim the elected leaders to one per State who will interact with the President and his few Cabinet Officers.
So this straw poll may just be the tip of the iceberg of a new metamorphose of the party composition.
Adam of CA.
And, of those who do vote ... generally the older generations ... MOST always have a generally long-lived pre-disposition to vote the "party line" of their particular party ... whether that party line is good, bad, indifferent ... or even absurd! (See the 2010 gubenatorial and congressional elections.)
So ... while I agree that I would like to see a wholly-new third party that actually represented the great working middle-class majority of this country to the fullest degree possible ... I also know that it would take a protest movement MUCH BIGGER and even MORE ACTIVE than that of the late '60s-early '70s ... it ain't gonna' happen ... because the younger generations that might support such a movement ... are too self-absorbed in their own little worlds to actually develop a genuine concern for "the greater common good".
It would probably be easier to energize and transform the existing DEM party in the same way the Tbags energized and transformed (for the worse, in my opinion) the GOPs ... than it would be to create a viable, majority-based third party. (???)
The problem with what you suggest is that you (and the Tea Party) seem to think that the way to form a new party is through being part of an existing party. You are not going to create a 3rd party at a GOP event. All Tea Party candidates have an R next to their name, they just are letting you know that they are far-right republicans.
So this is some kind of representation of democracy? If you are of very modest means ($30 to many people/families is real money) or don't have political connections forget you. This sounds like nothing more than a paid right wing love fest.
Most of the votes are paid for by the campaigns or by PACs, but the idea is that if you can get people to attend your tent and put in a vote, you have the organization and networking to be a legitimate candidate. It just seems odd to think that Iowa is somehow representative of the rest of the country.
The next president, whoever it is, would be nice to know something.
Paul on the other hand would not.
1. Interest rates should be raised to attract savings into banks.
2. No bailouts. Companies should be allowed to fail, and their assets sold to make new companies.
3. End wars, bring our troops home, cut military spending.
4. Pay more attention to our own borders than the borders of Pakistan.
5. Be friendly to Iran, which does not even have an air force, even if it did have a nuclear bomb. Just as we are to Russia and China.
6. Restore due process.
7. Cancel our debt to the Federal Reserve, which is about 1.65 trillion.
8. Fire the 8 elderly bankers who are the Federal Reserve.
9. End our war with Cuba.
Those are all mainstream positions. You're incompetent.
Ron Pauls positions---while easily understood, and emotionally satisfying---do not make sense in the reality of a complex 21st Century global economy and geo-politics.
Although, the Palin burnout/tailspin is fun to watch!