First of all, we learned that we have a lot of reasons to be optimistic. If the fact that lilly white (92%) Iowa could vote convincingly for a black man isn't proof this country is finally ready for change, then maybe the fact that there was almost double the turnout for the caucuses this time around than there was in 2004, and so many of them were first time voters will do it. Combine that with the fact that 57% of those young and new voters voted for Obama and it sounds like people wanted to be heard.
(Now before you go and say "But Joe, you were for Biden" let me state I promise I'll get to that...)
Next, lets note just how many Independants and defecting GOP members voted Democratic this time around. The turnout for the Democratic caucuses was more than double the turnout for the GOP. The GOP is in serious trouble at the moment for two reasons. The obvious one is that Bush is killing them. People want to not only distance themselves from him, but anyone they perceive to be like him. The GOP tag itself is an albatross, and one that the claim "Bush isn't conservative" doesn't seem to be helping. But more than that, the pool of Democratic candidates is far better this time around. The Dems aren't burdened with the likes of Gephardt and Kerry. Kerry wasn't the epitome of change last time around, nor was he the best choice. He was the compromise candidate that came back and bit the Democrats in the butt.
Furthermore, note that John Edwards finished second on the Dem side, and Huckabee ran away with the GOP vote and it's clear that people are tired of the same old-same old. Hillary is seen as an extenstion of Bill and by proxy, an extension of old Washington, and Romney is seen as Bush's choice as a successor. Both got beat badly.
Hillary counted on name recognition, her husband, and the fact that she was a woman to carry her to victory. But not only did she lose the female vote outright, it wasn't even close in the under 30 category. And Romney with all his charm, swagger, and money, got trounced by a guy he outspent 20-1. What does all this mean? It means that (at least in Iowa) people remember the past and have decided they don't want to go back. And it means that it may stand as the day that fear mongering as a winning political tactic died, and it reminded America of it's youth and it's optimism that we seem to have lost somewhere in the past quarter century.
With that said, let's turn back to Biden. The one thing that still needs to change is how the media controls public opinion. Tier 2 candidates like Biden, Dodd, and to a lesser extent Paul and even Richardson have been doomed to failure because the media focuses so heavily on the perceived front runners. I strongly believe that if all the candidates got the same amount of airtime, the outcome of the vote would look vastly different.
Biden could not get himself over the 15% viability threshold in Iowa in the vast majority of precincts. So whether he had 4% of 14%, it still showed up as 0% when his supporters were required to stand with their second choice. As such, Biden dropped out of the race last night. And that left me with the question "Who to support now?" My answer is this: I am now going to back Obama.
Why? Because a new direction in our foreign policy and a true turnover in Washington is necessary. I simply cannot support Hillary because she continued to stand with Bush on Iraq when candidates like Obama voted against it and Biden was drawing up plans to get us out. Hillary is not change when it comes to foreign policy. She is also too well entrenched in Washington, and has too many ties to special interest groups that have been financing her campaign. Edwards is my only other real choice. His angry populist message is tempting, and it's obvious he geniunely believes what he says. But being from North Carolina and noting he couldn't even win his home state last time around gives me pause. Obama is simply the better choice for me. And if you didn't see it, his speech last night convinced me I am backing the right candidate by switching to him...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Uh, Joe, as far as the vote totals go in Iowa, the Republicans had a higher increase in participants this year than the Dems. Also, remember that the caucuses do not require people to register, and it is about as precise as online polling. Also, Iowanese vote overwhelming for Democrats, W in 2004 being the only one since Johnson. Oh, and Reagan, but that doesn't count because EVERYONE with a brain voted for Reagan.
The last time Iowa had a Presidential caucus, in 2004, over 80,000 people turned out for the Republicans and Bush was unopposed, so why even show up?
That said, if change is what people are after, they should vote "none of the above" because every candidate we have running is simply more of the same rehashed stuff from the Sixties, Obama and Clinton more so than the others.
I wish your boy hadn't dropped out, now he return to Washington to hoist more crap on us, the people that wouldn't vote for him for anything, much less President.
Two Dogs, your numbers don't add up. 80,000 Republicans showed up in 2004 to nominate a virtually unopposed Bush. This time around only 116,000 turned out for a wide open field. That's pretty pathetic.
Compare that to the Democratic numbers of 124,000 in 2004 to the 240,000 this time around and I think you can see what's going on. There is no way you can spin that to mean anything other than there is huge interest in the Democratic candidates this time around.
But thanks for playing, and have a nice day.
Bush wasn't virtually unopposed, he was literally unopposed. I can't help if you say my numbers don't add up, Iowa is overwhelmingly Democrat. Only 87,000 Republicans showed up in 2000 in a wide open field.
I do hope that everyone realizes why so many Dems showed up; to blantantly NOT vote for Hillary. Obama is nuts if he thinks there was a huge swell of support for him, Edwards came in second and he is a superhero sized moron.
This requires very little thought to understand what happened.
And again I say, you do not have to register. Ron Paul got 10% of the vote. Do you think Iowa holds a legitimate election? It's a caucus and useless. But it turned out pretty much like I figured, but I thought that Kucinich would show better.
Post a Comment