NPR: The Word of the Night in Iowa Was Change

The Word of the Night in Iowa Was Change

Of the many messages that the candidates could take away from last night's caucuses in Iowa, it's that voters have change on their minds. For the Democrats in particular, where Barack Obama's message of change was the main reason cited by those who supported him, it became the theme of the evening. Democratic strategist Chris Lehane, talking to Renee Montagne on Morning Edition, says Obama's "impressive victory" has made change the main issue of the Democratic race.

Meanwhile, Republican political strategist Mike Murphy says Mike Huckabee has made the Republican contest in Hew Hampshire a three-way affair: Mitt Romney, a resurgent John McCain and himself. The question is can he now turn the momentum of Iowa into money and other primary victories in states without big evangelical constituencies, like Michigan and Nevada. Most observers believe he will not win in New Hampshire, where he does not have any organization of any kind (he has three workers in the state, all shared with a candidate for local office).

For Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney, the only way the results can be described is disappointing. As we pointed out before in the blog, however, they both have enough money to stay in the race for a long time.

But Murphy thinks that the big loser in Iowa could be Rudy Guiliani. While his strategy has been to "lose the first five innings and then roar back to win the late innings" he may have underestimated the importance of a strong showing in the early states. And he is not looking strong in New Hampshire, South Carolina, Michigan or Nevada, which could affect his fund-raising.

10:17 AM ET | 01- 4-2008 | permalink

Comments (Send a comment)

I get very angry that Iowa, New Hampshire and the press limit my choices of Presidential candidate!
Why not a national primary, since the conventions no longer accomplish anything?

Sent by June Moore | 10:39 AM ET | 01-04-2008

We have a national primary, its going to be on Nov. 4th, 2008.

The function of Iowa, New Hampshire, ...etc. has always been to put some faces (voices) before a sample of "real" people and ask, "Who would you like to see run for president?"
Because the party leaders (in the DNC/GOP) can't force someone down YOUR throat (at least they realize that!).

So we get to select (from many volunteers) an ever narrowing slate of "possible" candidates. Until, 2 Dems, and 2 Repubs remain. Then they "fight it out", one goes home (really upset), and we put the other on the ballot as "their party's choice".
The problem here is "machine politics". Both (major) parties "want it all". (So they can push "their" agenda on you!)
Its the whole reason for the 12th Amend. (To insure 1 party has BOTH the Presidency and Vice-Presidency)

If ever there was a petty, lame excuse to modify the consitution, that was it.
Imagine, the 2000 eelction (minus the 12th Amend.):
G.W. Bush (R-Pres.), Al Gore (D-V.P.), we all win!
But, the party machines are greedy (if not corupt), run by "all or nothing", myopic, ego-centrics. Who want to "change the way we do things".

For those who can't handle a world with more choices than "us/them, Ford/Chevy, Bud/Coors, Red/White, Coke/Pepsi", this works fine!
I, for one, think it (the 12th Amend.)is the greatest impediment to our nation becoming as great as it could be!

First place: President!
Runner up: V.P.
May the TWO most popular people win!

Sent by Harold | 11:41 AM ET | 01-04-2008

I'm not sure a national primary would solve your complaints. In fact, the money required to launch a national campaign would limit your choices even more. One of the benefits of campaigning in a place like Iowa is that it's relatively cheap, so that a candidate with less resources has a better chance against a better-funded candidate.

A better option might be a rotating calendar, so that a different sub-set of states would get a chance to be first in subsequent election cycles. As an Iowan, I am honored to be a part of that first-in-the-nation status and take it seriously, but I can't deny that there is an element of "here we go again" when election season rolls around again and wouldn't mind a break.

Sent by Amanda | 1:52 PM ET | 01-04-2008

90,000 people vote on a snowy night and suddenly we have a new president? There's got to be a better way to make a selection - like this commentary about how to narrow the field:
http://thedamedomain.blogspot.com/2008/01/caucusing-for-president.html

Sent by JaneBecker | 2:12 PM ET | 01-04-2008

Send a Comment

Comments are reviewed and edited by NPR prior to display. All comments will be read, but not all will be posted.

NPR reserves the right to read on the air and/or publish on its Web site or in any medium now known or unknown the e-mails and letters that we receive. We may edit them for clarity or brevity and identify authors by name and location. For additional information, please consult our Terms of Use.

E-mail this Page

Recipient's e-mail address:	» Up to twelve addresses, separated by commas.
Your e-mail address:
Your name:
Personal message (optional, 600 characters max):
Your NPR member station:
Are you a member of your local NPR station?	Yes No
Would you like to receive information from your local NPR member station? (see NPR's privacy policy)	Yes No
Please send me updates from NPR.	Yes No

(Information collected by NPR will be used solely for internal NPR or NPR member station purposes and only if you selected 'yes' above. See NPR's privacy policy for more information.)

Tom Regan

Blogger

About Us

This year's election cycle has been one of the most exciting in memory. At the NPR News Blog we'll do our best to bring you interesting, informative -- and controversial -- stories from our own reporters and bloggers, as well as the rest of the best of the Internet and blogosphere. And we hope you'll let us know what you think as well.

Want to learn more? Be sure to read our Frequently Asked Questions and our discussion guidelines.