Iowa Caucus Report: Second Choice Politics

by: Mike Lux

Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 19:30


As many political junkies know, unlike in most other elections, in the Iowa caucuses voters' second choices sometimes matter a great deal, because if your first choice doesn't have 15% of the folks who show up at that precinct, they have to pick some other caucus to go to in the second round. What this means in practical terms this year, unless there is a surprising surge or slide by some campaign, is that the top three candidates- Clinton, Obama and Edwards- will be viable in most precincts, and everybody else will be non-viable in a great many caucuses throughout the state. That means that if you are with a front-runner, who your second choice is probably doesn't matter. But if you are for Richardson, Dodd, Biden, Kucinich or Gravel, who your second choice is will likely matter a lot.

Who are those folks most likely to go with in the second round on caucus night? One of the danger spots for Hillary may be in the politics of second choices. I am getting the word from multiple sources in the Edwards campaign that they are very pleased with how they are polling in terms of the second choice issue, and Obama people seem satisfied on this score as well, but I've also been told by multiple rival campaign that Hillary is not doing so well in this regard, that the people who are for her are solid but that she doesn't have much in the way of being folks' second choice. I e-mailed multiple folks on the Hillary campaign staff how they were doing in terms of the second choice, and got radio silence back, which I'm pretty sure is a bad sign.

That this would be the case makes logical sense to me. If you are for the wildmen, Kucinich and Gravel, Hillary isn't going to be your second choice. If you get behind Dodd because of his strong stand on FISA, or Richardson because of his strong stand on residual troops, Hillary's probably not your backup choice. And with most frontrunners, the people not with them are looking for somebody else in general, and tend to coalesce behind whatever alternative is still in the game.

The one thing that might overcome this problem for Hillary is highly skilled and experienced precinct captains. They are the ones whose job it is on caucus night to go to the non-viable caucuses and negotiate, beg, plead, and cajole with folks to join their camp. My sense is that Hillary seems to have the best network of experienced precinct captains of any campaign, and that network could help her overcome the lack of 2nd choice support. But it's a dangerous problem for her, and makes that five-point lead she's shown in recent polls a lot more shaky.

Mike Lux :: Iowa Caucus Report: Second Choice Politics

Tags: , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
I agree that Hillary is not a second choice (4.00 / 1)
for many people. If she's not your first choice, she's probably way down your list.

I highly doubt that her precinct captains will be able to talk their way out of this problem. They may help her in other ways (e.g. transferring enough supporters to another camp so that a different candidate loses a delegate). But the math doesn't always leave room for such maneuvers, and the Obama and Edwards precinct captains will be trying to pull the same stunts to deprive Hillary of delegates.

I think the second choices of Obama supporters in precincts dominated by voters over 50 will be crucial. I think he will fall short of 15 percent in many more precincts than Clinton or Edwards. If I had to guess right now, based on the voter contacts I have made so far, I would guess that he won't make 15 percent in my neighborhood of empty nesters.

I assume that his precinct captains will be told that above all else, they must try to keep Clinton's delegate count down. That has to be good for Edwards. Remember that Obama's people have decided Edwards can't possibly win the nomination.

Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.


Who will make it? (0.00 / 0)
If Obama isn't going to make 15% then I think his precinct captains should will try to throw their support behind whichever second tier candidates are viable.  They need to head to Dodd or Biden before they head to Edwards.  Obama clearly doesn't want to lose to Hilary but he also wants to beat Edwards.

There is a difference between saying that Edwards won't win the nomination and that Edwards won't beat Obama in Iowa.  I think that the CW is that it will be a two person race after the early states go, and Obama needs to be one of those two.  They may have concluded that Edwards looses to Hilary or Barack in a two way race, but that doesn't mean he might not come in second once again.

My job is not to represent Washington to you, but to represent you to Washington- Obama
Philly for Obama


[ Parent ]
if I'm an Obama supporter (4.00 / 2)
and he is not viable in my precinct, it's a tough call whether to go to Edwards or one of the second-tier candidates.

Above all else Obama needs Hillary not to win Iowa. If Obama supporters go to Dodd or Biden or Richardson and bring them up to 5 or 10 percent of the state delegates, it doesn't do anything to stop Hillary from winning Iowa.

Of course Obama wants to win Iowa himself. But if he doesn't, an "Edwards wins--race scrambled" media narrative is much better than "Hillary wins, set to cruise."

An Edwards-Obama-Clinton finish would be almost as good for Obama as Obama-Clinton-Edwards. But Clinton-Obama-Edwards-others wouldn't help Obama at all going into NH.

Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.


[ Parent ]
Interesting analysis. (4.00 / 1)
I tend to agree that Edwards may benefit the most from the 2nd choicers.

[ Parent ]
I wrote a diary dealing with the second-choice issue (4.00 / 1)
in my Iowa caucus series. Here are the links:

http://www.dailykos....

http://www.mydd.com/...

Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.


I sure wish we had that second-choice arrangement in ... (0.00 / 0)
...primary states.

primaries with instant-runoff voting are ideal (4.00 / 1)
That would be my preferred electoral system. You can express your preference for a longshot candidate without "throwing your vote away."

The caucuses with the 15 percent threshold have too many problems. Whether your vote counts for your favorite candidate should not depend on whether your views align with your neighbors' views.

Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.


[ Parent ]
Since we're just electing delegates, anyway (0.00 / 0)
what's wrong with a straight proportional-representation system?  Just go with the percentage votes won by each candidate in each state?

[ Parent ]
well she is staffing up in Iowa, 100 new on top 117 paid (4.00 / 1)
per Political wire, she's doubling her paid staff in Iowa to 217.  I think Edwards was at about 130 and Obama about 140ish, paid staff.  I like this news.  It adds to my gut feel confidence that Edwards will win Iowa and the nomination.

I know Edwards is running against history.  But voter's are starting to see Clinton as maybe too calculating, too hawkish, and too close to corporate interests.  I remain hopeful that we the people will decide this election.  The odds are dauting, I am fluid of the polls, association with the Clinton name is easy to make.  We shall see, we shall see.  The people get to decide.


there is definitely a path for Edwards (4.00 / 1)
It's pretty straightforward. He needs to win Iowa, preferably with someone else beating Hillary for second.

And it would be helpful for him to narrow the gap somewhat in national polls before the caucuses. If he caught Obama in national polls, that would change the way many people view the feasible alternatives to Hillary.

Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.


[ Parent ]
He needs to improve in NH, too (0.00 / 0)
I"m not sure a post-Iowa bump will help him enough to take NH, particularly considering that he's been semi-expected to take Iowa.  The media might spin an Edwards win as a surprise, come from behind win, but that's not really the case.

[ Parent ]
I think a strong second is only important (0.00 / 0)
a win out of Iowa could set the tage for a strong second.  It could even propel him to a win but he should definately spend the max in NH, but SC and maybe even Nevada could be more fertile for a win, and then give great mojo into Feb 5th.  The tough thing of course is the amount of money that Clinton and Obama have but for me, I like the idea of a brokered convention.  It'll keep the Democrats in the limelight, force message improvement and engage the electorate.  Now many others fear that would give the GOP some kind of advantage but I'm doubtful. we'll see.

[ Parent ]
You don't see .. (0.00 / 0)
an increase in money for Edwards if he wins Iowa?

[ Parent ]
suspect Clinton and Obama's support softer (0.00 / 0)
I'll bet Edwards, although polls lower, has a more dependable base of support.  Clinton and Obama's votes have come from Edwards and non-committed voters would could get wooed back.  and then there is the 2nd choice equation. 

Here's one theory I have.  Kerry won big in Iowa partially under the notion that he was the most "electable".  Well Kerry ended up losing.  So, it seems to me that Iowans aren't going to embrace the "electibility" theory this go around.  Clinton may have the mojo at the moment and an inevitability aura but this could prove risky. And the Clinton's are smart enough to know it.  So, they are in a bit of a trap. 

I am hopeful that the Iowans are going to vote their hearts, they are going to vote for the future and they are going to reject Clinton's corporatist agenda. 
I hope the Edwards campaign does well during it's 99 county tour this week.


Where was Clinton ... (0.00 / 0)
in 1992? .. What were the polls like before the Iowa caucuses?  What place was he in?

[ Parent ]
Uncontested in 1992 (4.00 / 1)
Tom Harkin was really running for President and Iowans gave him 76% of the vote with most of the remainder going to undecided.  Clinton finished fourth in Iowa with around IIRC 2%.

Of course, Clinton won the nomination despite finishing fourth (or third) in Iowa and second in New Hampshire (behind Paul Tsongas).  He was hurt by the Gennifer Flowers scandal, bounced back with a live 60 Minutes appearance with Hillary and sold himself successfully as "The Comeback Kid."

The Iowa caucus was rendered meaningless by the media in 1992.  I suspect that memories of that "non-event" really hurt Tom Vilsack this year.  He had to win almost all the votes just to get a no decision.  Iowans might also be scared that the presence of a local candidate might kill the goose that laid the golden egg (not only for this cycle but perhaps for the future).


[ Parent ]
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox