Where Things are in Iowa

by: Mike Lux

Mon Dec 03, 2007 at 16:15


Here's my assessment of where the campaign is at based on my visit this weekend to Iowa:

1. The Obama surge feels real to me. Obama's team on the ground is feeling quite optimistic about things, and they weren't even downplaying things the way most campaigns do who are trying to keep expectations down. Most of the people I talked to while I was there predicted Obama would win, and they give him some clear momentum.

2. I think Hillary is hanging in there solidly. She still has a great organization, which is not losing any steam, and AFSCME and EMILY's List both have impressive independent expenditure campaigns working hard and at a big volume. She's keeping things very close, and if Obama stumbles at all, or she catches a lucky break, she still has a solid shot at winning.

3. My theories about Edwards fading don't seem as likely to me after my visit. His organization still seems just as strong as my last visit, and in some conversations with folks from rural Iowa that came in for Saturday's Heartland Presidential Forum, I get the impression that he is still the strongest of the three in rural IA, which is important.

4. Biden has more momentum than Richardson or Dodd going into the final month, and is picking up traction in some places around the state. I expect him to finish fourth , but he has a very long way to go to pull off a shocker and get into the top three- he's not surging by anywhere near that much, not yet at least.

With exactly a month to go, this race continues to look like a tight race down to the end, and at least right now, feels much more like a 3-way race than a 2-way.
Mike Lux :: Where Things are in Iowa

Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Where Things are in Iowa | 22 comments
My trips to Burlington and Ft. Madison recently (0.00 / 0)
give me the same sense of the race, except I see Richardson as stronger than Biden. I see a lot of Edwards, Clinton and Obama signs in suburban neighborhoods, with an occasional Richardson sign thrown in. One thing I noticed in conversations is the people who are with Clinton or leaning Clinton seem open to switching to others, especially Edwards and Obama, while those who are leaning towards Edwards or Obama don't seem to like Clinton much. The phrase I heard most often was "I've narrowed it down to Edwards and Obama at this point."

I realize it's a very limited sample in the SE corner.

Join us at the Missouri community blog Show Me Progress!

YeeeeeeeHawwwwwwwwwwwwwwww! (0.00 / 0)
Sounds like Democracy to Me!

I love it. Being an Edwards supporter I like to hear he's doing well.

Nothing would be better for the nation than for all of the 'big' three to finish in a near dead heat. Then on to NH and the rest.

The more folks get a look at the candidates the better for the nation.

And I'll take my guy against all comers.

He's a fighter and a progressive in the mold of FDR.

Just what we need.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

Caucus Math (0.00 / 0)
Given the 15% threshold in most areas, 25% in some rural districts, and the experience in most years when the eventual winner "surges" in the end, do you think that an effective two way race is the most likely scenaro at the end or do you believe it is possible that three candidates could finish above something like 30%?  Just asking...

Once push comes to shove, after Christmas, I believe it will be a two way race but I'm not saying it is a two way race now.  Also, is there any evidence that anyone outside the top 3 candidates will be viable in more than a handful of precincts on Caucus Night?  It looks to me like some candidates are in for something of a humiliating result if they stay in until Jan. 3, which is why I think there will be more than one dropout before Caucus Night -- and not Mike Gravel!

Noooooooooooooooo! (0.00 / 0)

............Not Mike...not Mike!

Oh well, if he does drop out he'll certainly be a viable choice for:

Gravel/Paul Unity 08!

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
Whoops! (0.00 / 0)
Sorry...

Low blood sugar.

Must....eat donut now.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
Good questions. (4.00 / 1)
I don't think 3 candidates will be above 30%. Biden and Richardson seem to be focusing on doing as well as possible in their strongest counties, and not paying much attention to places where they aren't already strong, so I think they will be viable in most precincts in their best 15-20 counties, and not have much anywhere else. That would give each of them in the 8-12 statewide. If Biden continues his upward trend, maybe he gets to 15.
[ Parent ]
Geographic breakdown (0.00 / 0)
Any other thoughts on geographic breakdowns? Like western Iowa vs. Des Moines vs Eastern Iowa.  Are any of the big three overly concentrated, or the second tiers?
2nd choice votes (4.00 / 2)
This will be especially interesting since the Obama and Edwards campaigns seem to be fueling each other's second choice votes.  Or is that a perception biased by reports coming out of population centers like Des Moines?

I think both Edwards and Obama stand to reach the minimum threshold in younger and more urban precincts given the strength of their polling numbers, their positions on the ideological spectra, and media buys in the final month that could create some separation between the top three and the other, less-well-funded campaigns.  (I think Clinton, with such a strong organization, will make that cut too, but I'm speaking of second-round vote swapping between the other two.)

How will the second choice votes play in rural Iowa when one of the big three doesn't reach a precinct threshold?  Will Edwards voters caucus for Clinton, or Obama for Edwards?  I'd like to see a 2nd choice breakdown of western IA for this reason...

But with polling so fluid and Jan. 3 so close, that kind of detailed breakdown will probably be destined to post-caucus analysis (if it ever happens beyond anecdotal evidence).

[ Parent ]
geography. (0.00 / 0)
As I said above, the 2nd tier candidates are focusing their efforts on maximizing their #s in a few key counties, Biden mostly in the counties where he has picked up local elected officials, Richardson seemingly in the DSM area, southeastern IA river towns, Sioux City and Council Bluffs, and in some small counties with meat packing plants.
The big 3 are more spread out, trying to do well everywhere. Edwards definitely seems strongest in rural areas, Obama in college towns.
[ Parent ]
Fake surge (0.00 / 0)
How do Obama's supporters keep saying 'surge' with a straight face when the polls show things extremely tight (and Clinton ahead today in the latest?)

Anecdotal "feelings" people get on the ground are nothing more than limited observations mixed with desire.

Sounds like the stuff I heard in the Dean, Kerry Presidential, and Lamont campaigns.

But I guess it's important for Obama to sound like he's surging and the spin machines work to keep it alive...

Spinners! (0.00 / 0)
Yeah! You tell 'em.  Obama's people spin...while everyone else is telling the Truth.

WE GOTTA STOP THIS OBAMA GUY - THANKS *AGAIN* FOR SOUNDING THE ALARM.

Greg, you and ACitizen are heroes.  I'm so glad you can see the future for us.

[ Parent ]
Past not future (0.00 / 0)
It's more like watching Obama's fan club reliving losing strategies of the PAST.
[ Parent ]
Surge. (0.00 / 0)
The polls you refer to were actually taken a few weeks ago.

You are right that no one knows for sure, but I will tell you this: pretty much everybody I talked to, including some of Hillary's top people, are convinced he's moved ahead in recent weeks.

[ Parent ]
Well if you are in Obama's campaign.... (4.00 / 1)

.....about all you got is whippin' that horsey. The minute you start talking policy or 'gasp' character....

Well, you become a loser.

So it's go horsey go until the nag breaks down in the stretch.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

Yes! Two points!!!!! (0.00 / 0)
Obama is a loser!  Yeah, hit him again. Take that, you naive fans of Obama.  ACitizen, you are simply devastating with The Truth, while everyone else wallows in ignorance. 

THANK YOU!!!!

I almost liked Obama until you enlightened me. Keep posting!

[ Parent ]
Oh? (0.00 / 0)
I am perfectly happy to talk about Obama's character.  I do think that Character Matters, and I think that Obama has the character that America is looking for this time.  He is forthright, brave, and has good judgement.  He alone of the top two tiers of candidates has consistently spoken truth to power all of his adult life.  He alone among those in the top two tiers did not choose to support the war in Iraq, perhaps because he wasn't afraid that doing the right thing would destroy his political career.

There are other candidates I like, but none of them have as much potential to be a great president as Barack Obama.

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

[ Parent ]
No question that we are in fundamental... (4.00 / 1)
....disagreement. I believe that one of the foremost problems progressives face in creating real change for the betterment of all is the belief, held by many Americans, that 'character matters'. Certainly in a relationship between two individuals of equal status where each can in fact make a good estimate of the others' 'character' I would agree. But....

That is not what the situation is when one is evaluating a politician whose 'character' you will never really be able to assess.

Think of your favorite actress or actor in a role that you liked.

Does you assessment of their performance tell you about their 'character'? Would you be comfortable allowing them to make decisions which would affect your family based on their performance?

I think not.

You are very aware that their performance is just that; something they've worked long and hard on to induce in you the desired emotions and responses.

Yet this is deemed perfectly acceptable when evaluating a politician for office.

You the citizen are presented with a carefully constructed persona and asked to subject yourself to this constructs' direction. Obama, like any good politician, has spent his life refining his performance with one aim: To be able to solicit and get your vote. To have you see things his way. To join his tribe.

I submit that 'character' is useless as a metric for choosing leaders. The fact that it is a totally artificial construct with no relationship to the person/group creating the illusion of same makes it so.

This is a fascinating election because we see on the Dem side what we've so roundly condemned on from the ReThugs for decades. The ReThugs have been running on race since Nixon. Their position has been and continues to be, 'Vote for me...I'm white. I'm just like you. And I will protect you from those who are not like you.'

And now we have Obama and Hillary saying, 'We're different...we aren't white/male....we'll stand up for you against the white racists/sexists of the ReThug Party...'

I insist that all such arguments need to be carefully examined through the lens of policy not 'Character'. Policy can be quantified, codified.

Character is make-believe.

Believe in it and you will be disappointed.

Or worse.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
Hmm... (0.00 / 0)
I think I misinterpreted my earlier post, but we are indeed in fundamental disagreement.

Where we do agree is that it can be difficult to judge who a politician really it.  They may and probably are trying to get up to see their positive qualities and ignore their negative.  We certainly do get to see what they want us to think about them.  We also get to see their record of political courage or lack thereof.

I agree that policy is important, but I don't find it fundamental.  Principles and character are more fundamentals.  Does the politician have at their core a set of political principles you agree with or at least respect and do they have the abilities and the integrity to follow through.  The best policy ideas in the world are useless if you do not have the leadership to get them passed or you are lying about what you plan to pursue while in office.

We do have to rely on our ability to judge, and hope that we will not be disappointed.  I was pleased when I spoke with Rep. Patrick Murphy and he was confident that Obama was the "Real Deal" and honest.  I know Murphy and his parents just well enough that his judgement of Obama was very reassuring to me.

You claim that Obama is trying to invoke some reverse racism is disingenuous at best.  While we are all aware of his racial background, he nor his campaign have put that forward as an issue.  I think that most of his supporters support him regardless of his race or even despite it.

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

[ Parent ]
Define "character" (4.00 / 1)
If a given politico appears to proceed through their public career with their eyes fixed on the next highest office and furthering their power, rather than proposing/supporting less popular initiatives (or opposing popular invasions of foriegn nations), does this elucidate their "character", or do you consider that a "policy" issue?

Likewise, if someone continually shows poor judgement and a lack of discretion in their personal life - does that speak to their "character"?  Either way - wouldn't it give you pause in supporting such a politician?

I agree with you that "character" can't be divined from political ads, or speeches - especially if one focuses exclusively on one or two of them.  But that doesn't mean it is irrelevant.


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

[ Parent ]
Here's some perspective (4.00 / 4)
An experiement you can do at home: Take the weekly expenditures by the top three campaigns and plot them on a time scale. Superimpose the rolling poll averages for the three candidates.

Results: They are absolutely IDENTICAL, except the polls move a few days after the money.

The ONLY thing that has been happening in Iowa since, like August (when Hillary did jump out to a real lead because Obama and Edwards weren't hitting on all cylinders and she had some major institutional endorsements) is the three of them have traded "surges" due entirely to spending patterns.

Clinton has now matched Obama's infusion of TV money a few weeks ago and is "coming back." All these shifts are very very soft and, since we're still a month out, irrelevant.

The dynamic that will decide this race -- the ad, the field program, the "scream" -- has not occurred yet. And there is really no use, although plenty of entertainment, in trying to predict what it will be or whom it will benefit.

Problem. (0.00 / 0)
One problem with your theory is that Edwards has stayed essentially stable for quite some time while being dramatically outspent week after week after week.
But I don't disagree with the main point of your last paragraph.
[ Parent ]
DM Register debate on Dec 13 (4.00 / 2)
will be a key event, particularly in light of the cancellation of the CBS debate on December 10. Many undecided voters will watch, and if Obama or Clinton stumble, that could be a big problem for them.

Obama has not faced the burden of expectations in Iowa this year--now the pressure is on him with a month to go.

Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.

Where Things are in Iowa | 22 comments
Donate to Open Left







QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.
As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment.
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
STATE BLOGS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2009, Powered by SoapBlox