The first hurdle the remaining Republican candidates (am I the only person who thinks this primary feels like a horror film?) will face comes this Tuesday in the form of the Iowa caucuses. For those of you who actually have lives to lead, is how the Iowa caucuses work:
Rather than going to a church, school, community center, library, creepy garage, etc, to cast a ballot, Iowans instead gather at those places to talk about the future of the party. Attendees present resolutions for what should be a part of the party's platform, and of course, there is the small matter of nominating a candidate. Local representatives for each candidate are given time to talk, then a secret vote is taken.
The results are added up, then each caucus selects representatives to send to county conventions, where they do the same thing, selecting delegates to district conventions, who in turn select delegates to the Iowa state convention, which chooses its delegates for the GOP national convention.
Iowa is one of several states to hold caucuses instead of primaries, including Alaska, Hawaii, and Nevada, but they are the most well-known.
Iowa's caucuses (caucus? cauci? caucuseses? cacti?) are closely watched, to the point that they have become a three-ring media circus. Candidates bet the farm, along with the truck, the diamond ring, and the 401(K), on Iowa, hoping the win will propel them to the top. It's amusing, then, that Iowa is patently awful at picking winners. The only non-incumbent Republican candidate to win Iowa and go on to take the general election is George W. Bush (Obama is the only Democrat). Three Republicans since 1976 have gone on to take the GOP nomination after winning Iowa - Bush, Dole, and Ford.
Why, then do candidates live or die by this slightly absurd process that's reminiscient of frantic townspeople gathering at the school auditorium in the middle of a horror film. "My dog's gone missing!" "So has mine!" "What about them weird lights in the sky?" "Sheriff, you gonna do something about this?!"
I understand the concept of building momentum, and from a candidate's standpoint, it only makes sense to campaign as hard as you can, anywhere you can - and that includes Iowa. But from a media standpoint, it really doesn't make much sense. None of the other primaries are given this much attention. Is it becuase this is the first "primary" of the season? Who knows.
The absurdity of the incredibly bright spotlight focused on the Hawkeye state can't be highlighted any clearer than Ron Paul's recent jumps in the polls, which must have the Paulborg going nuts. But just compare the 2008 standings with today's.
Here's 2008, with Huckabee in black and Romney in yellow. Huckabee was up .6 percent on December 31, 2007. The eventual winner, John McCain, is the barely noticeable red trailing along the bottom.
And here's 2012, with Paul in orange and Romney in purple. Romney is currently up .7 percent on December 31, 2012.
If this year's results follow 2008, the eventual winner of the Republican nomination will be (drumroll, please!) none other than Rick Santorum, in gold along the bottom, who caught the same bump McCain caught.
I don't stand by that prediction, but if it comes true, count on me to be screaming "I told you so!" at the top of my lungs.
Formerly Letters From A Young American
Saturday, December 31, 2011
Thursday, December 1, 2011
Herman Cain Not Backing Down?
It was the scuttlebutt on campus Tuesday, through several reliable sources, that Cain was supposed to announce he was dropping out, and that many of the allegations were true. Then the web blew up with the "Cain 'Reassessing' Bid" story. But it seems it was all for naught.
A Yahoo! article strangely titled "Feisty Cain Presses Ahead With Bid" (Feisty?! What is he, a teenaged girl?!) asserts Cain isn't going anywhere.
I don't know what to think anymore. This is just weird. Anything could happen. Every allegation could be true. Every allegation could be false. Who knows? Why are supporters backing down now? Why is this the last straw? Why am I just now hearing from friends who say they know people who claim Herman Cain really is a womanizer?
And more importantly, why are we turning to Newt?! It's amusing how up until this point, all of the "Flavors of the Week" have been speculation. This person could be the "not-Romney."
Now it's a fact. Newt will be the contender to Romney. Is it just because we're so close to primary season? Is it because people are disgusted with the whole process? Because of all people to turn to...
A Yahoo! article strangely titled "Feisty Cain Presses Ahead With Bid" (Feisty?! What is he, a teenaged girl?!) asserts Cain isn't going anywhere.
His campaign rocked anew, a feisty Herman Cain claimed a "groundswell of positive support" from backers on Wednesday and accused critics of trying to derail his White House bid as he worked to stem the fallout from allegations of a 13-year extramarital affair.
"They're attacking my character, my reputation and my name in order to try to bring me down," a feisty Cain told a friendly crowd without naming his critics. "But, you see, I don't believe that America is going to let that happen."
I don't know what to think anymore. This is just weird. Anything could happen. Every allegation could be true. Every allegation could be false. Who knows? Why are supporters backing down now? Why is this the last straw? Why am I just now hearing from friends who say they know people who claim Herman Cain really is a womanizer?
And more importantly, why are we turning to Newt?! It's amusing how up until this point, all of the "Flavors of the Week" have been speculation. This person could be the "not-Romney."
Now it's a fact. Newt will be the contender to Romney. Is it just because we're so close to primary season? Is it because people are disgusted with the whole process? Because of all people to turn to...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

