It's Huckabee and Obama in Iowa ...

... and by healthy margins.  What does it mean for the upcoming series of primaries in New Hampshire, South Carolina, Michigan and Florida?

Comments

[Fred Gregory]

Did you see that nauseating, MEGO, Edwards socialist , drag out the halt, lame , blind, Tiny Tim etc, declaring, " victory " harangue ? A Dean scream moment in '08? He is in a dreamworld if he thinks his Marxist message is going to resonate with one America.

What does Iowa mean down the road . Well in a real world it shouldn't mean s--t to a train. Is this anyway to choose a President ? I think not.

[Stan]

Come on Obama in NH!!!

[Joe Guarino]

Fred, at minimum, I would have to believe that these results put considerable pressure on Hillary and Romney to win in New Hampshire.

[Bubba]

It looks like Hillary will take NH, but Obama will maintain some mommentum. Edwards is dreaming if he thinks the Iowa results do anything but prolong the inevitable defeat that's coming for him.

McCain should win in NH, but Romney has an outside chance. Iowa may well be the apex of the Huckabee campaign.

[Bubba]

Here's what Power Line's Paul Mirengoff says, and it makes sense.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/01/019450.php

[Joe Guarino]

Bubba, I agree with you about the Democrat side (unless Obama's victory in Iowa changes the dynamics in New Hampshire).

I really try to look at the Republican side as half-full rather than half-empty. I think Romney may be history; and the three GOP "front-runners" ironically now appear to be Huckabee, McCain and Giuliani. And I think each of them will have some very good things to offer the nation; and each of them carry their own particular downsides for conservatives that we can hope will be somehow ameliorated. (But, truth be told, Romney and Thompson also have had their downsides).

You ideally would like to have your candidate be electable, likable, charismatic, inspiring, and, of course, right on the issues. So much depends on the appearance they give on TV. But it is very hard to get all of those desired attributes in one package.

[Stormy]

Orson Scott Card had a great column in this week's Rhino under the Civilization Watch. He analyzed the candidates (before Iowa)based upon their words and actions on the Bhutto assassination.

In short, if you believe that foreign affairs expertise is important in our next President, then most of these candidates are not close to competent, especially Obama, Clinton and Huckabee.

My sense is that to Democrats, the important thing is social justice matters. In essence, they are inwardly focused. Get our troops and presence out of wherever they are around the world and bring them home. Republicans tend to have more focus on the world events and how they affect us.

If you believe that world events are important in our lives and our President needs to be competent in dealing with them, then there are just a couple who are ready. It looks as though McCain and Rudy are the two that are best prepared. Of course, a majority of people in this country seem to not be most concerned with world affairs. But, I'm starting to get concerned, if our choice is going to be Huckabee or Obama or Hillary. Huckabee has no clue. As someone said, Huckabee is another Jimmy Carter in the making, in so many ways.

[Brenda Bowers]

Huckabee and Romney have been overstating their records outrageously. I feel confident they will both be knocked out of the race in states with more sophisticated populations. At least I certainly hope so since like Stormy I don’t believe Huckabee has a clue about foreign relations and that is where any president elected this year will need to be strong. Romney has been caught lying about his lies. One week he says one thing and the next week something else and neither one is true if you check out the facts. As for me I am still backing the only candidate I feel has a chance at doing what our next president needs to do: Rudy.

Obama and Edwards was a surprise. I guess I gave Hillary more credit than she had. Unfortunately all three would be a disaster as president at this time in world events. Obama because he has nothing to offer but dreams; Clinton and Edwards because they are both egotist who will say or do anything to win and be bloody tyrants in office.

In short, I really don't think what happened in Iowa will mean a whole lot in the rest of the country. BB

[Joe Guarino]

Stormy and Brenda, I agree that Huckabee would have some catching up to do on foreign policy, as most former Governors do, if he were to assume the presidency. Few ex-governors tend to be prepared for this aspect of the presidency, excepting Reagan who had spent years writing and speaking about it.

I imagine Huckabee would need to balance his ticket with a strong national security conservative; and would also need to make excellent appointments for secretary of state, secretary of defense, etc.

[Joe Guarino]

And I tend to agree with you, Brenda, about the Democratic field. I would be hard pressed to choose from the top three among the Dems.

[Stormy]

Brenda,

Here are some comments on the Obama/Hillary thing that I made at Sam's Place:

This defeat may have been an huge mistake for Ms. Inevitable Clinton. Her advisers told her what was likely to happen here, a 3rd pace finish. But, Hillary over-ruled them and brought in her national campaign betting on a win here to knockout Obama and Edwards in Round 1. Hillary invested a large amount of her credibility here, and Obama came away with the momentum. The worst part is that she was going to bring out voters that had never participated in the past, young women. They came out alright, but they voted for Obama. Hillary is not finished by any means, but the enthusiasm and excitement around Obama may propel him in future contests. As Sam as said, Obama won convincingly as a black man in a 93% state. Make no mistake, Hillary made a huge bet in Iowa and lost. It’s gonna get better as we go forward. Hillary is no longer Ms. Inevitable.

Obama won the message of Change over Hillary. So, what is Hillary’s message now? She’s still got Bill as her biggest asset, but he is an asset and a liability at the same time. Many people will vote for Hillary because they think that they are getting a 3rd term from Bill. Many people will vote against Hillary because they don’t want a 3rd term for Bill. We have a horse race folks.

Hillary made a big bet in Iowa by going for the knockout on Obama, and it has backfired. Obama has beat her in the one area where it has been said that she would overcome her negatives; young women. Obama trounced her in that vote. Now, where will she get the votes she needs to overcome that high negatives? Think about it. More than 70% of the Iowa voters voted against Hillary, and that's just Democrats.

[Stormy]

Joe,

Huckabee only has two assets as a Republican; he's pro-life and anti-gay marriage. He governed pretty much like a liberal Democrat in Arkansas. He has zero expertise in foreign policy and affairs, which is typically an essential to Republican voters. When we won the Cold War over the Soviets in the 90's, we allowed our defense to atrophy, and as a result, Clinton and Bush got elected as governors, because no one was concerned about foreign and global matters. 911 changed all of that.

If you pay attention to the Dems, they are talking about domestic issues, pretty much to the exclusion of global and foreign matters. Dem voters now tend to be concerned with domestic issues only. They want to bring the troops home and let the world fend for itself. A Republican candidate really doesn't have that option. A successful Republican candidate needs to be competent on global and foreign matters. Yes, a president can hire good help, but he has to start with some competence on the matter. Read Card's article in the Rhino. It is an enlightening view.

[Everest]

Joe - I think Hillary is in trouble...while I hate to count out the Clinton machine (and while Bill didn't win Iowa either in '92) she is in trouble in NH. And if she loses NH, the likelihood she beats Obama in South Carolina is almost nil....that's a lot of momentum for her to overcome. And Stormy's right... 71% of Democrats in Iowa picked someone other than her. I know it's early, but she has good reason to be worried...

The Republican caucus means less I think. Lots of evangelicals in Iowa, and Huckabee is a likeable guy, but his policy proposals - those he has put out for review - are long on rhetoric and short on detail/quality. And the line about "being more like the guy you worked with, as opposed to the guy who layed you off" is the class warfare populism that Edwards is trying to sell...and Huckabee is a conservative?? If the Republican party nominates him as our candidate, we'll lose, and we'll deserve to.

[Fred Gregory]

I realize that Iowa is a tradition but only 350,000 individuals, less than the population of Guilford County, from both parties participated in the caucuses, thus the real question is whether any single group of voters should exercise this much influence ?

http://nationaljournal.com/brownstein.htm

[Bubba]

Excellent comments.

I'm not sure how much trouble Hillary is in. Watch for NH to clear that point up.

Huck won over a lot of NC folks at the GOP state convention in 06. He spoke at the Saturday luncheon (I missed it because of campaign activity), and many of those who attended raved about his him.

when you examine his record, he's got a number of weak areas that probably make him unelectable in a general election.

I think Stormy and Brenda have it right. McCain and Guiliani will end up being the two left standing after most of the shouting is done.

Based on McCain's stand on immigration, his wrong-headed campaign finance reform legislation, and several other lesser negative points, Rudy is the choice.

[Everest]

While Rudy's not a perfect candidate, I agree with Bubba....he's probably the best we've got. His personal views on gay marriage and choice mean that his commitment to appoint Scalia/Thomas-like judges is a bit of a leap of faith, but he probably deserves the benefit of the doubt.

The one thing I really like about Rudy is that he's got some fighting spirit...and I think Republicans need some of that lately...if he dealt with the New York media as well as he did, he can deal with about anything.

[Bubba]

"The one thing I really like about Rudy is that he's got some fighting spirit...and I think Republicans need some of that lately...if he dealt with the New York media as well as he did, he can deal with about anything."

That is indeed his great quality, and one which convinces me (McCain's bad qualities considered) that he's the leader this nation NEEDS going forward.

Meanwhile, here's something else to consider:

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTUyZDY4Y2Y4ZDZjODg1YzRhN2YyYTM0NDgyNDlmNTQ=

[Bubba]

More here:

http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YzE2YmZiYTZhMzk1MGY5MmVhYzdkZmRjOTM0MzU0NmI=

[Everest]

Bubba - great info...and Fred has been my favorite for a long time. He's easily done the most specific (and most conservative) policy work...just been a lousy campaigner. As much as I like him, I'm not sure he's got the fire to win, but he might be a great running mate for Rudy - a strong, articulate, recognizable Southern conservative who also speaks his mind...I could get behind that ticket!

[Joseph Guarino]

South Carolina is an interesting state from the standpoint of the GOP primaries. While it has a large conservative Christian base, it has tended to vote in Republican presidential primaries with an eye toward foreign policy and military matters.

McCain would be favored there by virtue of that particular bias. But Huckabee is polling very well in South Carolina, and will win significant support there based on regional appeal and also from conservative Christians.

Keep an eye on South Carolina. Will it be national security appeal, as it has been in the past-- or will it be regional appeal and social issues that take the day? This is important, because it will determine whether Huckabee can continue.

One of the NRO online writers today conceded that Huckabee has that "undefinable something" that helps him connect with voters. And there are parts of his economic platform that may be resonating with some people-- for instance, the concern expressed regarding trade and exporting jobs overseas. Yes, I know that is not a classical conservative Republican position, but it may very well be a grass roots concern that is striking some chords out there.

I think, also it will be quite interesting to see how hard Giuliani works in New Hampshire over the next few days.

There was a divergence of opinion in his campaign organization regarding strategy. The folks from New York (including my cousin) have recently advocated for him to concentrate more on the early primary states. The national folks wanted to skip the early states and wait for Florida. The national folks probably misperceived how invincible Romney would be in the early states, partially because of how well Huckabee did in Iowa.

[Bubba]

"The national folks probably misperceived how invincible Romney would be in the early states, partially because of how well Huckabee did in Iowa."

Rudy definitely needs to step it up.

[Joe Guarino]

Bubba, one of the other things about Giuliani in New Hampshire is that there are wide cultural differences between many of the folks who live in New Hampshire and Rudy's NYC base.

In the south, many might presume they are all northeasterners, and therefore are similar, but in fact they are different-- different accents, perhaps different ways of looking at the world, etc. Rudy has not had any inherent advantage in New Hampshire, despite the relative geographical proximity to New York.

[Bubba]

Mark Levin:

"he biggest beneficiary of the Huckabee win in Iowa is not Huckabee, it's Rudy. The biggest beneficiary of a McCain win in New Hampshire would be Rudy.

Romney's strategy was to win Iowa and New Hampshire. He has now lost Iowa. Rudy is waiting to pounce in the next tier of states. That has always been his strategy."

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ODZjODg4YTM5YWU1ZGFlZWUzNDFjZTBhYjc4ZDA4NWI=

[Joe Guarino]

Bubba, there is no question that Romney's anticipated demise helps Rudy later by keeping things split up-- leaving an opening for Rudy in Florida, Michigan and on Feb. 5.

The flip side, of course, is that McCain or Huckabee might take off and fly-- particularly McCain, who I can see becoming the establishment candidate like Dole, in spite of the past.