Today one of the stranger exercises in American politics will unfold in the state of Iowa. I have mixed feelings about the whole thing.
In some respects it can be seen as a true demonstration of grassroots campaigning. Millionaire candidates find themselves sitting at the kitchen tables of farmers, trying to demonstrate a working knowledge of fertilizers and hoping they won't be called upon to assist in the delivery of a calf. Given the ridiculous amount of time and money invested in Iowa by the major candidates one would think they have shaken the hand of virtually every citizen in the state. I imagine Mitt Romney sends anniversary cards to every heterosexual couple in Iowa.
I went to college in southern Iowa and enjoyed the exposure to life in small town America. I have always valued those years because it gave me a feel for such a life, even though I am an urban guy. So I think it's good for the candidates to step out of their limos and walk the streets of America's small towns. They need to check out the onion rings at the Bluebird Cafe, and cope with the blank stares that come from trying to order a grande latte with a sprinkle of cinnamon on the foam.
On the other hand the caucus system, especially when coupled with the New Hampshire primary a few days later, gives the fine citizens of those states a wildly disproportional say in the selection of the president of the United States. It is ludicrous to suggest that these states are representative of the country, but the selection of the candidates will be a done deal long before the citizens of most states will even know who's running and why.
The truth is that in the next week a few thousand voters are likely to determine the two people who will run for the presidency in 2008. That troubles me very deeply.
Perhaps I shouldn't fuss about it. It could be worse. In 2000 the President of the United States was "elected" in a cloistered room by nine people in black robes.
Dare I say that the result of that decision demonstrates the wisdom of wider consultation?
Amen! Having been born and raised in Iowa (about 25 miles from that college you attended) and then spending most of my adult life outside of that wonderful state - I can assure you those folks do not represent a cross section of the nation as a whole. I doubt New Hampshire does either.
ReplyDeleteBruce Babbitt (former Gov of Ariz) made a proposal for a regional system of primary and caucuses in 1988. It was a good idea, they are floating out there. I would maintain the caucuses have had a positive impact on the process and the entire state.
ReplyDeleteyes it is unfair, but come on Mr. Murray, who ever said life was fair? ;-)
I appreciated the comment about the folk in black robes picking the president in 2000.
ReplyDeleteWell, regardless of whether one agrees or disagrees with my initial post on this topic, it must be said that tonight's results brought about some political theater of high order. Great fun for political junkies like me.
ReplyDeleteLast night was like Christmas all over again!
ReplyDeleteIn November there will be a new president and that is cause for hope...might it be that the Republicans are shooting themselves in the foot the way the Democrats usually do?
ReplyDeleteI couldn't agree more with your post Grant! It has been heavily on my mind since yesterday. I am only old enough to have voted in one prior presidential election. I didn't understand how it all worked in 2004. Now, that I do and realize how much power these rather insignificant states have it frustrated me.
ReplyDeleteI think there should be a law that all caucuses and primaries are to take place on the same day. This would make the playing field as far as possible.
As for the results. I like Obama but I just don't feel he is the right person for this election. I am a Clinton fan. I would love to see Obama as VP though!