Thoughts of Iowa

The Iowa Caucauses are slightly less than a month away, and it might be time to think a little bit about possible outcomes and what they might mean.

According to the Iowa Poll, Mike Huckabee and Barack Obama are the frontrunners, although the Democratic race looks to be a statistical dead heat. But more revealingly, when Democrats were asked who they would be most disappointed to see the nominee, 27% said Hillary Clinton.

I've said this before but it bears repeating: do we really want to see the presidency passed back and forth like a baton between two families for a period of 28 years? That's what would happen if Hillary Clinton won in 2008 and served two terms. From January 20, 1989 to January 20, 2017, the only people occupying the White House would be named either Clinton or Bush.

I don't know about you, but I'm not crazy about that prospect.

So what does it mean that Obama is, at least marginally, ahead in Iowa? It means two things, it seems to me: 1) Obama is by far the most charismatic Democrat in the race, and 2) Obama represents hope, change and the future. If, as Bill Clinton used to say, elections are about the future, Obama is the obvious choice for Democrats.

Is he my choice? I don't know yet. I would be happy with pretty much anyone except Hillary Clinton. I have nothing against the junior senator from New York, whom I have already voted for twice, but I don't think she's the best choice for the Democratic nominee.

But I wouldn't count her out yet. Iowa, more than anyplace else, is about organization -- you have to physically get your people out on what could be a ball-chillingly cold night and get them to the places where the caucases are going to be held. This leads me to believe that John Edwards, who made a strong showing in Iowa four years ago, might just surprise people a month from now. In fact, I'm not so sure that an Edwards/Obama ticket might not be the best thing all around.

But what about Huckabee? Is Huckabee surging ahead of Giuliani in the Iowa Poll a sign that Iowa Republicans are so convinced that they'll be defeated in 2008 that they'd rather go with a True Believer, even if they think he doesn't have a prayer? Or do they really think Huckabee can beat Clinton or Obama or whoever the Democrats end up nominating?

Personally (and granted this might be wishful thinking on my part), I think the Republicans don't think they can win and are opting for ideologically purity over pragmatism. Maybe they're hoping that an Evangelical Christian is their best hope, given that 40% of Bush's vote in 2004 came from the Religious Right. Or maybe Huckabee is a Hail Mary pass (so to speak) on their parts.

It's hard to say. But given how ridiculously front-loaded this process has become, we should pretty much know in six weeks or so who the prospective nominees are going to be. Because after Iowa and New Hampshire the ballgame's pretty much over.

Tom Moran