The Iowa Caucus Results

UPDATE (moved to top of post): Here's what Fox News is reporting at 7:35 pm PST with about 97% of the vote reported:

Obama 38; Edwards 30; Clinton 29
Huckabee 34; Romney 25; Thompson 13; McCain 13

That's the same order I thought they'd finish in, but I thought the GOP race would be close.

I think Obama will get a big lift from these results going into New Hampshire where he is basically tied with Clinton. He won't be tied come Tuesday. Hillary's support will crumble. After all the time she spent in the state, and sending Bubba around to campaign for her she still gets beat this bad, the aura of inevitibility is now officially gone.

Huckabee will get a big boost going into New Hampshire. He may not win there (McCain probably will), but he'll be well positioned for South Carolina. If Romney loses New Hampshire and South Carolina, he's done.

I saw Huckabee on Leno last night and he plays the populism card very well. I doubt he's a true conservative (based on his history in Arkansas and some of his campaign statements), but he will be an attractive candidate - though I think he'll have a tough time against somebody like Obama.

That popping sound you hear is Hugh Hewitt's head exploding.

UPDATE 2: I just listened to John Edwards' speech. To hear him tell it, America is a hellhole of poverty and sickness. Why would anyone vote for him?

Hillary Clinton's speech was at best an attempt to put a good face on a bad result. Much of the speech was still about her and how she's going all the way ...yadda...yadda...yadda. She had Bubba, Chelsea, Wesley Clark and Madeleine Albright standing behind her. Not a pretty sight.

Mike Huckabee's speech was completely opposite of the Dem's speeches. It was all positive. America is not a hellhole in the Republican world. I think voters will notice the difference.

UPDATE 3: Chris Dodd drops out of the campaign. Both of his supporters are sad. Joe Biden got 0.9% of the vote and has also abandoned the race. They couldn't find his supporter for a comment.

UPDATE 4: Some thoughts on the Iowa process. If you really want to see the difference between Democrats and Republicans, all you have to do is look at the Iowa caucus process (if not the speeches mentioned above). For the Republicans, all they had to do is show up and vote. It took a minimal amount of time and the voters were then free to go on with their productive lives. The Democrat process required people to show up, be assigned a number, stand in whatever corner applied to their candidate on the first ballot, and then if their person didn't get 15% they had to go stand in another corner. For many Democrats the process took over an hour. It's a picture of bureaucratic excess if there ever was one.

Which method do you prefer?

UPDATE 5: Jim Geraghty has some thoughts for all the candidates that are worth reading.

UPDATE 6: Drudge sums it up this way:

I'll be back with regular posting on Monday afternoon, though I'll try to post some updates from the Rockport Gospel Music Festival over the weekend by cellphone if nothing else.
==========================================================
(written earlier in the day) As I write this there's still about an hour to go before the Hawkeye Cauci gets going, and hopefully by the time the actual results come in I'll be able to update this post. However, the schedule of the Iowa and New Hampshire votes hits me at a bad time. I'm leaving about 9:45 tonight to head to LAX and catch a red-eye flight to Texas for the annual Rockport Gospel Music Festival appearance. I won't be back until late Monday afternoon which means I'll miss most of the postgame debate following Iowa, and much of the pregame debate preceding the vote in New Hampshire on Tuesday. That's tough on a political blogger.

If I can borrow a computer from somebody in Texas I'll try and catch up during the weekend. There just isn't time in the schedule for me to drag my laptop back there and try to stay on top of everything. I'm also hoping to post some occasional cellphone shots from the event in Texas. Otherwise, it will be a little quiet around here for a few days. Given that California is about to enjoy four days of rain and Texas is supposed to be 75 and dry, the weather timing is working out quite well.

I'll update this post with the Iowa results if they're known before I have to head out the door.

You can also find caucus results here: Democrats, Republicans

Some Dem News From Iowa

Jim Geraghty has been reporting over at the Campaign Spot a couple of pieces of news from Iowa:

• Bill Richardson will reportedly instruct his voters to throw their second choice support to Barack Obama, just as Spaceman did the other day. All three of Richardson's supporters have agreed.
• The rumor mill claims that Hillary's numbers are tanking all over the state. Could that be true, or is someone setting Hillary up as the "comeback kid"?

Then there's this new poll out:

The final Iowa poll from the American Research Group shows Sen. Hillary Clinton leading with 34%, followed by Sen. Barack Obama at 25% and John Edwards at 21%.

As for second choices: Biden supporters - 25% say Edwards, 31% Obama, 12% Clinton. Richardson supporters - 31% say Edwards, 19% Obama."

I'd like to see the sample on that one. That seems to be just about opposite of everything else I'm seeing.

This Morning's Hawkeye Cauci News

I've already given you my Iowa predictions. Here are the Drudge headlines on the morning of the Iowa caucus:

REUTERSCSPANZOGBY IOWA POLL: Obama Surges to 4 Point Lead Over Edwards; Clinton Fades to 3rd...

NOVAK: Obama win could be fatal for Hillary...

ESTRICH: Huckabee Is 'Democrat's Dream'; 'Honey, I'm Dancing At Inaugural Ball'...

TV Networks devote more time to '08 campaign than last four -- combined...

ALLEN: Playbook... HALPERIN: The Page... TODD: First Read...

DICK MORRIS: IOWA NEEDS...

RESULTS: TONIGHT...Bush Not Waiting Up...

And this from the Campaign Spot

ARG, beginning the last day of 2007 and completed yesterday: Huckabee 29, Romney 24, Thompson 13, McCain 11, Giuliani 8, Paul 6.

And, how about this?

DEAN SCREAM: RNC Outpacing DNC In Fundraising...

That hasn't happened for awhile. And then there's this story about attempted intimidation:

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) -- Iowa pastors who support Republican Mike Huckabee for president have received letters warning them that getting involved in politics could endanger the tax-exempt status of their churches.

Several pastors who have publicly backed Huckabee, a Southern Baptist minister who has support from many evangelicals, said they have received the letters, which have no return address. They have arrived in the weeks leading to Thursday's precinct caucuses.

Two letters were sent to the Rev. Brad Sherman, of Solid Rock Christian Church in Coralville. The first arrived a couple weeks ago and warned that he could be prosecuted for his support of Huckabee.

"I just laughed. No one lands in jail for this," Sherman said. "Somebody is trying to intimidate Christians from getting involved."

A second letter came Wednesday. It alleged that the Internal Revenue Service is looking for churches that back candidates in violation of tax rules and mentioned Iowa Sen. Charles Grassley, a Republican who has sought information about spending by high-profile ministries.

The Rev. Kevin Hollinger, of First Baptist Church in Algona, has received three similar letters. Although Hollinger has endorsed Huckabee, he hasn't urged his congregation to support a particular candidate.

"I just encourage people to get out and vote and use their biblical principles," Hollinger said. "I don't tell people who to vote for."

Hollinger said he doubted the letters would intimidate anyone.

The Rev. Rex Deckard has received nine letters, including three on Wednesday.

I guarantee you that whoever is sending out these letters is a Republican because Democrats want Huckabee to win. As you can see from the headlines above they think Huck will be a pushover in the fall. There's no way they'd try to derail that with this tactic.

If I had to bet, I'd put my money on a Romney supporter, and perhaps even with the blessing of somebody on the campaign. They've showed that they're not above negative campaigning and he seems to want to win worse than anybody. I don't think any of the other candidates have as much motivation to stop the Huck Express as does Romney.

My Iowa Predictions

Here goes nothing - the top three finishers in the Hawkeye Cauci will be:

• Republicans - Huckabee wins and Hugh Hewitt's head explodes. Romney is close behind, followed by Thompson who will finish higher than anyone expected.
  
• Democrats - Obama, Edwards, Clinton who will finish lower than anyone expected.

The win will be a minor boost for Huckabee, but won't be a deal killer for Romney. Thompson will get a big boost as he heads for South Carolina where he could win. He probably won't be a big factor in New Hampshire. Ron Paul beats Rudy Giuliani in Iowa and nobody cares. Fox still won't let him in the New Hampshire debate.

Obama gets a big boost and his numbers climb in New Hampshire. Clinton's support starts to crumble as the voters finally realize that she's unelectable. The idea of having Bill Clinton running around the White House again sends fear into voters and interns alike.

That's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

UPDATE: I'm a prophet (sort of).

Sunday Morning Pundits Are All Over the Place

I had a chance to watch a replay of Fox News Sunday while eating lunch today and was especially interested in hearing the Iowa predictions from the panel. In 2004 Brit Hume, Mara Liason and Juan Williams all picked Howard Dean to win the Dem caucus. Bill Kristol alone picked John Kerry and turned out to be a prophet. Dean finished third and Kerry won.

This year Brit opted out of a prediction (as the boss, he doesn't have to make one if he doesn't want to), and each of the other three had different combinations of the top three candidates. Juan chose Clinton first, followed by Edwards and Obama. Mara chose Obama followed by Clinton and Edwards. Bill chose Edwards followed by Obama and Clinton. I kind of hope that Bill is right. It will certainly made things interesting.

On the Republican side all three chose Romney to win. Bill thinks he'll win quite handily while Juan and Mara think it will be close. All three chose Huckabee to finish second with McCain coming in third.

Stay tuned.

Is This Really Democracy in Action?

John Fund gives us non-Iowans a primer in the caucus process and shows just how undemocratic the whole thing really is:

The trouble with the Iowa caucuses isn't that there's anything wrong with Iowans. It's the bizarre rules of the process. Caucuses are touted as authentic neighborhood meetings where voters gather in their precincts and make democracy come alive. In truth, they are anything but.

Caucuses occur only at a fixed time at night, so that many people working odd hours can't participate. They can easily exceed two hours. There are no absentee ballots, which means the process disfranchises the sick, shut-ins and people who are out of town on the day of the caucus. The Democratic caucuses require participants to stand in a corner with other supporters of their candidate. That eliminates the secret ballot.

There are reasons for all this. The caucuses are run by the state parties, and unlike primary or general elections aren't regulated by the government. They were designed as an insiders' game to attract party activists, donors and political junkies and give them a disproportionate influence in the process. In other words, they are designed not to be overly democratic. Primaries aren't perfect. but at least they make it fairly easy for everyone to vote, since polls are open all day and it takes only a few minutes to cast a ballot.

Little wonder that voter turnout for the Iowa caucuses is extremely low--in recent years about 6% of registered voters. Many potential voters will proclaim their civic virtue to pollsters and others and say they will show up at the caucus--and then find something else to do Thursday night.

I think it would be fascinating to attend one of these things and just see how it really works.

I wouldn't be surprised if this was the last year the Iowa and New Hampshire are given the privilege of playing such a pivotal role in our presidential elections. With many states moving up their primary elections, and other trying to figure out how to be a player in presidential election years, I think there are a lot of influential people in politics who will try and get the whole process changed. For one thing, we shouldn't have candidates campaigning during Christmas. There's no reason why the whole thing couldn't be moved back several weeks.

One midwestern governor and supporter of Hillary Clinton is already pushing for a change, much to the chagrin of the Clinton campaign:

CEDAR FALLS, Iowa (CNN) – Just days before the Iowa caucuses, a prominent Hillary Clinton supporter criticized the state’s privileged role in the presidential nominating process, forcing her campaign to declare that she did not agree with the assessment.

Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland was quoted in Sunday’s edition of The Columbus Dispatch as saying that it “makes no sense” to grant Iowa the right to hold the first contest of the 2008 race for the White House.

"I'd like to see both parties say, 'We're going to bring this to an end,'" Strickland told the newspaper.

Competing campaigns seized on the article and emailed it around to reporters to highlight Strickland’s comments late Sunday night. The Clinton campaign moved quickly, and issued a statement shortly after midnight distancing the New York senator from the governor’s remarks.

It could be that Gov. Strickland is trying to downplay Iowa's importance since it now looks like his chosen candidate might finish as low as third in Iowa.