WASHINGTON, Oct. 28 (UPI) -- Since 1976, when an unknown former Georgia Governor named Jimmy Carter stunned the party establishment, the Iowa Caucus has kept a peculiar hold over the presidential nominating process for both the Democratic and Republican parties.
The Iowa Caucus is traditionally the first test for candidates to compete among actual voters for delegates who go to the national nominating conventions. Held nine days before the first primary contest in New Hampshire, Iowa is built up by the media as a make or break game of expectations for candidates. Exceed them and fly; fall short and die.
But caucuses can be queer beasts that produce strange results. Only the most dedicated voters show up because caucus rules are arcane and voters are expected to remain for hours and vote publicly for their candidate. And because dedication is not necessarily a substitute for political judgment, many of the winners of the Iowa Caucus -- despite the media attention -- go on to win little else.
In 1980, George H.W. Bush defeated Ronald Reagan in Iowa only to be crushed days later in New Hampshire -- never to recover. Proving the fickle nature of the caucus, eight years later then-Vice President Bush finished third behind Sen. Bob Dole and Rev. Pat Robertson. Bush went on to become president, Robertson went back to predicting earthquakes and locust attacks on his cable show.
And in 2000, Alan Keyes won three times as many Iowa caucus votes as Sen. John McCain. McCain nearly won the nomination and Alan Keyes -- well, if you even know who Alan Keyes is you need to cease and desist all political activities and get a hobby.
Iowa is not much of a predictor of Democratic nominees, either. After telling Iowa farmers to diversify and grow Belgian endive instead of corn and soybeans, Michael Dukakis could manage only a third-place finish in the caucus before rallying to win the nomination. And Bill Clinton didn't even compete in 1992, because favorite son Tom Harkin was in the race.
Iowa is overrated at picking winners, but it can occasionally winnow out a loser, and that is why both Gen. Wesley Clark and Sen. Joe Lieberman decided to drop out of Iowa and focus on later races. For Clark, the decision is wise and obvious. The level of organization needed to get dedicated supporters to show up on a frigid January evening and spend several hours caucusing is beyond the ability of any new campaign operation. For Lieberman, the decision is both a strategic retreat and an admission that his campaign is in trouble.
By all accounts, Lieberman should have fared reasonably well in Iowa. He was on a national ticket that narrowly defeated Bush-Cheney in the state only four years ago. And Iowa liberals, the mainstay of caucus-goers, still adore Al Gore. But Lieberman was not catching fire in Iowa and was in danger of finishing sixth -- behind even Dennis Kucinich. (There ought to be a "Kucinich rule." Any candidate who finishes behind the iconoclastic Ohioan gets voted off of Primary Island.)
The problem for Lieberman is that it is getting hard to see where his candidacy begins to take off. He has packed his bags in Iowa and could easily finish out of the money in New Hampshire with Dean, Kerry, Clark and maybe Gephardt vying for the top three positions. Lieberman is hoping for a first place result in Arizona, but how will that really affect the race? As Arizona goes, so goes what ... Nevada?
Joe Lieberman is one of the most respected members of the United States Senate. In public opinion polls, he ranks consistently as one of the most well-liked Democratic politicians in the nation. He performed both admirably and with dignity as Al Gore's running mate in 2000. But the Democratic primary electorate today is consumed by anger -- anger about Florida chads, the war in Iraq, the 16 words that President Bush uttered in the State of the Union address, rising health care costs, and declining jobs.
On this playing field there doesn't seem to be a position for Joe Lieberman. The Iowa field of dreams is now down to seven players.
--Jim Kessler is president of the Washington-based consulting firm Definition Strategies and is not affiliated with any presidential candidate. He can be reached at [email protected].
-- United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues.
