Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

A win or a big showing in Iowa will give Obama's dream campaign an adrenalin shot, but it will be far from their final test.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

What Iowa Will and Won't Do for Obama

By Earl Ofari Hutchinson, New America Media. Posted January 2, 2008.


A win or a big showing in Iowa will give Obama's dream campaign an adrenalin shot, but it will be far from their final test.
Advertisement

Some weeks ago former Bush political operative Karl Rove put it bluntly to Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama; win Iowa or lose the Democratic nomination. A month before Rove's admonition, Obama's wife, Michelle, told her hubby pretty much the same thing; win Iowa or lose the nomination.

Obama moved fast to distance himself from his wife's blanket assertion about Iowa. He assured that Iowa is only one state and that a loss there wouldn't spell doom for his campaign. But even as he downplayed his wife's remark, and was publicly mute about Rove's Iowa rejoinder, he knew better.

In fact, virtually from the moment he stood on the steps of the state capitol building in Springfield, Illinois last February and announced the launch of his "Dream campaign" he knew that Iowa was big, very big, so big that he dumped more money into his campaign there, opened more field offices there than Hillary Clinton and John Edwards, and virtually camped out in the state.

A win there certainly gives a candidate a rocket launch boost in public and party standing, much media attention, and potentially piles of campaign money. Iowa did much for underdog John Kerry and sunk frontrunner Howard Dean in 2004.

Kerry won Iowa and bagged the nomination, and Dean bungled it, he quickly became a laughingstock and a bare campaign 2004 footnote. An Iowa win won't do that for Obama, but to put it bluntly it will give a hint whether he can get a majority or at least a significant percent of whites to vote for him. Iowa is one of the whitest and most rural states in the union. White voters make up more than ninety percent of the state's voters. That poses a possibility and a pitfall. He will have to convince the voters that he can deliver on his promises on health care, revving up the economy, labor protections, can wind down the Iraq War, and wage a tough war on terrorism.

He then must hope and pray that enough of them buy his message, and not succumb to the dread voting booth conversion on Election Day. That is the penchant for white voters to swear to pollsters and interviewers that they are absolutely color-blind when it comes to black candidates, and that the only thing they judge them on is their record and qualifications. And then once in the quiet and very private confines of the voting booth, develop collective amnesia and vote for the white candidate. Voting booth conversion has spelled doom for legions of black candidates that were thought to be shoo-in winners in head to head contests against white opponents, and then go down to crashing defeat on Election Day.

Polls have shown that Obama will either win Iowa or make a big showing there, and the odds are good that in this case the polls are accurate. He is riding what appears to be a genuine crest of public goodwill, and mixed with his likeability, personal appeal, charisma, and media fawning, that should be enough to convince enough white Iowa voters that he is a legitimate change agent and can bring the directional shift that millions of American voters say they desperately crave away from Bush's disastrous domestic and foreign policies.

But while Iowa is important for Obama, it's also an aberration among the heartland states. It is moderately Democratic leaning, has a mild populist tradition, and voters are known to be independent on candidates and issues. These are the exact opposite traits of the other heartland states which are traditionalist, deeply conservative, and rock solid Republican.

No white Democratic presidential candidate has managed to crack them in recent elections, and that includes Bill Clinton. He won not one heartland state in 1996. These states are a far better gauge of whether Obama can really convince millions of white voters, especially white male voters, who still make up nearly forty percent of the country's voters and have been the path to the White House for Nixon, Reagan, Bush Sr., and Bush Jr.

Clinton who slightly dented the GOP lock on the South had to deftly pirouette and convince the voters there that he would not pander to special interest i.e. minorities and women. Even if Obama is able to speak the language of white voters in Iowa, and convince them that he's not a black presidential candidate, but a color neutral presidential candidate, that won't lift the clouds of suspicion about him in the other heartland states.

A win or a big showing in Iowa will give Obama's dream campaign an adrenalin shot, and may convince more of the Democratic Party shot callers that he, not Hillary, is the party's go-to candidate. That won't dispel the doubts of the mass of heartland voters that he's still a political question mark, or the deeper fear that he's too liberal, inexperienced, and an African-American. Iowa is a test for Obama. It's by no means the final one.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: obama, election08, iowa, barak obama

Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. His new book is The Latino Challenge to Black America: Towards a Conversation between African-Americans and Hispanics (Middle Passage Press and Hispanic Economics New York).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Obama/midwest states
Posted by: bdnhome on Jan 2, 2008 8:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would take exception to the premise that Obama would have problems in the primaries or the general with other midwestern states. The political dynamics in Illinois, Wisconsin, and Minnesota compare pretty well to Iowa. I know Wisconsin, Illinois, and I believe Iowa went to Kerry in '04. Obama is from Illinois and was beating Hillary by better than 2:1 in the last Chicago Tribune poll. I live in Wisconsin (Madison) and the only bumper stickers I have seen so far are all Obama. He might have a tougher time in Michigan, Indiana, and Ohio, but his ability to attract independents and moderate republicans definitely won't hurt.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not A Problem
Posted by: frankoanderson on Jan 2, 2008 10:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The author just stated that Bill Clinton won without the Midwestern Red States; Obama can do it too. All he has to do is win the same states Kerry did, including Ohio. The opinions of the white male republicans in the red states are, frankly, irrelevant. They wouldn't vote for either Democrat anyway.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There will be a historic message from Iowa tonight...
Posted by: alietzow on Jan 3, 2008 5:23 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
bdnhome -- Kerry actually lost Iowa in 2004, by about 10,000 votes (see http://PresidentElect.org). This is what the Clinton and Edwards folks do not understand -- they won't win Iowa without a major crossover of Indy's and Repubs. And, should HRC win the nomination inspite of this, she will lose by a landslide in November. She was endorsed by Walter Mondale and will go down like Walter Mondale -- very sad, but true. Many of our good, strong Dems just don't see this and it's hard to understand why. We love to shoot ourselves in the foot.

Fortunately, Senator Obama not only has momentum with Democrats, he has serious support from Indies and 5-10% of Republicans will actually crossover tonight, just to support Barack! The DMR poll shows both to be true.

Last night, I heard from a fellow precinct resident, an attorney, that four of the attorney's at his office -- who traditionally would be Republicans -- will be standing up for Obama tonight. Tonight we will send a message of historic significance.

I've personally had 8 Republicans sign supporter cards with me. The Repubs and Indys will put Obama over the top tonight. They want real change. They want a uniter who can stop these distracting food fights in Washington and actually get something done.

Obama for President of the UNITED States of America

Andrew Lietzow - Des Moines, IA DSM #49 - Precinct Co-Captain volunteer for Obama for America

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Another take on "voting booth conversion"
Posted by: reevolve on Jan 3, 2008 8:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mr. Hutchinson suggests that many white voters will tell pollsters that they will vote for Obama and at the last minute vote for someone else because Obama is black. I don’t think that this is quite right. I suspect that much of Obama’s popularity, for better or worse, derives from the fact that he is black, and many white voters (especially left-leaning Democratic voters) really want to vote for a black candidate, especially a young, intelligent, charismatic black candidate. It is a subtle but important distinction. The danger for Obama is that at the last minute voters seriously consider his lack of experience, decide that being black is not enough, and vote for someone else.

Maybe I’m being too much of a Pollyanna here, but I think there is a strong contingent of people in this country, white and black, who think that it is time we had a black President, and see Obama as the best hope of making that happen. It would not surprise me if many of those people finally look past that on voting day and pick someone with more experience. In 2004, the voters were excited about Dean and he was “supposed” to win the nomination handily. But in the end, when it came time to actually choose someone to serve, the voters went with someone they thought could actually get the job done, not the exciting, inexperienced candidate that generated the most heat.

It happened to Dean, it can happen to Obama.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]