by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright January 4, 2008
All Rights Reserved.

en. Barack Obama (D-Il.) stunned his competition with a whopping 8% victory in Iowa, especially Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), whose campaign was built on the inevitability of her nomination. Obama's remarkable victory changes the dynamics only five short days before New Hampshire. With the race already tight in New Hampshire, Obama's Iowa bounce could put him over the top in the Granite State. Iowa was Obama's proving ground, removing all doubts about the legitimacy of his candidacy. Hillary had built her candidacy around her “experience” and electability, all now in doubt, since Barack received the lion's share of independent and crossover votes. “We came together as Democrats, as Republicans and independents, to stand up and say we are one people and out time for change has come,” Barack told a jubilant crowd in his victory speech.

      Clinton's loss was written all over her husband's face, former President Bill Clinton, who served as Hillary's attack dog during the waning days in Iowa. Iowan's didn't like his barb that Barack “was a roll of the dice,” preferring to make up their own minds. When Hillary's internally polling showed her numbers slipping in December, her campaign turned negative, eventually backfiring on caucus day. Hillary's third-place finish could be the beginning of a trend carrying over to New Hampshire and other states. Analysis showed that Barack beat Hillary in virtually every voting category, including women. Only the elderly showed her more support but only by a small margin. What makes Barack's victory so impressive was the decisive 8% margin, in a hotly contested race with Hillary [29%] and former Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) finishing an impressive second with 30%.

      When all the dust settles, Barack's win was not based on a single issue, for the differences among Democratic candidates were not significant. His message and charisma, originally showcased at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, inspired all kinds of voters, causing his big win. He returned to his red/state-blue/state theme, of healing divisions experienced during the Clinton and Bush years. President George W. Bush promised to be a “uniter, not a divider,” ushering in the most partisan period in recent U.S. history. With the economy failing and voters weary of the Iraq War, and all the costs in terms of human life and wasted tax dollars, the electorate appears hungry for a new direction. Change also propelled GOP candidate former Baptist preacher and Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee to an impressive 9% victory over former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

      Huckabee launched himself from obscurity a few months ago to his Iowa victory also preaching unity, common ground and the American Dream. He was the only GOP candidate to criticize Bush, keying into voters' collective frustration with the direction of the country. Romney, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani haven't dared to cross that line. Huckabee was rewarded by Iowans for his sensitivity to the economy, poverty, health care and the environment. While evangelicals no doubt helped his cause and hurt Romney, Huckabee's independent streak revealed the type of charisma not seen since the late President Ronald Reagan. Obama and Huckabee keyed into the electorate's craving for change. Hillary, Romney, McCain and Giuliani were all perceived as status quo candidates, something sold by their campaigns as mainstream “experience.”

      Obama and Huckabee read correctly the fear and frustration on the streets, where voters sought change over experience. Four generations of wisdom in the Bush White House gave the country some of the most costly miscalculations in U.S. history. While improvements in Iraq now place the economy as the number one issue, both seem inextricably tied together. No economy—including the mighty U.S—can afford to waste $12 billion a month without serious fallout. “I'll be a president that ends this war in Iraq, and finally brings the troops home, who restores our moral standing, who understands that 9/11 is not a way to save to scare up votes but a challenge that should unite America and the world against the common threats of the 21st Century,” said Obama in his victory speech, seizing the moment to drive home how he intends to lead as president of the United States.

      Obama and Huckabee must carry their momentum into New Hampshire. It's going to be more difficult for Huckabee to catch up lost ground, especially in New Hampshire where evangelicals play less a role than Iowa. Barack should have an easier sell proving in Iowa that voters from many different backgrounds joined his crusade to end partisan divisions and do what's right for the country. Clinton has a much tougher sell now telling New Hampshire that her “experience” and ability to “lead on day-one” trumps Obama's message of ending Washington's recent history of pernicious partisanship. Losing Iowa exposes Hillary's major weakness that she's a polarizing figure destined to perpetuate the same partisanship that, as former presidential candidate H. Ross Perot liked to say, has caused Washington's gridlock. Without answering that, Hillary's in trouble.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.