Minneapolis Star Tribune, MN
11-19-07
Stakes get higher in Iowa, New Hampshire
The first-in-the-nation states are more important than ever -- and more
representative than people often think.
By Bob Von Sternberg, Star Tribune
Talk about your unintended consequences.
This was supposed to be the presidential campaign that would finally break the
stranglehold that Iowa and New Hampshire have long held on the nominating
process.
For months, other states have been elbowing their way to the front of the
campaign calendar, claiming that they better represent the nation and that their
early primaries or caucuses could force candidates to reach out to a broader
population of voters and interests.
It hasn't quite turned out that way.
If anything, Iowa and New Hampshire have become more important than ever
now that so many states will weigh in so quickly after they kick things off. Losers
in the lead-off states will have less time than ever to counteract momentum
gained in the first contests.
"Iowa and New Hampshire are everything," said Scott Reed, an unaffiliated GOP
strategist, echoing the words of other political analysts.
"They'll be like a slingshot for whoever wins and does well."
Meanwhile, as it turns out, the "unrepresentative" rap hung around the necks of
Iowa and New Hampshire voters is a bit of a bum rap.
True, they're "older and whiter" than the nation as a whole, in the words of Iowa
pollster Ann Selzer, but polling data show that many other differences between
Iowans and New Hampshireites and the rest of America are often overstated.
"In a lot of ways, in spite of our whiteness, Iowa is pretty representative of the
rest of the country," said Steffen Schmidt, a political science professor at
Iowa State University. "Race is a huge freaking issue, though, and it tends to
fog over everything else."
One thing is certain: The influential verdicts from Iowa and New Hampshire will
be handed down by a strikingly small number of citizens. In a nation with more
than 142 million registered voters, the first two contests will likely be decided by
no more than 600,000 people, according to voter turnout records.
Similar and different
Racially, the differences between the two states and the rest of the nation are
vast.
Exit polls conducted in 2004 showed that nearly one-fourth of the nation's
electorate was made up of members of minority groups. That is more than three
times the proportion of minorities who participate in New Hampshire's primary
and Iowa's caucuses.
The racial disparity "creates a real stigma, and we political scientists haven't
done a good enough job explaining how representative these states really are,
that they're a pretty good national test for candidates," Schmidt said.
Age is another difference. Iowa caucusgoers of both parties and Republican
primary voters in New Hampshire are more likely to be senior citizens than the
national electorate as a whole.
Exit polls from 2004 and opinion polls conducted this fall show that Iowa
caucusgoers and New Hampshire primary voters are similar to other American
voters when it comes to family income and political ideology.
Iowans who take part in the caucuses are slightly less educated than the nation
as a whole, while New Hampshire primary voters are slightly more educated.
Similarly, more general election voters in Iowa describe themselves as white
Protestant conservatives than do their counterparts in New Hampshire and
nationwide, though it's unclear whether that difference extends to caucusgoers.
Beyond age and race, the most striking difference between the two leadoff states
and the rest of the nation is the small town and rural atmosphere of Iowa and
New Hampshire.
In Iowa, about half of likely caucusgoers live outside larger cities -- twice the
proportion of Americans who live in small towns and rural areas.
For the record, Minnesotans, who will hold caucuses Feb. 5, also aren't strikingly
different demographically (again, other than racially) from the electorate in the
nation as a whole. But very little is known about the tiny number of Minnesotans
who attend caucuses -- about 70,000 in 2004.
More intense than ever
Feb. 5, Super Tuesday, has come to symbolize other states' attempt to wrest
political clout from Iowa and New Hampshire. At least 20 states will hold
caucuses or primaries on that date, prompting many analysts to assert that the
nominations of one or both parties could be wrapped up by the time the votes are
counted that night.
A handful of other states have been even more assertive, moving their contests
into January, which prompted Iowa's Republicans and Democrats to move their
caucuses to Jan. 3 -- the earliest date for a presidential contest.
Bound by its constitution to hold the nation's first primary, the date of New
Hampshire's contest remains up in the air and could yet be set for sometime
before Christmas.
Some numbers show just how much the campaigns are concentrating on the first
two states -- especially Iowa.
By late October, Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, Hillary Clinton and Bill Richardson
had collectively spent $8.7 million on TV ads in Iowa, according to TMS Media
Intelligence's Campaign Media Analysis Group, which tracks political advertising.
Raising the stakes for the candidates is the longstanding tradition of Iowans and
New Hampshireites taking their time to make up their minds.
Four years ago, for example, more than half of New Hampshire's Democratic
voters didn't decide until the weekend before the primary; 41 percent of Iowa's
Democratic caucusgoers said the same.
"Iowa voters are very engaged in this and aren't as parochial as people believe,"
Schmidt said. "And this has become the most intense campaign I've seen in 37
years of watching it."
The Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post contributed to this report. Bob
von Sternberg • 612-673-7184