Gerard Baker: American View
Win tickets to the ultimate village fete with welly wanging and more
If the frenzied commentary is to be believed, it may just be the most eagerly awaited political event since Julius Caesar ignored the warnings and showed up at the steps of the Senate on that fateful March day in Rome a little over 2,000 years ago.
Today, across Iowa, a couple of hundred thousand people will cast the first votes in the 2008 US presidential election. No one, it is devoutly to be hoped, will meet Caesar’s fate, but it is almost universally assumed that tonight’s events will play a crucial role in selecting the identity of the most powerful man or woman on the planet.
But will they? On this, of all days, it seems iconoclastic, even a little sacrilegious, to suggest that Iowa, which proudly celebrates its status as the first state to vote, may not actually decide anything.
And yet there are good historical reasons, as well as current political ones, to think that, for all the hoopla that will attend a victory tonight, winning Iowa may not be that big a deal.
It’s certainly true that the stakes here seem to have been raised this year by the apparent closeness of the contest in both the Republican and Democratic parties. Never in the modern history of presidential elections has the identity of both parties’ nominees been so hard to predict on the day of the first vote.
So a win in Iowa should be enormous. It should provide momentum for the quick succession of other primary contests to come, beginning in New Hampshire next week.
But history urges caution. Since the US parties adopted primaries as their preferred system for selecting candidates 40 years ago, there have been 13 contests in which there has been a genuine competition for the Republican or Democratic nomination – that is, excluding those times when an incumbent president seeking reelection was unopposed.
In those 13 races, only one winner in Iowa has gone on to win the presidency the following November – George W. Bush in 2000. If Iowa were half as important as everybody thinks it is, we would have celebrated the presidencies of Walter Mondale, Richard Gephardt, Tom Harkin and Bob Dole, all proud winners of the caucuses here, who went on to greater or lesser obscurity thereafter.
To be fair, in assessing Iowa’s predictive capabilities we need to distinguish some of the Iowa winners who went on to win their party’s nomination only to lose the general election, from those who won the caucuses in Iowa but failed to get their party’s nod. In the 13 elections, Iowans have picked the man who became the party’s eventual nominee seven times, suggesting that a win in Iowa is useful rather than indispensable.
This year, with the contests in both parties so close, Iowa’s decision may, paradoxically, matter even less.
On the Democratic side, even declaring victory may be difficult. If the final polls are correct, the result tonight could well be, in essence, a three-way tie.
The candidate for whom a win is probably a must is John Edwards. Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have the resources and nationwide strength to absorb a narrow defeat tonight, but Mr Edwards has staked almost everything on a win Iowa.
On the Republican side, the winner may be even less significant in the long run.
The race for first place seems to be between Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee. But politically well-trained eyes will be focused almost as hard on the presumably distant third place.
If John McCain, once left for dead, but now resurgent, can snatch a strong third in Iowa – a state where he has hardly campaigned – it will be a huge fillip for his prospects in New Hampshire next week – where he has staked most of his chips.
As ever, this is because early primary contests are as much about beating expectations as they are about beating other candidates.
So when you hear the winner talking about the White House tonight, have a pinch of salt handy. A strong third place for Mr McCain on the Republican side, or even a close third for Mrs Clinton or Mr Obama among the Democrats, might augur no less well for them than a big win will for Mr Huckabee or Mr Edwards.
As it happens, the candidate who finished third in the Iowa caucuses has gone on to win the presidency more times (twice – George Bush Sr in 1988 and Bill Clinton in 1992) than the candidate who won them.
Follow our three athletes' progress in their preparations for the London Triathlon, and pick up training tips and more
Enjoy screenings of all the classic films you love, plus take advantage of two-for-one tickets
We explore leisure activities that are safe and suitable for all of the family
Times Online's new TV show helps you make the right decisions for your pet
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
The latest travel news plus the best hotels and gadgets for business travellers


Overseas contacts and local business information

A treasure trove of baubles, booty and stylish quests


2002/02
£59,995
The Midlands
F/1989
£36,000
Hollingworth At Ombersley
2007/57
£35,000
South East England
Great car insurance deals online
90K plus bonus plus options
Confidential
London
To £28k
Barclaycard
Various (outside London)
£
£40,000 - £50,000 + benefits
Lloyds Pharmacy
Coventry
£38k
Barclaycard
Various Locations
Live in One of London's Most Vibrant Areas
From £249,950
Beautiful Gardens w/ stunning Thames Views
Studios £33K, 1 Beds £60K, 2 beds £79K
Mortgages, bank acc & money transfers to help you buy abroad
Explore mystical Jordan
From £1030 for 7nts 4*
to USA's Most Cosmopolitan City; San Francisco!
£POA
Book Now for Winter 08/09 and Get 10% off!
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Search globrix.com to buy or rent UK property. Visit our classified services and find jobs, used cars, property or holidays. Use our dating service, read our births, marriages and deaths announcements, or place your advertisement.
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
The Electoral College is greatly misunderstood. It is really two things. The first, which people often find amusing, is a set of delegates who are the actual voters. This aspect is irrelevant because the delegates always vote exactly the way they are supposed to vote. There have been a meaningless handful of exceptions to this rule over the years.
The second aspect is the way that representation is delegated to each state. This is extremely important. It is designed to represent the compromise originally established in the Constitution where each state gets exactly two senators and as many representatives as appropriate to its population. The Electoral College reflects this allocation, giving each state a vote for each senator and each representative that it holds. This is essentially a handicap provided for the small states. It is balanced by the fact that states cast their votes as a bloc, giving an advantage to the large states.
jj mollo, Philadelphia, USA/PA
We have the Electoral College because the USA is a federal nation. She is not a democracy in the strictest sense, but a representative republic. The states vote for their preferred candidate, and electoral votes are awarded proportionally, according to each state's representation in congress. Time was, the EC was not a mere formality. States chose their electors at different times of year, with electors choosing the president. Since our founding we have, regrettably, drifted away from federalism, making things like the EC seem anachronistic. While a great deal has changed since 1787, the EC is a healthy reminder that we live in a federal system, and hopefully could help refocus the priorities of our federal and state governments. The federal government should handle the "big" things (defense, trade, highway construction, etc) and the states should take care of human services, such as education and law enforcement. In my opinion.
Eric Richard, Tulsa, Oklahoma
Obama says that the 'border security in Afganistan is insufficient' while we've got 30,000 troops there patrolling, and 0 in the US on the Canadian and Mexican border, is this guy F*&^ing a retard? Take care of our borders from this 'peaceful religion' that is trying to take over our country. Anyone hear of the towel head that just killed his two daughters in Texas as 'honor killings'? Go Barak Hussien Obama, at least GW has a fast lane for idiot murderers...I realize that GW has very dumb [policie](s) but c'mon, this guy doesn't know his a $$ from a hole in the ground...no illegals, or give them driver's licences please, he's got no experience! in anything. He was created by the media, for the media, for profit! Get over it LIBS!!! It didn't work in Russia (USSR) it won't work here. Muslims just save your time and blow yourselves up at any Dem primary please!!!! Livberalism is truly a mental disorder - Savage.
Fred, Hudsonville, MI
Grant, At the time the electoral college was devised, there weren't any states at all except coastal ones. California wasn't even anybody's nightmare at that time. I'm not sure whether it meets any needs - geographic, class-wise, or otherwise in the 21st century.
Chuck, Richmond, VA
400,000 to decide the president. I thought it was 12.
yankee diddle, Edinburgh,
The Electoral College is not at all a "Banana Republic" type system but was carefully crafted by the founders so that American politics is not dominated by large coastal states like California and New York. So the heartland of the country does have a say as well.
Grant, Scarsdale NY, USA
Yankee Doodle asks "Do you really think we would allow about 400,000 people to decide our next President?".
From a nation with a banana republic "electoral college" system who managed to allow a misaligned counting machine in Florida to elect George W Bush, such unfettered democracy could produce an improvement.
Fruitbat, Wirral, UK
"In those 13 races, only one winner in Iowa has gone on to win the presidency the following November â George W. Bush in 2000. "
You missed one, friend: Jimmy Carter in 1976. He didn't actually win because he didn't get a majority, but he got the most votes (plurality). That 'win' took him from obscurity to instant nation-wide fame. But otherwise, I COMPLETELY agree.
The Iowa Causus is the most overrated event in American politics. Do you really think we would allow about 400,000 people to decide our next President?
yankee doodle, cleveland, usa
(A lessor known GOP hopeful registered the Federal Election Commission posted this in today's Des Moines Register.) "Openly cheated by the Iowa GOP I urge all Republicans to boycott the caucuses. The current system is like how the Soviets controlled ballot access to "approved" candidates. The caucuses are about lining the pockets of party officials, local lawyers, flacks, community leaders and consultants. I got into trouble because my campaign was self financed and relied on volunteers. When I won Polk County Chairman's Ted Sporer's online straw poll with 52% (Romney got 14%), the party freaked. No way could the hacks fill their pockets with gold with Dr. Klein on the loose. So my name was permanently removed from the poll, refused a ballot line at Ames, and denied access to party functions and debates. Left Iowa several weeks ago to campaign in New Hampshire where the ballot is open to candidates who just pay a $1000 fee. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oQdn6NvhIU"
MARK KLEIN, M.D., OAKLAND, CA
by Mrs. Lyndon Baines (Ladybird) Johnson
Former First Lady, United States Of America
Eleanor Roosevelt taught us that sometimes silence is the greatest sin.Women can move beyond the struggle for equal status and for material goods to the challenges and opportunities of citizenship. Quality of goals and the achievement of goals which will mean a better life for all. For me, it was the beginning of seeing how politics can bring tangible results. I always hope that the very best of our people will go into politics, and I am sure that some of our best are women. So, I say: "Don't hold back. Don't be shy. Step forward in every way you can to plan boldly, to speak clearly, to offer the leadership which the world needs. Let us today earnestly resolve to build the true foundation for Eleanor Roosevelt's memory--to pluck out prejudice from our lives, to remove fear and hate where it exists, and to create a world unafraid to work out its destiny in peace. Eleanor Roosevelt has already made her own splendid and incomparable contribution to that foundation. Let us go and do likewise, within the measure of our faith and the limits of our ability. Let Eleanor Roosevelt teach Us all how to turn the arts of compassion into the victories of democracy.Eleanor Roosevelt taught us that sometimes silence is the greatest sin.
Marcy Rothchilds, DeM, IA