Even though the Iowa Caucuses are over a year away, candidates are already hiring staffers and websites are already chronicling the exploits of these politicos–or at least posting their names. Over on TPM Cafe, there’s a rather long list of everyone ever vaguely mentioned as working for a campaign on Hotline or The Fix, unfortunately this means it is rather inaccurate (for example, Jean Hessburg is most definitely not working for Hillary Clinton, she’s running the Nevada caucuses) and rather consultant heavy.
George Washington University’s Democracy in Action also has a much smaller list as part of its attempt to chronicle the campaign. However, it does have the benefit of accuracy as well as succinct bios for those readers who always wondered what Jesse Harris majored in at college. (History and Political Science). However, judging by GWU’s efforts to chronicle Iowa staffers in the 2004 General and the 2004 Caucuses, it’s sure to become the definitive site for those just dying to know how many field organizers John Edwards has in Ottumwa and whether you need all of them to screw in a light bulb.
As Chris at Political Forecast points out, Ed Fallon was an active volunteer at John Edwards’ event in Des Moines this weekend. In addition, Denise O’Brien showed up as well. It seems judging from this, Edwards may have an early advantage with the hardcore lefties in the caucuses this year. Considering Edwards was endorsed by Dennis Kucinich for all intents and purposes in 2004, it looks like Edwards will get a lot of support from the Fallon/O’Brien wing of the party this time around. (Not to mention that Kucinich might fall short of the one percent of county convention delegates he received in 2004 this time.)
Although it’s questionable how much pull Fallon actually has, (his “Don’t Write Me In” campaign was astonishingly successful in the General Election), he still received the support of nearly 40,000 voters in the 2006 Gubernatorial primary. And quite a few of those voters were highly enthusastic about him. It’s doubtful whether Fallon’s endorsement has any real weight outside of Fairfield and certain precincts of Iowa City but it doesn’t mean his endorsement’s useless. When Barack Obama attacks John Edwards on his vote in support of the Iraq War, John Edwards will have Fallon to back up his lefty street cred among caucus goers. It’s not the type of endorsement that actually will bring a lot of votes (like that of a major union like AFSCME) but one that’s important because it reassures voters. To paraphrase Thomas Callahan III, it offers a guarantee of lefty credentials that will help keep many prospective Edwards supporters feeling all warm and toasty inside.
Via Political Wire, American Research Group put out a crazy new poll of likely 2008 Iowa caucus goers.
In the Democratic caucus, Clinton led the poll with 31%, followed by Edwards with 20%, Vilsack with 18%, and Obama with 10%. Interestingly, Vilsack did the best with “no party” respondents who said they were likely to participate in the Democratic caucus, at 38%. Clinton garnered 32% of this group’s support, but no other candidate scored more than 2% of “no party” support. This could be a product of name recognition, but since when are Iowans who consider themselves likely caucus goers unfamiliar with Kerry or Edwards? I never would have though that Clinton could bring a lot of “no party” support to the caucuses.
In the Republican caucus, Guiliani led with 28%, followed by McCain with 26% and Gingrich with 14%. Naturally McCain did well in the “no party” category, although for some reason American Research calls them “independents” in this section…
It’s no secret that few people understand exactly how the Iowa Caucuses work, and many don’t think they should exist. So the Iowa Department of Cultural Affairs is going to make a museum exhibit for the State Historical Museum in Des Moines. From the Register:
The purpose of the display is threefold, said Anita Walker, director of the Iowa Department of Cultural Affairs:
- To secure Iowa’s first-in-the-nation caucus status by helping the nation understand why Iowa is a good first stop on the road to the White House.
- To provide a more well-rounded picture of Iowa to the world. The caucuses attract news media from 50 foreign countries and virtually every major media outlet in America.
- To encourage participation in the caucus process.
“I use the word ‘exhibit’ with quotes around it,” Walker said. “The real underlying, powerful message of this is citizen democracy, people’s participation in government. We want to get people excited about attending their own caucus.”
The ‘exhibit’ is going to open around Labor Day of 2007, and it’s going to have a real coffee shop (with a jukebox that plays politician sound-bites), a real living room (because there are still a few precincts where the caucuses are held in homes), and some kind of technology room where visitors can blog about stuff! I can’t wait to see all the great blogging that could result from this…
Big news for Tom Vilsack: he now has the chance to learn more about the circumstances of his birth (he was given up for adoption) and may be able to find out who his real mother was. The article has an interesting line: “But Vilsack acknowledged this week that the unexpected letter — and the realities of a modern-day presidential campaign — may cause him to reconsider [forgoing knowledge about his past].” Does finding his real mother help him or hurt him? If she turns out to be a rotten lady with shady dealings (no offense Governor), it could cast a bad light on him. On the other hand, there is a huge potential for positive publicity as Vilsack explores his past and the woman who gave him life; the whole thing just oozes the kind of cheesiness America loves. All this aside, I’m not trying to denigrate what I’m sure is a very tough and personal experience for Vilsack. But as the Register notes, when you’re running for president, the game of politics is never put on pause.
P.S. — Wondering if America has ever elected someone who was adopted, I did a quick Google search. The closest I found was this site which said three presidents — George Washington, Andrew Jackson, and Ronald Reagan — had adopted children of their own, but there is no mention of any president having been adopted himself. Therefore, 2008 could be a bigger year than previously thought: the potential for the first female, black, or adopted American to be elected president of the United States.
It’s easy to forget stories like this with all that’s going on (especially on a day when we get linked from MyDD), but today is the last day of work for most of the remaining Maytag employees in Newton.
As a canvasser going door to door in Newton (among other cities) over the summer, I heard firsthand how frustrated folks were with what had happened. I think our fears that the shutdown would have far-reaching political implications have luckily proven false, but union strength in Newton was certainly a bit weaker this year, and it’s a safe bet that this had something to do with it.
From the Register, whose coverage of this story has generally been pretty good:
“I’m sad,” production worker Machell Phifer said this week. “I’m scared.”
The cuts will leave about 660 workers in the washer-dryer factory, where the work force was about 2,600 four years ago.
Also quoted is Ted Johnson, president of the UAW local:
The average Maytag production worker earns about $19 an hour. “Locally, there’s not anything comparable to what they have now” in wages and benefits, said Johnson.
A new Research 2000 poll in Iowa shows John Edwards and Sen. Barack Obama tied among likely Democratic caucus voters with 22% each. Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack trails with 12%, followed by Sen. Hillary Clinton at just 10%.
No other candidate broke 10%. Top three Republicans are John McCain (27%), Rudy Giuliani (26%), and Mitt Romney (9%). I think this just reinforces my post from yesterday, “Why the Iowa Caucuses are Still Wide Open.”
In an interview with Hotline today, Nick Ryan, campaign manager for Jim Nussle’s losing gubernatorial bid, said:
“Looking at central and eastern Iowa — I think Republicans can be encouraged that the right candidates CAN win there. Absent the 2006 wave, both congressional seats in eastern Iowa were held by Republicans — by two very good, effective congressmen (Nussle and Leach).”
I think Ryan meant to say that the right candidates COULD HAVE won there (note: the word “can” was capitalized by Hotline). Nussle and Leach had been congressmen for 15 and 30 years, respectively. They had built up a high enough level of trust that people could overlook their Republican flaws. Now that Democrats are in control, the GOP won’t be able to build up a sense of loyalty, which was really the only thing keeping them alive in these solidly blue districts. The first and second CDs went for both Gore and Kerry (and perhaps Clinton but I can’t navigate that darn Secretary of State’s website very well). Unless Braley or Loebsack make a huge mistake, I think it will be a very long time before any Republican can retake either of those seats.
But Ryan’s not dumb — you should check out the whole thing, in which he discusses, among other things, whether Harkin can be beat and who are the rising IA stars from both parties.
There has been a lot of talk over the past few weeks about who is going to win Iowa in 2008. I’ve been resisting the temptation to join, because it’s pretty unlikely that the picture we see now will look anything like the picture we see a year from now.
Think of how much has changed from four months ago: Warner, who has since dropped out and now might be un-dropping out, was attracting a lot of Iowa support. Obama, whose candidacy I have been predicting for a year, was written off as too green and inexperienced to run in 2008. Bayh looked like he had too much money not to play in at least the first four primary states. John Kerry was not a favorite, but he was in as good a position as any of the candidates. And John Edwards was probably getting the most buzz around here. (Incidentally, Hillary’s position as the elephant in the room everyone either loves or loves to hate has remained relatively consistent this whole time.)
Since then, Warner and Bayh dropped out, and a lot of people started talking about what that might mean, often concluding that it was because the caucuses were close to being decided — already. (Kyle’s post here is actually what provoked me to write this.) Here are five reasons why it’s still wide open:
The caucuses are an expectations game above all else. Given two candidates with equal money, talent, charisma, etc., the candidate who is favored more heavily is actually in a weaker position right now than the candidate nobody is talking about. To “win” the caucuses, you have to beat expectations, not just the other candidates, and the job gets harder and harder as expectations get higher and higher.
Nobody knows what to expect from Tom Vilsack. Before he announced, I didn’t know very many people who took his candidacy seriously. But his campaign has assembled an excellent staff, and he keeps on impressing me. He isn’t expected to do all that well nationally (his strategy is clearly to paint himself as the underdog of the race), but nobody really knows how well he’ll end up doing in Iowa. (Drew has some thoughts on how well he has to do to stay in, but even he’ll admit that it’s guesswork at this point.) Again, though, I think it’s clear a fair number of candidates have to play in Iowa (particularly Edwards and probably Obama), and, if Vilsack can even hold his own against them, he isn’t out of the picture.
The majority of the field hasn’t even declared yet. Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and John Kerry are all staying above the fray by not making themselves candidates yet. As soon as they do, expect a lot of rhetoric to change. Even if attacking Obama will hurt the attacker more than it will hurt Obama, somebody will start doing it as soon as he declares in hopes of shaking the tree a little bit. Expect a wave of attack dog pundits and surrogates as soon as Obama and Clinton declare. We don’t know how that will turn out.
Nobody is talking about John Edwards right now. Even though Edwards is a fundraising force with name recognition, a strong biography, charisma that rivals Obama’s, and a reputable staff, he has avoided high expectations. Polling in Iowa has consistently put him on top, and it looks like he’s going to declare pretty soon, so it isn’t clear how he will end up.
In the end, staff quality and political strategy make a much bigger difference in the caucuses than buzz and media coverage. John Kerry was not a frontrunner in November of 2003; he was closer to a longshot. But his staff put together a better field program than Dean’s staff, and he ended up winning. (And because Dean was the frontrunner before losing, it pretty much knocked him out.) Field work is huge in Iowa, and we probably won’t know who has the best field program until the caucuses are over.
Of course, keep checking here for more news and analysis as the field of candidates continues to narrow.
I saw it on CNN (cable), so I don’t know whether it’s only running in Iowa or what, but it’s an ad for Operation Home Front, and for all I know it’s being run as a PSA. Regardless, it definitely helps McCain more than it helps Operation Home Front, and it’s alarming to see him up on TV in Iowa already.
