In 1987, when then-Vice President George Bush ran for president, he suffered a major embarrassment early: He lost the Ames Straw Poll to televangelist Pat Robertson. He later lost the Iowa Republican caucuses to Kansas Sen. Bob Dole. In the end, he had to settle for a consolation prize: the presidency, which he won against Democrat Michael Dukakis in November.
In 1987, when then-Vice President George Bush ran for president, he suffered a major embarrassment early: He lost the Ames Straw Poll to televangelist Pat Robertson. He later lost the Iowa Republican caucuses to Kansas Sen. Bob Dole. In the end, he had to settle for a consolation prize: the presidency, which he won against Democrat Michael Dukakis in November.
The Ames event, for decades a marquee event on the campaign calendar, might have taken a fatal blow four years ago — or rather two fatal blows. The first was that victory went to the erratic firebrand Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., whose candidacy soon imploded on her way to coming in last in the caucuses.
The second was the third-place finish of former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who immediately abandoned the race, depriving the party of a talented and more moderate contender who might have provided a winning alternative to Mitt Romney.
Besides raising money for the state party, the straw poll traditionally was supposed to winnow out the weak aspirants in favor of the strong. But, as in 2011, it often failed in that function. In 2012, even Republican Gov. Terry Branstad said, “I think the straw poll has outlived its usefulness.”
Last week, the Iowa Republican Party recognized the straw poll’s obsolescence and voted to close it down.
“We set the table and they didn’t come to dinner,” state party chairman Jeff Kaufmann lamented.
One problem is many credible candidates have elected to bypass Ames on the theory that the risk of losing is greater than any benefit from winning. In 2011, Romney skipped it, just as John McCain did four years earlier.
This year, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and Mike Huckabee indicated they wouldn’t compete in the contest, which the party decided to move to Boone in order to reduce costs. Others were not sure things either.
“Only Ben Carson made a public commitment to be there,” reported The Wall Street Journal. It would be hard to write a sentence that better defines irrelevance than that one.
What Iowans might be figuring out is that the caucuses themselves also don’t matter as much as they once did. More often than not, GOP caucus victors don’t wind up winning the nomination.
Iowa has been a better predictor of success on the Democratic side, having given Al Gore, John Kerry and Barack Obama a boost on their way to winning nominations. But Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa (1992) and Rep. Dick Gephardt of Missouri (1988) found that winning the caucuses guarantees nothing.
The 2008 Democratic vote was especially helpful to Obama — mainly because it proved he could not only turn out new voters but also outcompete Hillary Clinton among an overwhelmingly white electorate.
If she were to be upset in next year’s caucuses by Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders or former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, voters in primary states might decide to give them serious consideration. Or they might just conclude Iowa’s Democrats, whose state is far whiter and more rural than the national average, are prone to peculiar choices.
Don’t get us wrong. As a neighboring state, we like Iowa just fine. As a political barometer, though, a Ouija board might serve just as well.
— Chicago Tribune