The overwrought Hawkeye

This post isn't about Obama, who's governing no better or worse than Hillary Clinton would have. It's not about David Plouffe, either. It's about Iowa.

My current read is The Audacity to Win, the campaign trail memoir by David Plouffe, manager of Barack Obama's winning presidential campaign. My interest in this book is threefold: simple curiosity for an insider's view of this novel campaign, piqued interest on the basis of Jerome Armstrong's posts over at MyDD, and the knowledge that the author is today directing the re-election campaign of Deval Patrick.

As with many victory lap memoirs, there are a few interesting but ultimately unshocking tidbits mixed in with loving recounting of victories and rationalizaton of mistakes. There is a three-page extended excuse about Obama's (correct) decision to back out of public financing for his campaign. Why not admit that Obama's promise to follow the regime was made when the money wasn't there, and now that it was, the federal campaign would hamper it? Bill Richardson is ignored save for a cheap shot about his weight, John Edwards ignored aside from the revelation that Obama's people pushed the expensive haircut story. Hilary Clinton and Ted Kennedy are the only Democrats for whom David Plouffe demonstrates anything resembling respect. John McCain receives more praise (I haven't gotten to the part about Sarah Palin yet).

However, the most overwhelming aspect of the book is the careful, loving, almost obsessive attention given by Barack Obama and his campaign to Iowa. This obsession is reflected in an exhaustive and exhausting recounting of the Iowa adventures and strategy, which outweighs attention given to Super Tuesday. I am unaware of any electoral system in the world that places such a pivotal role on such an idiosyncratic, unrepresentative, and small population that Iowa enjoys in the American system. The culmination of this courting period is the caucus process, an exercise that is self-limiting and violates the fundamental democratic principle of the secret ballot. After the primary process faded, the spitefully undemocratic nature and overall enormous suckitude of caucuses and baffling centrality of Iowa were forgotten.

Reading this book has reminded me. It reminded me that individual, smaller counties in Iowa were the subject of more discussion, candidate time, infrastructure, focus, and planning in the primary campaign than the entire state of Massachusetts was. Linn County, Iowa was a more important audience for the Obama campaign that was California, in all probability. The crafting of message, and quite arguably policy, balanced on the point of Iowa. (Parallel statements could be made about the Edwards and Hillary Clinton campaigns, as well.)

Sadly, the entitlement of this state will go unchallenged, as the Democratic Rules Committee is seeking to further enshrine the inexplicable privilege of Iowa in their upcoming recommendations. As a time when this reform process would be as apolitical as it would ever get, inertia has apparently taken over, untroubled by the lack of leadership that has been the hallmark of Tim Kaine's tenure as chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

Four or eight years from now, we're going to witness this all over again, as millions of dollars and hours are spent on every nook and cranny of the Hawkeye State, while Massachusetts receives about as much primary attention as Manitoba.

Latest graphic

If you want to know what is pissing me off about the caucus process this time, read up about it here.

Wow, do caucuses suck

In every incarnation, caucuses as an idea suck, and suck hard. There is the general odiousness of the system. Then there is what we've seen in 2008:

1. Iowa: This "first-in-the-nation" try that supposedly allows smaller candidates a chance to break through the hype and spin. So it uses a system that invalidates a hefty number of votes. In 2008, almost all support for Biden, Dodd, Kucinich, Gravel, and Richardson in Iowa were thrown out.

In the entrance polls, those five combined for just about 15% of the support that night. Due to the arcane system, they received 3% of the delegates. This system cut support for non-glamour candidates by 80%. Not to mention the spectacle of entitled farmers feeling they should meet all candidates for president before voting.


2. Nevada: Having shorn the race of candidates that couldn't hold the media's interest, we arrive in Nevada. Nevada, home of the hideous at-large caucuses designed to favor voters in certain fields.

Okay, those two are no way to pick a president. Pretty hideous. But at least they mimicked a real political contest, unlike the third caucuses to be held this season, the Republican contest in...

3. Maine: In addition to all the other problems inherent in demanding that people show up at a certain time and place to publicly declare support, there isn't even a consistent time. Here is the (abridged) schedule for the Republican caucus in the Bangor area, according to the Bangor News:

Penobscot County cities and towns will gather at Peabody Hall at Husson College at 1 p.m. Saturday, Feb. 2...Knox County towns will gather at the Samoset Resort in Rockport at 3:30 p.m. Feb. 2...Hancock County towns will gather at Ellsworth City Hall and Blue Hill Town Office at 10 a.m., at the Bucksport Town Office at 1 p.m. and the Orland Town Hall at 2 p.m., all on Feb. 2...central Aroostook towns will gather at the Campus Center of the University of Maine at Presque Isle at 4 p.m. Feb 2...northern Aroostook towns will gather at Fox Auditorium at the University of Maine at Fort Kent at 7 p.m. Friday, Feb. 1...Waldo County towns will gather at Troy Howard Middle School in Belfast at 9 a.m. Feb. 2...

In the region of one city, for an event that will lock you out if you arrive late, the Maine caucus has seven different starting times. Seven! And who knows what counts as a "central Aroostook town" versus a northern one? Which Hancock County towns meet when?

Best of all, these start times are spread over two different days! What the hell is this, Freedonia?

An insult to our democracy

I think it was a great idea to give the Mountain West and the Latino vote more prominence in the nomination process in the Democratic Party. To do it this way is clearly a disaster:

• The party is unprepared and overwhelmed by the turnout.
  
• Inadequate training: the caucus chair on CNN asked for somebody who could speak Spanish. You're on the Vegas strip, and you didn't think that would come in handy? These structure was not ready.
  
• The at-large caucuses designed to make the votes of some people "more equal" than others'.
  
• Allegations of union intimidation and suppression concerning this public forum from mainstream media that won't go away, no matter what the attacks launched from Team Obama.
  
• A schedule that excludes Nevada's observant Jews.
  
• A fixed, inflexible time that doesn't work for many citizens.
  

These things are an abomination. And a "victory" in Nevada shouldn't count for much more than the one in Michigan.
(Please note that I wrote this just as the doors closed, before results came in.)

UPDATE: Hillary won the state 51-45%. But because rural voices count for more than urban voices (like in the Electoral College), Obama may possibly get 13 of the Nevada delegates up for grabs, to Hillary's 12. This is far from guaranteed, as is pointed out by the Chair of the Nevada Democratic Party. Either way, this system is broken.

Oh, and I'm watching CNN, and Conservative slanderer/commentator Bill Bennett is desperately pushing any attack angle on Hillary he can think of while ignoring Obama. Hm.