Posted by
flagwaver on Tuesday, January 08, 2008 12:13:18 PM
I have long had a real problem with the out-sized importance that is placed on the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primaries. I have long wondered what it is about the opinions of these two states, other than they are among the first to hold primaries or caucuses, that makes them so very important in the process. It just seemed fishy to me that every four years the media and political pundits descend on these places and act as though the decisions of the voters and caucus goers there are like a word from the ancient Oracle at Delphi.
Then it came to me that it is
because they are like the Oracle at Delphi that the pundits and media act that way. You see, the Oracle at Delphi never really told anyone anything of significance. The Oracle knew no more of the future than the person seeking wisdom, yet there was always just enough given to the seeker that allowed them to find what they
wanted to hear in the mutterings of the Oracle.
And so it is with the media when the subjects are the Iowa Caucuses and the New Hampshire primaries; the media takes what little information they get there and turn the results in the voting into earth shaking news when it really isn't. Hillary Clinton has a poor showing in Iowa and every conservative pundit out there is dancing a jig about the demise of the Clinton machine, and on the other side Mike Huckabee wins in Iowa and he is basically being handed the GOP nomination. My question to that is: Why are those types of conclusions being drawn, and what does the chattering class get from advancing those ideas?
I happen to believe that all of the attention given to the results in these two states allows the Fourth Estate to exercise undue influence on the political process, and it allows them to attempt to select their preferred candidates for the nominations. Think back to the 2000 election cycle on the GOP side: poor showings by George W. Bush in Iowa and New Hampshire had the media declaring the Bush candidacy DOA and John McCain, their boy, as the clear front runner. To the eternal chagrin of the media, however, Bush made a serious push in South Carolina and the rest is history...for good or ill.
The media is trying to do the same thing now, and it serves as a way to influence the entire election process. By focusing on the results in Iowa, where only a handful of the state's voters actually get to be involved with the caucus process and New Hampshire, where independent voters are allowed to vote in party primaries, the media is able to create a narrative that fits their wishes. Thus, you have stories of McCain's "comeback" and of Obama's newfound strength that are backed up by the results or projected results of voters in these two states.
But don't be fooled people! As hard as the media may try to influence the process by over-inflating the importance of Iowa and New Hampshire, we know that they are not the "be-all-end-all" the media would make them out to be. According to the
National Council of State Legislatures, 34...that's right 34...states will hold caucuses or primaries on or before February 5 this year. That leaves a lot of delegates to be won and a lot of campaigning to be done, and it destroys the media driven idea that the Iowa and New Hampshire results are somehow the determining factors in figuring out the nominees.
Just be careful not to believe that media hype or fall for their god-like political pronouncements, because in the end the voters will make their own decisions. WE will deny the media the undue influence they seek to exercise on the nomination process.