WATCHING THE RESULTS LIKE A HAWK

8/15/11

The Republican straw poll held this weekend at that other university in the Hawkeye state was interesting for those of us who follow this stuff but probably a bad omen of the beginning of a new presidential season for those who either don’t care a whit but still, unfortunately under our system, still get to vote or for those sensible types who care but are not obsessed. Several points deserve to be made regarding the weekend’s vote.

First, those who say that this poll doesn’t really matter because it is a poll of only about 16,800 people who paid (I think the fee was $30; not inconsiderable, especially when you consider what you can buy with $30 in Iowa.) to vote are right and they are wrong. They are wrong because the opinions of those who care enough to pay (or maybe not; see a comment I make below) to register those opinions are worth considering more than those who take a break from “Jersey Shore” to embark on the seemingly backbreaking chore of going to the polls or filling out a mail-in ballot and (How can we possibly ask our citizens to make such onerous sacrifices?) driving to the mailbox to deposit it. Further, this poll took place in a state that has a disproportionate voice in the selection of our president, and thank God it does; Iowa is a GREAT state that ought to have a disproportionate voice in public affairs. Finally, the straw poll has a profound impact on fundraising; ask Tim Pawlenty. But those who dismiss the poll’s importance do have a point in that the poll involves as many voters who live on some blocks in say, Chicago or New York. So the media probably were a bit overly winded in its coverage of this poll.

Second, Michelle Bachmann was the winner, but a little noticed story indicates that maybe she wasn’t the victor in anything but raw numbers. One of the news stations (It was either CNN or Fox News; I was listening to them both on satellite radio (What a wonderful inventions!) during yet another drive from New York to Chicago and don’t remember which station made this point, but it was probably Fox; its coverage of the poll was more extensive than that of CNN, which frequently broke away from coverage to keep its viewers abreast of such vital news as the latest developments in the quasi-romantic exploits of those who fill our “culture” with figurative bowel emanations.) reported that the Bachmann campaign paid 6,000 entrance fees for the poll. This report may not be right; both CNN and Fox are to be approached with wariness since both have problems with facts when those facts clash with their worldviews. But I digress. If that report is indeed accurate, however, Mrs. Bachmann paid 6,000 people to vote for her but got only 4,823 votes, meaning that 1,177 of her “supporters” stiffed her. Some victory.

Third, the big story was supposed to be Tim Pawlenty’s dropping out of the race in the face of his third place finish among Hawkeye State Republicans, but that result was about as predictable as the outcome of a Cub season. The real story was Ron Paul who, despite spending very little money, came in 152 votes behind the “winner,” Michelle Bachmann. This showing was accomplished in an Iowa Republican party that is supposedly dominated by social conservatives and, while Dr. Paul is a big abortion opponent, little else in his record or beliefs would appeal to social conservatives. This was a big victory for Dr. Paul. Yes, he remains a quixotic candidate, but perhaps a bit less LaManchian than he was before Sunday.

Fourth, the poll was somewhat overshadowed by the entry of Texas Governor Rick Perry into the race on the same weekend. The bigger story, however, should be the boost that Mr. Perry’s entry, when combined with Mrs. Bachmann’s overrated but still not to be ignored showing, gives to the guy I still think will be the nominee, Mitt Romney. See my seminal 7/19/11 post MICHELE AND SARAH, MAKE ROOM FOR THE FAT LADY. While Perry and Bachmann split the votes of the true believers, Mr. Romney will pick up the votes of those who perhaps do not share Mrs. Bachmann’s excitabilities or her ignorance of history or Mr. Perry’s similar enthusiasms and so are not won over by his substantial record, skill, and intellect. It’s still Mr. Romney’s race to lose, and even he, despite ongoing and at times herculean efforts, may not be able to tear defeat from the very mandibles of victory.

Fifth, did I miss something when the results were announced? From what I heard on the radio, somebody (Again, I was listening, not watching, so I didn’t have the benefit of the captions to which those who were watching were treated.) got up and said, paraphrasing

…and the winner of the straw poll is Representative Michelle Bachmann of Minnesota.

and that was it. No numbers, no second or third place finishers, nothing. Apparently, the numbers flashed on a screen behind the speaker, but the announcement only told us that Bachmann had won. I hope this was done according to some weird tradition because it left me, and doubtless thousands of others, flat.

Sixth, the poll was a lot of fun and raised a lot of money for the Iowa Republican Party. Yes, some candidates took it too seriously, as did some voters, including, as you are probably surmising from reading this, yours truly. But where was the harm? And anything that showcases Iowa is beneficial, as long as too many people don’t get the word and do to that great state what, say, Californians have done to Nevada, Oregon, or Washington.