‘Chaotic’ was the word used to describe last week’s Iowa caucus in Suzanne Lynch’s article for The Irish Times. Such a description is probably akin to saying that December’s general election in Northern Ireland was ‘sectarian’ or that Pope Francis is ‘religious.’ A caucus is not an election in the sense of the word that we are used to; nor is the United States a democracy in the sense the word is generally used. The Economist ranks the US among the world’s ‘flawed democracies,’ though all matters of corruption and gerrymandering aside it should be remembered that the US is not a democracy, but a republic. The concept of caucus speaks to the Jeffersonian notion of people-driven governance, and in such a rural, agrarian state as Iowa all the more so.

Citizens of Iowa and New Hampshire have long taken great pride in the fact that their states are the first call for candidates braying to become their party’s nominee for President of United States. The early contests are made all the more significant by the fact that the winner of Iowa’s caucus has recently – sometimes – gone on to win the nomination. This year, however, any pride in its “kingmaker” status dissolved in national derision as technical problems with a new app for tallying the results from the 1,700-odd caucus sites meant embarrassing delays in announcing the outcome. It also didn’t help that DNC chairman Tom Perez later stepped in to call for a re-canvass, raising more questions over the process.

Iowa, unlike New Hampshire, holds a caucus rather than a primary. While a primary is closer to an election that we would be familiar with, a caucus looks more like a game that a newly-qualified PE teacher would make you play in school. Voters gather in a large hall or barn and try to convince each other to join in supporting one candidate or another. There is obviously no secret ballot and representatives of each campaign are allowed to be present while voting is taking place, with a running tally on full display on whiteboards.

This is how Pete Buttigieg controversially was able to declare himself the winner  before any official announcement. It’s understandable why a candidate would have such itchy fingers in wanting to get the news of their success out: as the historic starting pistol of the primary season, Iowa can deliver much momentum – and a fundraising boost – to an underdog campaign.

It may yet prove to be tempting fate for Buttigieg to jump the gun like this, though. After marginally winning Iowa in 2016, Hillary Clinton’s campaign was probably thinking about putting together their transition team. But then of course there was the celebration that never was that November, when a literal glass ceiling had been constructed to open when the result was announced, releasing a flock of white balloons.

As one would expect from said momentum, Buttigieg is seeing his poll numbers rise in New Hampshire, which holds its primary on Tuesday. Yet he still trails Bernie Sanders, who won the primary with 60 per cent of the vote in 2016. The senator has many unique advantages in a state where citizens are hyper-aware of how valuable their vote is and like to see a candidate earn it. Voters in the Granite state still have reservations over voting for someone if they’ve only shaken hands with them twice. Sanders has the advantage of being a high-profile and popular representative from the neighbouring state of Vermont, and New Englanders like to vote for other New Englanders. The concept of the ‘favourite son’ features heavily in US politics.

After Nevada votes – another caucus – on Feb 22 – the contest to wait for will be the primary in South Carolina a week later. Former Vice President Joe Biden currently enjoys a significant polling lead in that state, and he needs to bounce back after a disastrous showing in Iowa. Biden came in fourth, behind Buttigieg, Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, with 16 per cent of the vote, which it should be said is a great improvement on the 0.9 per cent of the vote he managed in 2008. But that in turn was an improvement on his initial campaign for the nomination twenty years before that, when he dropped out four months before Iowa after he had plagiarised a speech by Labour leader Neil Kinnock.

As the highest-ranking candidate, Biden has been assumed to be the favourite in South Carolina. But remember there are new rules to the political game now. One suspects that Trump’s pre-emptive character assassinations on Biden are actually diversionary tactics. Trump has previously stated ‘I would love to run against Bernie,’ which is a case of Trump pretending to read from the old political handbook where Sanders’ brand of populist socialism could never be elected, and Biden’s ‘no malarky’ blend of insider-outsider is the perfect electoral cocktail. Trump’s own election is the downfall of the argument he builds here. Biden’s qualifications for the presidency make him a peer with Hillary Clinton, ‘the most qualified’ person on the ballot; but that alone does not make him a good candidate. Though Biden pitches himself as the friend of the blue collar, Streets of Philadelphia working man, it is Sanders who will speak to those voters in this election. Nominating Sanders to run against Trump will be a case of fighting red flames with blue ones.

While Sanders is still the front runner in New Hampshire, it could be a close result. For Biden, coming in third will not be enough to recoup the momentum he lost on a disastrous night in Iowa, meaning his campaign will be hanging on by its fingernails by the time voting moves south. Iowa may have been the damp squib of a starting pistol, but South Carolina will be where the serious competitors launch themselves off the ground.

 

See also:

You Come at The King, You Best Not Miss – 5 February

Apocalypse Now? – 31 January

Trump’s Iran Move Upends the Chess Board – 6 January

Trump Impeached In Day of Acrimony  – 19 December, 2019

 

And read Julia Flanagan on the Democratic debates here:

Democrats face Foreign Policy Test – December

The Road To Iowa Goes Through Georgia – November

A Dozen Deliberative Dems Debate – October

And Then There Were Ten… For Now – September

Time For The Democrats To Get Serious  – July

Democrats Turn Up The Heat For Opening Debates – June