Iowa Caucuses: The Historical Importance of Victory
EmailThe first-in-the-nation voting contest is rapidly approaching and each candidate is scrambling to either solidify or improve their polling numbers. With just four days to go, the latest poll numbers show Mitt Romney in the lead in Iowa. Ron Paul is polling in a solid second place, and it appears as though the race is on for third place among four other contenders.
Candidates spend a great deal of time and resources in Iowa, but just how important, historically speaking, is a victory in the Hawkeye state?
The Iowa caucus has had about a 50 percent “success” rate when it comes to predicting the nominee, meaning that roughly half the time the winner in Iowa goes on to secure their party’s nomination for president. On the Republican side, among the winners of the past six Republican caucuses, three have gone on to win the GOP nomination. George W. Bush, Bob Dole and Gerald Ford each won Iowa, but John McCain, George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan did not emerge victorious after that first vote.
Democrats have about the same prediction rate. Since Iowa moved to the first in the nation voting contest in 1972, five out of the total nine Democratic victors in Iowa have gone on to become the Democratic nominee for president. Two of them — Barack Obama and Jimmy Carter — have gone on to become president.
As for that third place finish — the candidate who secures that spot will be in good company. Three former third place finishers have gone on to win their party’s nomination, and two have gone on to become President; Bill Clinton placed third in 1992, as did both of the eventual nominees in 1988- George H.W.Bush and former Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis. (Interestingly enough, George H.W. Bush finished first in Iowa when he ran against Ronald Reagan in 1980.)
Even a fourth-place finish does not necessarily indicate that a candidates run is over. In 2008 John McCain finished in fourth place, coming in just behind former Sen. Fred Thompson.
With this historical context in mind, don’t expect the GOP presidential hopefuls who do not win in Iowa to immediately throw in the towel. New Hampshire will hold their contest just seven days later, and everything can change in the Granite state.
Best Commencement Speeches of 2012 
Joe Biden Recalls Death of Wife, Daughter
According to CBS, if Iowans pick Ron Paul, they make themselves irrelevant. So, Iowans should just do what CBS tells them to do and stuff it.
Posted by: Tim | December 30, 2011, 12:07 pm 12:07 pm
So the Iowa caucus winner has a 50-50 chance of securing the nomination, based on past performance? No wonder they’re spending so much time and money there.
Posted by: A Cynic | December 30, 2011, 12:25 pm 12:25 pm
I’m not knocking Iowa or New Hampshire but Let’s be honest because past President who won these states went on to win the White House is a bit like playing the odds in Vegas. Winning Iowa and New Hampshire is more about tradition than actually needing to win the state’s electoral votes (electoral college should be disbanded).
Posted by: MTATL67 | December 30, 2011, 1:12 pm 1:12 pm
Mitt Romney was a hedge fund manager, made tens of millions, yet perplexingly Romney knows little of macro economics. I remember back in late 2007, Ron Paul warned of the coming economic crisis, Romney looked at Paul with a dumbfounded look and yelled ” you are crazy, America has never been stronger”. Isn’t America wonderful, when a guy of average intelligence can make millions as a Hedge fund manager and still not know anything about the state of the world’s economy.
Ron Paul will defend against the erosion of the constitution, and he will defend our constitutional liberties and freedoms, not just for the few. America(and the rest of the western world) is facing a debt armageddon, the current fate of Europe is in the cards for America, Britain and Japan, we are only kicking the can down the road. Ron Paul’s budget cuts will be hard, but they are necessary and will restore America’s glory before it is too late. Ron Paul’s views seem revolutionary, but they are correct. Ron Paul is also right when it comes to foreign policy, America can no longer afford to impose its will on the world. America should protect America’s vital interests only when a proven threat is shown, America should not police the world. The other GOP contenders believe the road to peace is via war.
Vote for Ron Paul, or expect the status quo and America’s decline.
Posted by: skip | December 30, 2011, 1:37 pm 1:37 pm
Great things are achieved when we have the courage to dream and the fortitude to act upon those dreams, overcoming innumerable obstacles until our dreams are dreams no more, but live in reality.
When the burden of the journey seems overwhelming, when the light is but a distant flicker in a sea of darkness, it is in those moments, sustained by faith, the mettle of our character is burnished to a gleam – so that we may realize a great destiny.
The time is at hand, when we must cast aside the fetters of doubt and indecision, when we must come together with fixity of purpose, and do our part, to restore that dream for everyone.
Posted by: Romney Supporter | December 30, 2011, 2:53 pm 2:53 pm
Anyone that votes for Romney has throw away their vote…
Ron Paul is a true conservative and after this last congress passed TSA, the Patriot act , NCAA , homeland security and now wants to bomb countries based on propaganda…
Obama , Mitt , Newt etc all want to continue the destruction of the constitution
we have lost our fourth and fifth amendment rights …No more Rinos
I will only vote for Ron Paul and the rest of his supporters share my views.
Posted by: hwt123 | December 30, 2011, 4:35 pm 4:35 pm
No RINO Romney !!! Vote for anyone but Romney !!!
Posted by: GoodRoads2u | December 30, 2011, 8:42 pm 8:42 pm
A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for Obama! If you can’t see that, you’re blind to reality. I’m no fan of Mitt Romney. Actually Rick Santorum is a better candidate.
Posted by: Pappadave | January 3, 2012, 8:16 am 8:16 am