After All Of This, Is Iowa Really All That Big Of A Deal?

An interesting piece on the New York Observer website http://www.observer.com/2008/brief-history-iowa-new-hampshire-bounce shows that what happens in Iowa does not always translate into much when it comes to New Hampshire.
Some examples on the Republican side show that if the results of the 1988 caucus were taken at face value, we would have had a possible one-term Pat Robertson presidency. For Rev. Robertson finished a strong second behind former Kansas senator Bob Dole. Then Vice-President George H. W. Bush had a dismal 18% of the caucus vote. No Dole or Robertson in the end and Mr. Bush went on to get the nod and the presidency himself.
In more recent history, the 2000 caucus saw a big George W. Bush win over Steve Forbes, 42-30% with Alan Keyes coming in third with 14%. But, on the way to New Hampshire, then Gov. Bush got a sneak attack when Sen. John McCain finished first, 19% ahead of Gov. Bush. Some big mo!
Want to go back to a little ancient history and 1980 and we see that then former U. N. ambassador George H. W. Bush won the Iowa caucus. It is where we got the term "big mo" from. Mr. H. W. Bush thought he had it. A fellow named Ronald Reagan did not back down and when a strange event occurred in New Hampshire during a Republican debate in which a microphone was turned off and Mr. Reagan told the debate moderator "I paid for this microphone" and it was turned back on. And all the Republicans running for president at the time were allowed to join in the debate. Mr. H. W. Bush looked weak and thus the "wimp" factor came into play. Mr. Reagan cruised to victory in New Hampshire and the rest is history.
On the Democrat side, similar results have occurred.
In 1992, we should have had President Tom Harkin, the Iowa senator who had 80% of the caucus vote that year. Of course no one tried to compete in any seriousness in the state.
1988 was a year a lot like this. Three candidates bunched at the top, former Missouri congressman Richard Gephardt, the late former Illinois senator Paul Simon and the former governor of Massachusetts, Michael Dukakis. Well, we all know what happened there.
And in 1984, while former Vice-President Walter Mondale won the caucus, former Colorado Sen. Gary Hart became the anti-Mondale and could have very well won the Democrat nomination that year. But, alas, Mr. Hart did not and the humiliation of a 49-state loss to President Reagan fell to Mr. Mondale.
So, in the end, Iowa matters in the sense that this is but a first indicator on how some Americans vote when they have a chance to actually do so in a booth and not when called by a million pollsters trying to divine the outcome of an election before it occurs.
But, where Iowa falls short is that so few participate in the caucus. For the Republicans, at least there is more of a secret ballot. You have to actually write the candidate's name. For the Democrats, they set it up so that only a candidate that meets the 15% viability minimal is taken
seriously.
And, Iowa is quaint, but not a real reflection of the United States as a whole. And neither is New Hampshire.
So, the first real test maybe in Michigan on January 15. It is a primary for both Democrats and Republicans. For both parties, independents can vote and there is where one can see a real cross section of Americans voting. And there is where we can get a better idea of how this all plays out. This time.