The New Hampshire Primary

We took our field trip to the New Hampshire primary today. The record warmth was appreciated as we had to stay 100 feet from the polling buildings to do our exit polls. We left before 7AM and arrived at Ward 1 in Nashua around 9:30. Our bus was immediately surrounded by TV cameras and reporters, who were soon disappointed that no candidate was aboard. But fortunately for us, their target - the Straight Talk Express - showed up 10 minutes later. McCain was nearly crushed by the media frenzy but he made his statements and managed to shake a couple hands - including Ms. Barton's! (see video below) The kids all got good pictures, and some even got interviewed by the TV reporters hanging around. So cool!

From there we went to Ward 3 in Nashua - a lot quieter - and then on to Milford. Our polling in both places was fascinating, as we all met a wide variety of voters. Below is the press release I just sent around to the local papers, which summarizes the results of the poll.

By the way, the New York Times ran the article on political tourism today in which I got mentioned. See http://travel.nytimes.com/2008/01/08/us/politics/08tourism.html

Press Release: Harwich Students Conduct Exit Poll in New Hampshire

Twenty-four students and two teachers from Harwich High School took a field trip to New Hampshire to see the state’s “first-in-the-nation” primary first-hand. While there, they interviewed 137 voters in Nashua and Milford for an exit poll summarized below. They also got to see Sen. John McCain as the “Straight-Talk Express” visited Ward 1 in Nashua.

In the exit poll, McCain beat Huckabee, Romney, and Paul 40% to 26%, 16%, and 10% respectively. For the Democrats, Clinton led with 39% over Obama and Edwards tied with 29%. The small survey conducted in a narrow area of the state isn’t likely to be an accurate predictor. However, many other interesting trends emerged.

Independents voted for Democrats 77% of the time, indicating a possible advantage for November. The top four issues cited by voters were foreign policy (the war in Iraq), character and experience, health care (esp. for Democrats) and the economy. Among these, foreign policy helped McCain and Obama, Experience helped McCain and Clinton, and the economy helped Edwards.

The average voter watched 3.6 debates, and those who were influenced by them in their decision favored Huckabee and Obama most. Voters reported seeing hundreds of ads and receiving dozens of phone calls – some had been called ten times in the last day. While most said the were not influenced by ads, 15% of Democrats cited Clinton’s ads as convincing, and 22% of Republicans voted against Romney because of his negative ads.

Pres. Bush had very low ratings in the survey with only 15% approving, 77% disapproving and 9% unsure. Even among Republicans, 54% disapproved. Only 30% of Republican voters described themselves as evangelical Christians – half the rate reported in Iowa, and while Huckabee led with 42% of their votes, the lower percentage might account for his loss.

Both men and women favored Democrats though more so for women (68%-32% compared to 55%-45%). Both younger and older voters favored Democrats while middle aged voters were evenly split. Younger voters voted most for Obama and Huckabee, while middle aged and older voters supported Clinton and McCain.

The students on the trip were all senior government students. They reported a deeper interest in the presidential race after this experience.

Some video of McCain's visit:

Just remembering - a slip by Rep. Steve King?

One interesting moment from the week that just came back to me. It may be an indication of how hard this election has been on some conservatives. Rep. Steve King, a very conservative Congressman form NW Iowa was introducing Sen. Fred Thompson at the W Des Moines event yesterday morning. In doing so, he compared having to endorse a candidate with being executed. The context, paraphrased:

Nothing focuses the mind like knowing that you’re gonna be executed in the morning. For me it was a press conference. I stayed up all night thinking about which candidate I would endorse. In the end, I decided to support Thompson.

He then went on to explain why Fred was the true fiscal and social conservative in the race. I’m sure he didn’t mean it that way, but an interesting psychological slip, perhaps?

Some numbers and my survey data

A couple follow-ups on the final results. I won’t rehash all the numbers (see http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/04/iowa.caucuses/index.html) but the results reflected the energy we saw in the rallies (expect Edwards didn’t do as well as we thought).

At the various rallies we attended, I interviewed 25 Iowans about the caucus. This was hardly a scientific poll interviewing so few among those who took the time to attend a rally. However I think some of the trends I found are interesting. There was wide support for the current system, with 88% supporting Iowa’s first in the nation status, and 60% supporting the caucus system over a primary (12% preferring a primary and 28% unsure). I didn’t interview people at all the rallies, so my candidate preference numbers aren’t meaningful, though the Clinton rally was the only place where most of the people I interviewed didn’t identify themselves as Clinton supporters – perhaps an indication of the soft nature of her support which is one reason why she lost. The issues people identified were interesting – 48% cited the war/foreign policy issues as important Health care next at 24% with immigration and character issues each getting 16% (some people cited two issues). Among Democrats, 50% cited health care, and 40% cited the war. Among Republicans 50% cited the war and 25% cited immigration. Bush was divisive as 90% of Democrats disapproved of the job he has done as president, while 67% of Republicans supported him. Among demographic variables, men and older voters were more Republican and women younger people were more Democratic. This matches entrance poll data – see http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/04/547795.aspx or http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/03/iowa.dems/ for Democratic data.

It’s on to New Hampshire and we will be there on a field trip exit polling in and around Nashua. More to come from NH!

The Morning After

It's morning in America! In Iowa at least, and quite warm at that - high 20's. An article in the Washington Post (I think) claimed it was 6 degrees at caucus time, it was around 30 actually, a merciful break from the cold on Wednesday (high around 10).

What a great experience this has been! In two days we got to attend seven rallies, a caucus and a victory celebration. We met several major political figures, and got interview and tailed by a New York Times reporter. I interviewed a score of Iowans about their views and waded into the blogosphere. My teaching of caucuses and presidential selection will now be greatly informed by personal experience.

in the end, both winners were the ones with the most conciliatory tones. This may be a testament to the perception, probably right, that to win here you have to be "Iowa nice." People point to 2004 when Gephardt and Dean seemed to destroy each other dropping from 1-2 to 3-4 after they attacked each other. This may or may not carry on to future states - probably not - as some candidates begin to get desperate, they will use their ammo. McCain and Romney at least already are in New Hampshire. But this year, I think more than just Iowa is looking for unity and humility in our politics.

The turnout was huge here, a record - 239,000 Democrats (basically doubling their 124,000 in 2004) and 115,000 Republicans (compared to 88,000 in 2000 - the last time the Republican side was contested). This is about 15% of eligible voters - a high number for a caucus, but much lower than the contested primaries will get. The 2 to 1 ratio for the Dems bodes well for them in November, in a state usually considered Red.

Historically, the winners of contested races here have gone on to win the nomination only half the time since Iowa gained its first in the nation status in 1972. So we obviously can't coronate them yet. And while it is impossible not to be enmeshed in the moment after two days here, it feels like the people here chose the candidates that have the intangibles to win the nominations.

Lastly, I will confess to being swayed by my time here to support Obama. I think this is the most qualified group of candidates assembled in my lifetime, but an Obama victory would be seismic and transformative, and I think our politics need a transformation. I believe that an Obama victory would stand the greatest chance of healing the nation's partisan divide, and redefining our politics along more pragmatic and authentic lines. I may well be wrong, but coming to Iowa has pushed me off the fence.

Obama Victory Speech

After the caucus, we decided to head into town to what was looking to be the big event of the evening - the Obama rally in Hyvee Hall - a bib convention room in Des Moines. While waiting they had bid screens showing the CNN results. By now they had called Obama and Huckabee the winners. They played Edwards speech but then drowned out the Clinton speech with a marching band. There must have been 3000 people there by the time Obama took the podium at 11. He gave an exhilarating speech, calling this moment historic and predicting that he will win in "New Hampshire and beyond" (no scream). Parts of it reworked the stump speech we heard yesterday, but a lot of it was new and inspiring, though perhaps because of this he was reading from a teleprompter. He continues to push his approach that we might call post-partisan - we are not red and blue states but the United States of America. Edwards speech had all the same stories as yesterday, though a lot less "fight", he also took his finish as a victory. We didn't hear any of the others.

Obama Victory Speech 1:


Obama Victory Speech 2:

Johnston 3 Final Vote

After the redistribution, Obama won the third precinct in Johnston with 368 votes to Edwards 204 and Clinton's 197 - Clinton and Edwards flipped positions in the second vote. The counting for this round was quite odd - each precinct captain calculated their own troops by having them count off - with an independent observer watching over them. This precinct gete 15 delegates to the county conventions, so the results (for the Dems, not the Reps) are reported as delegates - Obama 7, Edwards and Clinton each with 4. This was a great event - democracy was in the air and there was a lot of enthusiasm for the process. And it still only took an hour total (not like a 3 night town meeting).

I can't say I'd recommend this process over a primary, but at least I know better now how it works.

Johnston Caucus 4:


Johnston Caucus 5:

First round vote at Johnston 3

I am reporting from the 3rd precinct in Johnston at the West Lake Elementary School. This is a crazy event - surprisingly similar to how it is described in the textbooks. It is a bit like town meeting in its participatory feel and school gymnasium atmosphere. There 795 voters here tonight (there were 90 four years ago, but I think there is a new subdivision in the precinct), and this places viability at 119 (15%). Supporters of candidates that don't meet viability have to redistribute themselves or go undecided. The voting is interesting - they have to collect blue tickets - each precinct captain brings them up in a box. The first round #'s:
Dodd 0
Biden 50
Clinton 181
Edwards 148
Gravel 0
Kucinich 0
Obama 318
Richardson 73
So they now give the Obama, Edwards and Clinton supporters 30 minutes to woo the Biden and Richardson folks, then they will take a final count. We are seeing early state numbers on the internet giving Edwards 33, Obama 32, Clinton 30, but these are very preliminary. This is nuts!

Incidentally, Secretary Albright is here as an observer for Clinton - I got a picture with her! This after having a pre-caucus dinner with Rep. Udall of New Mexico - running for the Senate this year - and the Campaign Manager and two deputies from the Richardson campaign.

Johnston Caucus 1:


Johnston Caucus 2:


Johnston Caucus 3:

YouTube version of the Romney clip

Romney clip

There was some buzz among some of the bloggers (see americablog.com, openleft.com, and firedoglake.com) here about Romney's speech in Cedar Rapids where he contradicted himself about energy independence, first saying we are independent, then that we need to become independent. I happened to have videotaped it, so here it is - see for yourself. For context, he is praising various accomplishments of President Bush.

The Huckabee Rally

Just got out of the Huckabee rally at the Veteran's Hall in Grinnell - now having lunch at Lonnski's. It was a large, enthusiastic crowd - maybe 250 people packed in the hall. He gave a strong populist message, emphasizing that he has been outspent 20 to 1, and that we ought to have a presidency, not a plutocracy (shots at Romney). He talked about his humble beginnings - his parents sacrificing to give him a guitar for Christmas when he was 11, and how he was the first person in his family to graduate high school as well as college. He hit on the social issues at eh heart of his campaign - pro-life and pro-marriage/family (traditional, that is). He told a long story about his son making a cake where he mistakenly put a cup of salt in it, the moral being that it's not enough to mean well, it matters what you believe. He also appealed to our obligations to our children - to stop leaving them debt and to stop making the world less peaceful and less hopeful (shot at Bush?). His supporters are true belivers, and I suspect that he will win tonight. At Emily's request, I got an autograph after!

Huckabee Rally:

The Thompson Rally

Just leaving the Thompson rally at the West Des Moines Marriott. Like other Republican events this was a bit hard to find - no volunteers holding signs - had to ask the concierge in the hotel where to go. But this was a big crowd - ~200. And Thompson was folksy and engaging - making his case as the experienced consistently conservative. He was Arthur Branch - not the uncomfortable gaunt fellow in the debates. His themes - the fair tax, fiscal responsibility, immigration, rebuilding the military, and national security. He argued that he is the true conservative in the race - "Where I stand doesn't depend on where I'm standing." He talked about the instability in Pakistan (asserted that Bhutto was killed because she was friendly to the U.S.), and that now is "no time for a president with training wheels." A more impressive speaker and event than I was expecting after watching the debates.

Thompson Rally:

The Edwards Rally

As I am writing this post in the lobby of the Hotel Fort Des Moines, Pres. Clinton is standing behind me in the lobby, having campaigned all day for Hillary. He looks tired.

We came back here after a HUGE Edwards rally in West Des Moines. About 2000 people packed what appeared to be a roller rink and were entertained by John Mellencamp as a warm up. This is our country! Then Elizabeth introduced the candidate, and he gave the fight speech I expected. It was electric. He emphasized the stories of his parents and grandparents as mill workers - his parents were on stage with him. His message is we need to fight corporations and special interests - the unfairness of the HMO CEO making 100's of millions while the ordinary worker can't afford health insurance - ExxonMobil making record profits while 35 million go hungry and veterans sleep on grates. Some of the rhetoric was the same as the Paul - we want to take our country and our democracy back. Again, he did not name his rivals, but attacked their academic/philosophical (Obama) and politcal (Clinton) motivations for change, saying that instead that we need to fight for it and not back down. He described his law career as one fighting for the little guy against corporations. He will never negotiate with them, but fight against them. He quoted Harry Truman as responding to someone's encouragement to "give 'em hell", by saying that he just tells the truth and it looks like hell. If I said "fight" a lot in this post, that is a reflection. The crowd was huge (motivated in part perhaps by Mellencamp) and excited.

Edwards Rally 1:


Edwards Rally 2:

The Paul Rally

Now that was different! The Paul rally was at the Hotel Fort Des Moines, where several hundred rabid supporters filled a ball room. It was hosted by the veterans for a stronger America, and thus had a long pre-candidate program featuring a prayer, the pledge of allegiance, a narrative about Francis Scott Key, the singing of the national anthem, a speech by John Holland - a POW activist (who hates McCain), and an introduction by his deputy campaign chair. Paul himself gave a very libertarian speech, emphasizing foreign policy (we need to get out of Iraq and stop meddling in others' business). We should learn that Vietnam democratized after we left, not because we went there. He is worried about the dollar and the growth of our debt overall as well as the problem of China becoming our bankers as we borrow more money form them(his figures: 2.7 out of our 9 trillion debt, perhaps this was meant as our total foreign debt). It was an energetic crowd.

Paul Rally 1:


Paul Rally 2:

The Obama Rally

We are rolling for Des Moines after the busy day in Cedar Rapids. The Obama rally was huge - about a thousand people at the Veterans Memorial Building. He was introduced by local freshman Congressman Dave Lobesack, and local radio personality Tim Boyle. Like the others, the major focus was on getting people out to caucus. He mentioned the war, health care, global warming, college tuition. But most of his speech featured rhetorical responses to Edwards and Clinton, without ever mentioning. He countered the argument that he didn't have enough experience arguing that he had the right kind of experience - not in Washington, but in working with the people. The gamble, he said would be in putting the same folks in and expecting a different result. Though he the referenced Bill Clinton's similar response to the same issue in 1992. "Bill Clinton was right then, and Barack Obama is right now." He spent even longer countering Edwards' emphasis on confrontation, that some think Obama is too nice. There's no shortage of anger and partisanship in Washington, but "we don't need more heat, we need more light." He took a shot at Edwards pointing out that after law school, he turned down "trial lawyering" to become a civil rights attorney. He defended his slogan of hope, arguing that all great changes in this country began with hope. But as Marc pointed out after, independence and ending slavery only happened after we fought wars. Like Clinton, Obama tried to turn a weakness into a strength, defending his statement that he would talk to our enemies, not just our friends, quoting JFK that we should never negotiate out of fear, but never fear to negotiate. Overall, the speech told the story of his campaign as that of the underdog, that is now winning. But it's hard to be the underdog when you're winning. That said, we were all very impressed with his skills as a speaker.

Obama Rally Part 1:


Obama Rally Part 2:

The Romney Rally

Leaving the Romney rally. A lot smaller - there were about as many media as voters. The event was in a hangar at the local airport - very small. There were no signs out front but we saw them stacked inside the door on our way in - some volunteer dropped the ball. He was introduced by Speaker Hastert. Romney spoke for about 15 minutes, a lot shorter than Clinton's hour. His speech was very general - "valence" issues as our AP text calls them - I love those Heartland values. Brief hits on immigration, marriage, health care - we are going to insure everyone but not with Hillary Care. I got to shake his hand on the way out and offered him greetings from Massachusetts. One of his sons, Jake was with him. I polled a number of enthusiastic supporters. So far, my polling shows a lot of support for the Iowa First Caucus system, but I haven't gotten a chance to interview anyone away from the rallies yet.

The Clinton Rally

Leaving the Clinton rally. A large crowd in an indoor track at Kirkwood Community College. She gave a long speech - we left after 50 minutes to get to the next event. Gov. Vilsack introduced her and Chelsea was there. Her speech rallied the crowd very well. She started witht he assertion that we need a president who is going to be fully ready to run the country "from day one" (shot at Obama). Her themes included education, tax reform and energy policy ("Nothing will change until we get the two oil men out of the white house"). Interestingly, she focused on health care, trying to change a perceived weakness (the failure of the 1994 plan) to a strength (she has the experience and know-how and track record to fight for universal care). She also emphasized veterans' rights and benefits, including treatments for traumatic brain injury. She argued that she is the right person to make change happen - do you just demand it (Edwards) or hope for it (Obama)? No, you have to work hard for it. She interwove a lot of personal stories - the nurse from Waterloo, who lost her job and health care when she got sick, e.g. Many out of state volunteers and a lot of signage outside and in. We are arriving at the Romney event unclear of whether we are at the right place because there are no signs! (but a few other people vaguely confused).


Rolling to Cedar Rapids

On our way from Davenport to Cedar Rapids. We missed Obama at the last event, but we got to see the aftermath - a lot of electricity in the crowd as it lingered and slowly dispersed. I got to interview one person - my first poll in Iowa. She loves Iowa's special status and the caucus format where those that care the most get to decide, and where if your first choice doesn't get much support you get to move your vote to your second choice. She is a Obama supporter and her issue is the war.

We are being interviewed on the way to Cedar Rapids by Ashley Parker, a New York Times reporter doing a story on caucus tourism. The story probably will run later in January after a the early primaries/caucuses.

Wake up call

Good morning class! We are just rolling out of Chicago and are on our way to Davenport, Iowa. We hope to catch an Obama event there at 9 – we’ll probably miss the beginning of it if it starts on time. We were hosted last night in Evanston by a friend of Marc’s. Dave’s a businessman now, but he graduated from the Air Force Academy, served seven years active as a transport pilot, then was called up from the reserves for the Iraq War. To hear him tell stories of flying in and out of Baghdad under rocket fire is unnerving. They used various types of flares to direct the missiles away from the plane – and fortunately he was never hit. I can’t imagine the courage required for this. He’s a big Obama supporter.

You learn something new every day – actually a lot of things yesterday. Southwest has a new, less chaotic boarding scheme. Beau Brummell was a 19th Century Brit who changed the way men dress for fashion – from wigs, makeup and heels, to suits, ties and boots. Jane Addams was the first American woman to win the Nobel Peace Prize in 1931 (I should have known this). And Washington and Lee University has held a mock Party convention since 1896 that has predicted the oppositions party’s nominee correctly 75% of the time and every year since 1976 – they hold it later this month.

I can’t wait to get to Iowa!

On my way!

Happy New Year! I’m on my way to Iowa a day ahead of schedule. Jim and Marc, my two traveling companions, arranged to get to Chicago tonight, so I decided to join them. This will allow us to head to Iowa at the crack of dawn, and not have to worry about flight delays. Later we’ll work on our itinerary for tomorrow, to see how many campaign events we can pack into our voyage to Des Moines.

Perhaps it would be appropriate to discuss my own political leanings here. I am registered as an Independent, and I am undecided in who I will support in the Massachusetts primary on February 5 (Independents an vote in either primary in MA). I usually end up voting Democratic, though I voted for McCain in the 2000 primary, and Weld for governor in 1990. Also, in 1980 I supported John Anderson’s independent bid. OK, I was only 10, but my dad (a Republican state legislator and town politician) supported him and he spoke at our house!

I am attending the caucus as an observer, as a student of American politics, and as a government teacher. I have taught about caucuses for years based on my experience at town meetings in Massachusetts – as an event where the ordinary voter stands up and participates. However in 2004, I found myself in both Michigan and D.C. during their caucuses, and found them both to be pretty much primary elections run by the Party instead of the government. Iowa may be the last bastion of the traditional caucus, and I want to see it.

This year has the potential to be a watershed in American politics – to be the critical, realigning election that we haven’t really seen since 1932. Many candidates might break from the past in revolutionary ways. On the Republican side, none of the major candidates fits the traditional mold, despite their acrobatic efforts to seem closest to it in the debates. And on the Democratic side, both Edwards and Obama are campaigning on anti-establishment platforms, and even Clinton would be historic as the first woman. And then there is the potential for independent candidacies from Bloomberg (who could legitimately compete to win as a centrist – he can self-fund, he might only need 35% and half the voters are independent) and Paul (he is leading a libertarian revolution, and he’d have plenty of money also).

Besides the potential for seismic shifts in our partisan process, this election is spectacular for its uncertainty. This is the only election in the primary era when neither party really has a likely nominee as the voting begins. Clinton is the perhaps closest to this, but Obama is pretty much even with her and at least one poll had Edwards leading in Iowa. Giuliani can’t be the leading candidate when he isn’t really competing in the first three contests, and is slipping in national polls. More than ever before, whoever wins Iowa will become front-runner for each party, and then will likely pass that mantle to someone else in New Hampshire next week, and so on until February 5. And unless a candidate wins a majority of the delegates up for grabs that day, we have a good chance of a nomination that won’t be decided until the convention. This is a government teacher’s dream!

So this is why I am heading to Iowa (and then to New Hampshire) - to witness history. I am traveling with two friends of similar fascination. Jim and I have been debating politics for 20 years together, and he current is an executive in New York (he also happens to be my wife’s brother). Marc is another college friend who among us is most involved in politics, running a company that develops internet strategies for progressive causes. We are all undecided voters that have come here to Iowa to see what we can see.

Lastly (for now), I want to share a dream I had the other night (I am enough of a gov nerd that I dream about politics). Part of the dream had to do with Doris Kearns Goodwin’s Team of Rivals, where I imagined the eventual president would form a cabinet from the candidates of both parties – Biden for Secretary of State? Giuliani for Homeland Security? The other part imagined that the two candidates with the most conciliatory rhetoric would win the nominations – Huckabee and Obama, and would then nominate each other as Vice President – so in November we would choose between Huckbee/Obama and Obama/Huckabee. Bipartisanship would reign! I know this is fantasy, but I guess it reflects my hope for a new pragmatism in our politics and my belief that this is the deepest, most qualified group of presidential candidates in my lifetime. I don’t see anyone writing the usual article about why great men don’t run for President anymore.

More later, once we form an itinerary for tomorrow.