The Iowa fallout

Last weekend, a leading conservative intellectual promised me Donald Trump would not win Iowa.

“How can you be so sure?” I asked.

“God,” he replied, “looks out for children, drunkards and the United States of America.”
I’m not sure whether divine intervention prevented a national embarrassment, but as I watch victory, and moral victory, speeches in Iowa, some realities are coming into focus.

First, while Bernie Sanders and his campaign deserve tremendous credit for a truly impressive accomplishment, Hillary Clinton was the real winner on the Democratic side.

It may not feel that way, but the demographics of the Democratic primary electorate work against the Vermont senator. His support has been mainly confined to young, college educated, white, male independents — and Iowa provided no evidence he is moving beyond that constituency.

There are enough of those voters to tie Iowa and to win New Hampshire and some other states, but not enough to win the Democratic nomination.

To have a real chance of securing the nomination, Sanders would have needed to fundamentally alter the shape of the race. Rearranging voters’ perceptions on that scale would require clear victories in both Iowa and New Hampshire. Without the pair, he may win New Hampshire and some other contests, but not the ultimate prize.

Second, Ted Cruz, who I underestimated throughout the process, truly surprised. The Texan brought out his evangelical base in greater numbers than ever before. He withstood attacks and reversed his sagging poll numbers.

Marco Rubio emerged as the last refuge of the Republican establishment — and, if he didn’t kill it with a long, boring speech, he will carry real momentum into New Hampshire and the states that follow.

Donald Trump is seen as an existential threat by GOP officeholders, and Cruz is viewed as evil incarnate — a tough choice. With Rubio the only “reasonable” alternative, the pressure to get out of the race on everyone from Jeb Bush to John Kasich will be immense.

But keep in mind that more than 60 percent of Iowa Republicans voted for an anti-establishment candidate. Rubio still faces a difficult road to the nomination.

Indeed, the fundamental question gnawing at the Florida senator is, where does he win? The longer it takes, the less likely it is to happen in a meaningful way.

Finally, Trump was the night’s big loser, though he gave perhaps the most mature speech of his campaign — brief and gracious — bereft of the Dean scream many anticipated.

But the man who every poll said would win has lost. The self-styled “winner” has, at least for now, been branded a loser.

Trump’s defeat seemed a function of the problems pundits had been pointing out for months, but which never seemed to take a toll in polls conducted before ballots were cast.

Republican voters increasingly told pollsters that Trump was not only electable, he was the most electable GOP candidate. When they went to caucus however, Iowa Republicans who were interested in electability voted overwhelmingly for someone other than Trump, with Rubio capturing the lion’s share.

Trump’s anti-immigrant tirades paid off with Republicans who prioritized that issue, but only 14 percent saw it as central. He was also the candidate of those who wanted a president who “tells it like it is,” but they constituted just 14 percent of the GOP electorate.

The billionaire also won those who made up their minds more than a month ago, and 65 percent who came to a decision more recently.

Oddly enough, the only ideological segment Trump won was “moderates,” but they were just 14 percent of Republican caucus participants.

Both races will go on, and while the Democratic contest will likely lurch to its long-predicted finish, the GOP nomination is very much up for grabs.

Note: In an earlier piece, I misinterpreted some of the information provided by a YouGov Iowa caucus poll. The survey did overestimate GOP turnout as I suggested, but to a lesser extent than I calculated.

Mellman is president of The Mellman Group and has worked for Democratic candidates and causes since 1982. Current clients include the minority leader of the Senate and the Democratic whip in the House.

 

Whether winning for you means getting more votes than your opponent, selling more product, changing public policy, raising more money or generating more activism, The Mellman Group transforms data into winning strategies.