Why I’m Not Impressed by Trump’s Iowa Caucus Win
51% of the vote from a base he’s supposed to “own.” Whoopee.
As I listen to the conventional wisdom about Donald Trump’ “great victory” in the Iowa Republican precinct caucuses, I’m reminded of a night back in 2016 when I listened to a different kind of conventional wisdom being dispensed about Trump’s political prospects following the caucuses in Iowa.
Instead of certifying his “invincibility” we were hearing that it was all over for Trump,
I was attending a lecture at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington. Two nationally known and widely respected political pundits, - the husband and wife team of Steve & Cokie Roberts were there to provide their analysis of the results from that year’s just concluded Iowa precinct caucuses.
They were a powerhouse couple, among the most respected of all political pundits in the nation.
Yet, at that event, Steve Roberts pronounced that Donald Trump - who had just finished second to Ted Cruz in a crowded field in Iowa - was now out of the race for all practical purposes.
During the Q&A, I raised my hand and asked him why he thought that was the case.
“Trump failed to meet expectations, expectations he, himself set,” Roberts said. “He said he was going to win Iowa, and he didn’t. It’s over for him now. That’s how it works. Fail to meet expectations and it’s over.”
It was a perfect recitation of much of the conventional wisdom at that time. But I wasn’t buying it.
“We’ll, I guess we can all draw our own conclusions,” I tesponded, “but I see it differently. I see a guy who never really ran for office before, who had no experience running a national campaign, who had little to no staff on the ground in Iowa, and who didn’t spend much money in the state on things like voter identification and voter turn out.
“Yet he came in second. He beat a large field of experienced campaigners made up up of current and former US Senators and Governors.
“It looks to me like things are just getting started for Donald Trump, not ending, and I say that as no fan of Donald Trump.”
Roberts attempted to defend his view, rather weakly and his wife spoke up in his defense, too, but also not very convincingly.
As the evening ended and we were all making our way to the door, Mr. Roberts caught up with me in the crowd.
“I think I’m probably right, but your point is well taken. Very well taken,” he said. “You could be right. I hadn’t thought of it that way.”
It’s now 2024.
Once again I dissent from from the conventional wisdom about Donald Trump’s performance in the Iowa Caucuses.
Yes. He won this time.
Yes. His margin of victory over his nearest competitor set a record.
But there’s is a lot more to the story that convinces me that the storyline about his “great victory” in the Iowa precinct caucuses is wrong.
The conventional wisdom says the Iowa Caucuses prove Donald Trump is unstoppable both for the Republican presidential nomination and for another term in the White House as our “President” or whatever authoritarian moniker he intends to call himself once re-installed in that office.
In my view, Trump’s win in Iowa is a lot less impressive than many who should know better claim;
Here’s why:
Donald Trump got 51 percent of the vote among a hard core Republican base he is supposed to “own.” Whoopie.
Nearly half of Republicans in the room on caucus night refused to vote for Trump again, a man their party nominated for President twice before and elected once - at least according to the Electoral College, if not the popular vote which he has never won.
He got that 51 percent in a splintered field which gives a natural advantage to a former President and two time previous party nominee.
The two top contenders after Trump, combined together, received 40 percent of the vote. That’s a sizesble “Not Trump!” vote going against the former president. There were others in the race winning votes that weren’t going to Trump, as well.
If Republicans could ever get smart enough to stop splintering the field in nomination races against Trump, his margin of victory in Iowa - if he would have even won at all - would have been much smaller.
But let’s also put this in historical perspective. Because doing so really illuminates what really happened in Iowa on Caucus Night 2024.
Does anyone remember what happened in the 1968 New Hampshire Primary?
Lyndon Johnson - the incumbent president with all the advantages Trump as an ex-president enjoyed in the Iowa Caucus race - name Identification, voters who are deeply familiar with him, the prestige of having already served as president, existing and much larger networks, experience running a national campaign, easy fund-raising, etc - won 48 percent of the vote.
That result is not that different than this year’s 51 percent won by Trump in Iowa.
US Senator Eugene McCarthy won 42 percent in the 1968 New Hampshire Democratic Primary - again, a result not that different from the combined vote of 40 percent won by Trump’s two closest competitors, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and former South Carolina Governor and UN Ambassador Nikki Haley.
There is one big difference, however.
That difference is in how those nearly identical outcomes were interpreted by pundits, politicians, and people alike.
LBJ’s prospects were declared dead in the water after he won 48 percent in the New Hampshire Primary in 1968. Too many Democrats - his own political party base - refused to vote for him in that Primary election for another term in the White House.
Johnson formally withdrew from the race within weeks.
Trump, on the other hand has been declared to be invincible, despite a nearly identical set of circumstances, and despite similarly very wobbly caucus vote results coming from the party’s hard core base which he is supposed to “own.”
In my view, rather than being a trumpet call to bring out the purple robes for Trump, those numbers should alarm the Trump partisans. His opponents are stronger, apparently, than even they know.
I should also point out that LBJ’s 48 percent “victory” in New Hampshire in ‘68 came as a write-in candidate. LBJ’s name wasn’t even on the ballot, making it much more difficult for him to win any votes, much less nearly half of them.
Some will say that Trump also has significant built in disadvantages: having led an insurrection, suffered two impeachments, 91 felony indictments, and a host of civil lawsuits he is pretty consistently losing certainly didn’t help his prospects in Iowa.
True enough, but the book on all that currently is that Republicans don’t care about “any of that stuff.” It only makes him stronger.
The Iowa Caucus results suggest that maybe they do care about “all that stuff.” Nearly half of the Republicans in those caucuses refused to vote for Trump to be their nominee for the presidency again.
We should also not overlook the fact that the turnout for this year’s Republican precinct caucuses was remarkably low.
Yes, the weather was bad and in some spots dangerous. But other caucus nights in Iowa have dealt with similar weather, so that’s not so significant - especially when you consider that Trump exhorted his followers to go to the caucuses and vote for him, even if they are “very sick” (great advice in the middle of a Covid surge), and even if they die right there at the caucus after voting for him. “It’s that important!” he claimed.
If Iowa Republicans are still ga-ga over Trump, I don’t think they demonstrated that on caucus night, Many stayed home despite Trump’s ridiculous plea; and nearly half of those who did go voted against him.
The primary and caucus calendar is about to accelerate. We will be getting a lot more details on what is happening out there. Time will tell - pretty quickly - whether conventional wisdom has it right or whether I do.
New York Yankee great Yogi Berra once famously said, “It ain’t over ‘til it’s over.”
I agree, especially in politics.
This isn’t over, unless we delude ourselves into thinking that it is over. That’s the point at which it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
It’s just getting started.
There is still time for folks - pundits and voters alike - to come to their senses and see that Trump’s Iowa Caucus win doesn’t portend half of what people say it does.
Self-fulfilling prophesies only come true if people believe the prophecy in the first place. There are plenty of reasons to reject the prophecy of Trump’s invincibility both for the nomination and in the general election.
Republicans: if you really want to rid your party of Trump - and Trumpism - which is driving your party to ruin and which now threatens our democracy - then roll up your sleeves and get to work.
Trump can be had. The caucus results in Iowa revealed cracks and leaks that are substantial and nearly identical to the situation that drove an incumbent president from the race in 1968.
I think there is a message in this for Democrats, as well: Stop staring at your shoes and kicking the dirt and get out there and tell Joe Biden’s story - which is a story of remarkable success of historic proportions after having been dealt one of the worst hands in American history by his predecessor.
Donald Trump is unfit to enter the White House ever again - even on a public tour, in my view.
if Trump is the Republican nominee, Joe Biden can stop him. He has done it before and he has compiled a record as President that has more than earned a second term anyway with his historic accomplishments.
It’s time to dismiss the fantasies about Trump, and work to help Joe Biden now save American democracy.
You are right, Barry!
I agree that 51% of the most rabid faithful who bothered to attend is a fairly tepid endorsement in the scheme of how Iowa caucuses work. It would behoove political observers to understand just how these caucuses work and that historically the nature of attendees on both sides is very party faithful, usually heavy on the fringe sides. (However, some caucuses in recent memory saw thousands of new attendees beyond the fringe and most faithful. ) I also agree that, as you say, “ Trump can be had.” My concerns are that the other attendees, by and large, will fall in line like good little soldiers and that the larger portion of those who stayed home will quietly cast their votes in November anyway and just as they’ve intended all along for a man who is intent only on staying out of jail, no matter what cost. Fear of MAGA retribution (in all forms, including violence) and/ or loathing of Biden ( for whatever reason) will bring more support and votes to Trump than what the fairly tepid caucus results indicate. LBJ was not above strong- arm tactics, but he never called up his supporters to enact a violent insurrection. Biden for sure (and the media and all common persons who love democracy) must get a whole lot more full- throated about what we stand to lose and how the gains that have been made actually do positively impact everyone, including the most rabid Trump supporters.