AlwaysWrite
Addicted Member
Few news stories are as overblown and overpublicized as the Iowa caucuses, but why should they matter so much ... or do they?
After all, we are trying to determine the next president of the U.S., but the fact is that Iowa has a population of 3.017 million, representing .00974 -- or slightly less than 1 percent -- of the nation's population.
No matter how one analyzes it, the voters of Iowa bear little resemblance to the nation whose political future Iowans "help" -- in exaggerated and uncertain ways -- determine with caucuses that kick off the presidential primary process. For example, Iowa's black population totals only 3.4% and Hispanic totals are only 5.6%.
Indeed, the Iowa populace is mostly white, primarily rural and generally older than national norms, and that doesn't reflect overall U.S. demographics. Small samples of people aren't a problem if they are representative, but more than four of every five Americans live in urban areas.
In Iowa, 36 percent reside in rural areas. And non-Hispanic whites account for more than 87 percent of Iowans. And nationwide, more than one in eight Americans are black, as compared to 3.4% of Iowans, as mentioned earlier.
So why -- except for being the first primary voting on the calendar -- is Iowa getting so much attention? Let's consider a few more things:
* A smaller percentage of Iowa's statewide population participates in the primary election process -- in part, because rather than casting a simple vote for a candidate of choice, caucus-going requires two hours or more (and often involves dealing with less-than-ideal weather conditions). And with the length of the process, many would-be voters -- including the sick, those who work in the evening, and those who must take care of their children -- don't take part.
* The candidates spend a ridiculous and disproportional amount of time and money in Iowa, and for obvious reasons -- because they are not "swing states" -- candidates pay virtually no attention to voters in such population-rich (and Electoral College-rich) states such as California, Texas and New York.
* More than in other states, large percentages of Iowans don't make up their final candidate selection until the proverbial last minute, and even when the final vote totals are in, only rarely do the consensus candidates go on to success at the national level.
* Ad nauseam, television news commentators bloviate while saying nothing of substance. We repeatedly hear trite comments about how polls mean little or nothing in Iowa because of last-minute vote switching, and how the so-called "ground game" is so important (although no one seems to have valid claims as to which candidates have the best and worst "ground games"). A halfway-intelligent junior high student could likely match the "expertise" of the TV commentators, who aren't really telling you anything new when they repeat it's up to the turnout, the ground game or last-minute vote switches.
Sure, the voting in Iowa means something, but enough of it already! Many Americans -- including some in the Hawkeye State -- will be glad when the overpublicized caucuses are in the rearview mirror.
After all, we are trying to determine the next president of the U.S., but the fact is that Iowa has a population of 3.017 million, representing .00974 -- or slightly less than 1 percent -- of the nation's population.
No matter how one analyzes it, the voters of Iowa bear little resemblance to the nation whose political future Iowans "help" -- in exaggerated and uncertain ways -- determine with caucuses that kick off the presidential primary process. For example, Iowa's black population totals only 3.4% and Hispanic totals are only 5.6%.
Indeed, the Iowa populace is mostly white, primarily rural and generally older than national norms, and that doesn't reflect overall U.S. demographics. Small samples of people aren't a problem if they are representative, but more than four of every five Americans live in urban areas.
In Iowa, 36 percent reside in rural areas. And non-Hispanic whites account for more than 87 percent of Iowans. And nationwide, more than one in eight Americans are black, as compared to 3.4% of Iowans, as mentioned earlier.
So why -- except for being the first primary voting on the calendar -- is Iowa getting so much attention? Let's consider a few more things:
* A smaller percentage of Iowa's statewide population participates in the primary election process -- in part, because rather than casting a simple vote for a candidate of choice, caucus-going requires two hours or more (and often involves dealing with less-than-ideal weather conditions). And with the length of the process, many would-be voters -- including the sick, those who work in the evening, and those who must take care of their children -- don't take part.
* The candidates spend a ridiculous and disproportional amount of time and money in Iowa, and for obvious reasons -- because they are not "swing states" -- candidates pay virtually no attention to voters in such population-rich (and Electoral College-rich) states such as California, Texas and New York.
* More than in other states, large percentages of Iowans don't make up their final candidate selection until the proverbial last minute, and even when the final vote totals are in, only rarely do the consensus candidates go on to success at the national level.
* Ad nauseam, television news commentators bloviate while saying nothing of substance. We repeatedly hear trite comments about how polls mean little or nothing in Iowa because of last-minute vote switching, and how the so-called "ground game" is so important (although no one seems to have valid claims as to which candidates have the best and worst "ground games"). A halfway-intelligent junior high student could likely match the "expertise" of the TV commentators, who aren't really telling you anything new when they repeat it's up to the turnout, the ground game or last-minute vote switches.
Sure, the voting in Iowa means something, but enough of it already! Many Americans -- including some in the Hawkeye State -- will be glad when the overpublicized caucuses are in the rearview mirror.
