Ignore the Early Primaries
/
f you’re a reasonable person, you’ll agree that the U.S. presidential election system is broken. Twice in this century, our “democracy” awarded the presidency to a candidate with fewer votes. The preposterous electoral college dropped George W. Bush and Donald Trump into the Oval Office, despite the fact that more voters wanted someone else. Furthermore, if you’re in the minority party in a solid red or blue state, you know that your presidential vote doesn’t matter…which stifles voter turnout.
Nice job, America!
But I’m not here to belabor this. Instead, I want to focus on a companion folly—our equally preposterous primary election process.
You know how the calendar lines up. Batting leadoff are the Iowa caucuses on February 3, followed in short order that same month by primary elections in New Hampshire and South Carolina. From these exceedingly small and skewed samples, the media--and the larger political world--attempt to figure out what’s happening “in the voters’ minds.” It’s nonsense.
First, consider size. Both Iowa and New Hampshire constitute less than one percent of the U.S. population. South Carolina weighs in at a hefty percent-and-a-half. Combine all of them—it’s still peanuts.
Second, let’s look at race. Iowa is the sixth whitest state in America (85.9%), and New Hampshire the fourth whitest (90.3%). As a whole, the country is 77% white…so we’ve immediately established a distorted sample. South Carolina flips the script—it’s 28% African American, well more than twice the national average. To repeat, in none of these states are we dealing with anything close to a profile of the total U.S. electorate.
Third—and make of this what you will—these states also do not represent “city people”. Iowa nationally ranks right in the middle on the percentage of citizens living in urban areas (#25), but it’s biggest city, Des Moines, is only the 75thlargest market in America. Meanwhile, South Carolina (48th) and New Hampshire (50th) sit right at the bottom in the percentage of urban dwellers. Another false indicator, since most of the country is not out in the country.
All this is sort of like going to the doctor to find out what’s wrong with your knee…only to have the doc accidentally looking at someone else’s MRI. It’s not at all helpful.
Finally, I want to drill down a little more on Iowa and its caucus process. Unlike going to a poll and secretly casting a ballot, Iowans who choose to participate gather in churches, schools and the extra large living rooms of wealthy neighbors. There they gather in groups segregated by candidate choice. Really…they huddle together like boys at a middle school dance. They then spend a half hour trying to convince other group members to defect and join them (Red Rover, Red Rover, let you misguided Bidens come over!). From these shouting scrums, the “winners” of the nation’s first “election” are declared.
So, how well does it work? Well, first consider that in presidential election years, between 40% and 55% of Iowans go to the polls in November. The caucus process yields the same results. In other words, in this tiny, white, small town, compelling and perfectly participatory democratic process…half of voters don’t even bother showing up.
But!--when they do attend, aren’t they offering an early signal as to how the national races are going?
Let me point out that last time around, Iowans chose Ted Cruz over Donald Trump. And in the not-to-distant past, Iowans have crowned ultimate losers like Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee, Tom Harkin and Dick Gephardt. In 1972, the Democratic winner was “undecided.” This ain’t no crystal ball.
No matter, the media will continue to boost this silly event as “pivotal”, when, in effect, it’s just a way for those same media to help fill their hours and inches of news coverage.
Maybe this is the process Shakespeare had in mind when he lamented, “a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”
Huh. I had no idea the Bard was from Cedar Rapids.
Have a comment or thought on this? Just hit the Your Turn tab here or email us at mailbox@cascadereview.net to have your say.
