January 04, 2008
1/4: First In Iowa, But Not In The Blogosphere
We've frequently discussed how the leading bloggers have major problems with Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee. Huckabee's win in the Iowa caucus earned him grudging praise from conservative bloggers, as well as a fresh round of criticism. Unfortunately for Huckabee, this criticism will probably only increase now that he's proven that he is more than just a flash in the pan. And while most conservative bloggers acknowledge that Huckabee's victory will hurt Mitt Romney, they still don't think that Huckabee can win the nomination. Most of them seem to believe that the ultimate beneficiary of Huckabee's win will be John McCain.
Similarly, Obama's caucus victory earned him a mixture of praise and criticism from liberal bloggers. Although Obama has long been the second choice of the progressive blogosphere, his post-partisan rhetoric and alleged embrace of right-wing talking points has not endeared him to netroots leaders. On Wednesday, Open Left's Chris Bowers summarized what an Obama victory in Iowa would mean:
"If [Obama] wins, it will be in spite of the progressive blogosphere, rather than because of it."
In the wake of Obama's big victory 1/3, will the leading netroots bloggers be any more open to his candidacy? Or will the current trend continue, in which Obama fights for delegates "in spite of" the progressive blogosphere?
DEM FIELD: They've Got The Energy
Liberal bloggers were thrilled by last night's record turnout numbers, and see it as a good portent for November:
Daily Kos' Markos Moulitsas: "Tonight, seeing what transpired in Iowa, I can't help but be hopeful for our party's long-term future. The youth vote is turning out big, and turning out for us. Independents have had enough of Republicans and are trending our way. The center is moving leftward for the first time in a generation."
Daily Kos' Devilstower: "Last night, the Republicans produced around 115,000 voters -- an impressive 30% increase [from 2000]. But the Democrats turned out 236,000. That's an increase of roughly one whole helluva lot. And it's a huge indicator of both how energized Democrats are this year, and how ready independents are to put their chips on the D line."
Firedoglake's Scarecrow: "Over 236,000 Iowan's turned out in bitter cold to participate in the Democratic caucuses, nearly 90 percent more than 2004, and as Howard Dean noted on CNN, about twice as many as participated in the Republican caucus. There were record numbers of first time participants, and large increases in women and young voters...So even though many of us/you may be disappointed that a favorite did not win, I'm feeling pretty good today about what Iowa did."
OBAMA: An Inspiring Win
Several liberal bloggers used lofty language to describe Obama's victory:
Arianna Huffington: "Barack Obama's stirring victory in Iowa -- down home, folksy, farm-fed, Midwestern, and 92 percent white Iowa -- says a lot about America, and also about the current mindset of the American voter. Because tonight voters decided that they didn't want to look back. They wanted to look into the future -- as if a country exhausted by the last seven years wanted to recapture its youth. Bush's re-election in 2004 was a monument to the power of fear and fear-mongering...And the Clintons -- their Hillary [Clinton]-as-incumbent-strategy sputtering -- followed the Bush blueprint in Iowa and played the fear card again and again and again. Be afraid of Obama, they warned us. Be afraid of something new, something different. He might meet with our enemies. His middle name is Hussein. He went to a madrassa school. A vote for him would be like rolling the dice, the former president said on Charlie Rose. And the people of Iowa heard him, and chose to roll the dice."
Ezra Klein: "A black man just won the Iowa caucus. And he won not because of his race, nor in spite of it; not because of the novelty of his campaign, nor because of its historic import. He won because a broad swath of Americans found him to be the most inspiring, the most elevating, the most attractive of the candidates. He won because so many Iowans felt their heart quicken before his words that they smashed all turnout records in order to add their voice to his."
The Atlantic's Matthew Yglesias: "Certainly, in principle Obama more than anyone else epitomizes the new progressive coalition and wields the coalition behind him with tremendous oratorical skill. The questions always been whether he can really deliver on that promise. Before today, I think relatively few people thought he would be able to pull off this unprecedented surge of young people and first-time caucus-goers -- but he did."
The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum: "I've been sort of fitfully supporting Hillary Clinton for the past few months, but I have to say that I don't feel any disappointment tonight over her loss. Just the opposite, in fact. My arguments against Obama have mostly been fairly abstract ones, but emotionally I'm as susceptible to the famous Obama charm as anyone. And the idea of a young, charismatic, black guy as our next president is pretty damn inspiring. Just sayin'."
Obama's netroots critics offered more measured praise, emphasizing the Illinois senator's achievement in turning out the youth vote:
Firedoglake's Jane Hamsher: "People wanted change, and their votes were cast based on who they see as best embodying that change. Obama did a great job energizing the youth vote."
Digby: "Congratulations to Senator Obama, who brought out the next generation, something that every candidate says they're doing and never actually do. This bodes very well for the Democrats."
Atrios: "Well I'm a bad pundit...I figured Obama's younger voters wouldn't come out, and [John] Edwards' rural voters would. No actual numbers, but buzz is that the younger voters showed up."
Open Left's Matt Stoller: "Young people are coming out, they are Democrats, and they like Barack Obama...The electorate really is changing in dramatic ways, and Obama is a key part of that shift. This country is turning far to the left, and while I don't expect media pundits to talk about pandering to youth the way they do values voters, they should."
OBAMA II: Still Not Trusted By The Netroots
As liberal bloggers praise Obama for turning out the youth vote, it should be noted that many of them were harshly criticizing the IL senator only days earlier:
Markos Moulitsas: "Obama has made a cottage industry out of attacking the dirty f**king hippies on the left, from labor unions, to Paul Krugman, to [Al] Gore and [John] Kerry, to social security, and so on...He is the return of Bill Clinton-style triangulating personified. Now I'm willing to consider that this is all a front, and that he'd govern as progressively as Bush governed conservatively after his 2000 bullshit about being a 'uniter' and 'compassionate'...[but] I'd rather have our candidate elected promising progressive reform, especially in a year where the American people seem to crave such solutions."
Matt Stoller: "Since declaring for President, [Obama] has called Social Security a 'crisis', attacked trial lawyers, associated unapologetically with vicious homophobes, portrayed Gore and Kerry as excessively polarizing losers, boasted as his central achievement an irrelevant ethics bill, ran against the DC establishment while taking huge amounts of cash from DC, undermined Ned Lamont in 2006, criticized NAFTA while voting for a NAFTA-style trade agreement, compiled opposition research on the most effective liberal pundit in the country, refused to promise that American troops would be out of Iraq by 2013, and endorsed the central plank of the Bush-Cheney foreign policy doctrine, the war on terror...if you know all of these things, and you still support Obama, you have to concede that you are supporting a conservative candidate for President. And that's fine. But just go into this with clear eyes."
MyDD's Jonathan Singer: "It's becoming increasingly difficult to come to the conclusion that Barack Obama understands the stakes of this fight and/or that he really stands on our side when he bashes Democrats, tries to gin up fears of a crisis in Social Security, and now kowtows to some of the basest elements of the Republican machine."
CLINTON: Inevitable No More
Ezra Klein: "Her candidacy now lacks its central advantage: The impression of inevitability. Worse, its central rationale -- 'experience' -- was decisively rebutted by the voters, who voted to change the system rather than seek to better master its workings."
AMERICAblog's Joe Sudbay: "This was...a devastating loss for Hillary Clinton. There is no other way to spin it. Her campaign was built on inevitability -- and she simply wasn't in Iowa."
Matthew Yglesias: "Hillary Clinton, sapped of her aura of inevitability, doesn't seem to have very much to say. Her candidacy is fundamentally about a kind of brokerage transaction; she herself is the logical convergence point for a group of people associated with her husband's administration and she's a competent steward of that network of supporters. But that's not a fighting message, it doesn't leave you with much to fall back on when times look grim."
EDWARDS: 2nd In Iowa, But 1st In The Netroots' Hearts
Ezra Klein: "Barack Obama won tonight, but, in a sense, John Edwards' campaign also triumphed. The progressivism of the race, the focus on ideas, the courage of the Democrats -- all were products of his early example...And while his shot at the nomination is long at best, his candidacy, even if it fails, will have been far more successful than most."
David Sirota: "That Edwards was even close in this race at all, and that Huckabee won outright is a success for both candidates considering they were grossly outspent by candidates being funded by huge corporate interests...no matter what the final exact tallies, we the progressive movement -- and We The People -- are already winning."
GOP FIELD: Where It Stands Today
Power Line's Scott Johnson: "The Iowa caucuses aren't going to resolve much of anything on the Republican side tonight. The race for the nomination seems certain to remain a three-way race among three plausible candidates. Each of them is formidable in his own way, and each has strengths that roughly offset his weaknesses. That is to say, each has substantial weaknesses. Conservatives are perhaps more than usual placed in the position of choosing the least worst among them."
AmSpec Blog's James Antle: "Mike Huckabee's rise is in no small part the result of a backlash by values voters against a Republican establishment and conservative movement they felt didn't take their concerns seriously enough. But there are other conservative groups who will be heard from. Will economic conservatives, to name just one of them, be happy with the prospect of a Huckabee-McCain race? Rudy Giuliani -- and perhaps Mitt Romney -- would like to think not."
HUCKABEE: Credit Where Credit's Due
Conservative bloggers, who overwhelmingly oppose Huckabee's candidacy, nevertheless praised the ex-governor for his remarkable victory:
RedState's Pejman Yousefzadeh: "I think that [Huckabee] is the worst major candidate to throw into the general election, but give the man his due; with very little money and very little organization, he won in a state where money and organization matter a great deal indeed."
AmSpec Blog's Hunter Baker: "AmSpec has had a lot of hard words about Mike Huckabee...However, I think it's time to stop and give this guy some credit. When has the GOP last seen a candidate like Mike Huckabee? This man is talented, driven, and hungry. The same personality that decided to defeat diabetes has locked onto winning the nomination and he has achieved far more with far less than anyone thought possible. We need more candidates with that kind of desire."
Townhall's Matt Lewis: "Inspiration beat Organization."
RedState's Erick Erickson: "Mike Huckabee, you did well. Now you can get some money and try to go further. You deserve the win tonight, but let's be honest. Your win was McCain's by proxy."
Meanwhile, Huckabee's online critics continued to savage him:
Power Line's Paul Mirengoff: "With any luck, tonight will be the high-water mark for Huckabee...Iowa has given its seal of approval to (1) a one-term Senator who stands for 'hope' and 'change' and (2) a tacky, big spending governor who doesn't know much about foreign policy but did stay at a Holiday Inn Express. The common demoninator here, other than a patent lack of qualifications for the presidency, is likeability."
AmSpec Blog's Quin Hillyer: "Tonight is a sad one for America. It marks the triumph of sentiment over substance...All year long I have warned people to watch Huckabee -- because I knew he was a threat to win the nomination. But if he does, Susan Estrich is right: The Democrats will be dancing on inauguration night, because they will make mincemeat of this unethical, insubstantial, unconservative rube from Hope, Arkansas."
ROMNEY: Ouch.
NRO's Mark Steyn: "This is as bad as it could be for Mitt. It wasn't a close finish, and it's hard to see how his numbers in New Hampshire go anywhere but south."
NRO's Ramesh Ponnuru: "I don't see how Romney can recover from this loss. McCain was already running ahead in New Hampshire. If Romney loses both, he's gone."
Soren Dayton: "The Romney campaign, already down, can expect much more negative coverage from the media, which already dislikes him. It is certainly possible that there will be falling turnout at his events and fewer volunteers. Already down 6-9 points to McCain [in NH], this just makes his life harder."
Captain's Quarters' Ed Morrissey: "What does this mean for Romney? It's a body blow. He spent somewhere between $8-9 million and came up far short of a victory. That directly reflects on his next race, where John McCain has taken the lead in his backyard...If McCain wins in New Hampshire, Romney has serious problems."
Meanwhile, the bloggers at RedState gloated over Romney's defeat:
Erick Erickson: "Mitt Romney, you couldn't buy Iowa. $10 million and now you're about to get spanked in New Hampshire too. Ouch. Don't worry though, Clinton made his comeback in South Carolina. You can make yours in Michigan."
Pejman Yousefzadeh: "All that money just went down the drain, didn't it? Apparently 'I can look at spreadsheets with the best of them' and 'I can calibrate my positions to make anyone happy' just don't go down well with the electorate, do they?"
Townhall's Hugh Hewitt, a longtime Romney supporter, tried to be optimistic: "Sure, I'd have preferred if Mitt Romney had won, but he's in second place and has a national organization behind him of conservatives who want a conservative nominee. And neither Huck or McCain can claim to be the heir to Reagan, so, on to Wyoming and beyond."
NRO's Jim Geraghty agreed with Hewitt that Romney isn't going anywhere: "The good news for Romney-ites: Your man got a tough, tough blow tonight. It happens. Your guy, and you, are going to get back up on the horse and start trying again. Maybe you push hard in Wyoming, and by Monday you can say you've come in second in one state and first in the other. Then you push hard in New Hampshire. Maybe John McCain beats you there, maybe he doesn't. Then you get back up on the horse and ride into Michigan, and give it your best shot there. And your man has the funds and the resources to just keep on going, all the way through Super Duper Tuesday."
MCCAIN: The Real Winner?
Many conservative bloggers think that Romney's defeat makes McCain the new consensus candidate for fiscal conservatives and foreign policy hawks, who are unlikely to support Huckabee:
Erick Erickson: "The clear winner tonight is John McCain. He talked up Huckabee and he talked down Romney. He sat out of Iowa and still made a respectable showing in the state in fourth place as I write. He's going to get momentum in New Hampshire now and McCain now has the clearest path to victory."
NRO's Yuval Levin: "Tonight seems more important as a bad night for Romney than a good night for Huckabee; which makes it a great night for McCain."
AmSpecBlog's Jennifer Rubin: "McCain may in fact be the consensus that economic conservatives (ok he's keeping the Bush tax cuts, is a free trader and has a terrific healthcare plan) and foreign policy conservatives can live with as the anybody-but-Huckabee. There aren't a lot of options."
Many conservative bloggers are still uncomfortable with the idea of supporting McCain, however:
Scott Johnson: "McCain himself is unpredictable, though it can be predicted with certainty that he would make conservatives uncomfortable as the standard bearer of the Republican Party. He is not a party man; he conceives of himself as bigger than any party."
NRO's Mark Hemingway: "Fred Barnes said on Fox News, 'This is a perfect result for McCain.' Strategy wise that might be true...But every time I even mention McCain on the Corner I get scads of angry emails from true blue conservatives. I wonder what he can do long-term to pacify conservatives if his chance of winning the nomination continues to improve."
Meanwhile, Jim Geraghty offers McCain some advice: "I'd be wary of getting too negative, no matter how tempting it may be -- you may be facing the task of unifying the party sooner than you think."
THOMPSON: On To South Carolina!
Erick Erickson: "Fred Thompson said last night that he has 'a ticket to the next dance.' He's going to go to South Carolina and fight. Good for him. I'm sending more money. He is, after all, carrying the consistent conservative message. And between McCain and him, he has an opening in South Carolina on the immigration issue."
Pejman Yousefzadeh: "I know that [Thompson] didn't campaign as hard as some thought he should have in Iowa. And I know that he doesn't have much money. Despite all of that, he snagged third place. He can get stronger as candidates drop out or as those who looked to Mitt Romney perhaps look again (whether Thompson will get stronger is the question)...One thing is for sure: He's not going anywhere. He's remaining in the race."
Townhall's Mary Katharine Ham: "As is always the way with Fred, because of low expectations, a decent third place finish over the surging McCain would be a pretty keen victory. And, now that Huckabee's got a win under his belt, concerned fiscal conservatives may respond to the last glimmer of hope that Fred is viable. For Fred's sake, though, South Carolina can't come fast enough, and he better do well there."
THOUGHT OF THE DAY: How Huck Did It
Townhall's Patrick Ruffini discusses Huckabee's victory:
"Huckabee won women 40-26% (and men just 29-26%). He won voters under $30,000 by about 2 to 1. Cross those two, take away the Republican filter, and you're talking about a general election constituency that is at least 2-to-1 Democratic. These are not people that conventional primary campaigns are designed to reach. These are the Republican voters the furthest away from National Review, other elite conservative media, and websites like this one. It's easy to see just how the analysts missed the boat on this one."
LEST WE FORGET: Not Everyone Wants Change
Wonkette's Megan Carpentier doesn't think Obama needs to worry about his lack of elderly support:
"So, Barack scored a decisive victory tonight, unless you look exclusively at the old people vote. While he kicked ass in nearly every age group except those over 65, his support goes down progressively as the voters get older and he really, really doesn't do well with the old people (CNN says he only got 18% of old people's votes). Pundits are already pundit-ing that he needs to improve among old people because otherwise that whole 'breaking down barriers' thing he's pontificating about doesn't count if all the old people don't vote for him because he's black. Then again, November 2008 is kind of far off. A lot of 'em will prolly kick the bucket by then."
Posted by Ian Faerstein at January 4, 2008 01:12 PM
The Watergate · 600 New Hampshire Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20037
202-739-8400 · fax 202-833-8069
NationalJournal.com is an Atlantic Media publication.
