Christopher Rants op-ed: Palin Iowa victory could kill caucuses
Former Iowa House Speaker Christopher Rants has an op-ed in Sunday’s Sioux City Journal where he argues that the Republican caucus electorate’s emphasis on ideological purity could marginalize their impact going forward.
Or as the Republican from Sioux City puts it: If former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin wins the 2012 Iowa caucuses, “I think that will be the end of the Iowa Caucuses as we know it.”
Rants argues what is an emerging theme in the quietly developing caucus campaign, that Republican presidential prospects more associated with their fiscal and economic profiles may be looking for a way to steer clear of the Iowa GOP caucus electorate, which Rants calls “a more conservative lot than you will find in most states.”
“We tend to push candidates for ideological purity. Unlike our coastal cousins, we have a stronger evangelical presence in the party,” Rants writes.
He adds in the post, which you can read here: “Now that’s all fine. But if you are Haley Barbour, a Mitch Daniels, a Mitt Romney, you have to ask yourself if there is a path to victory in a state like Iowa. There is no room to the right of Palin or Huckabee. And if they both run you can expect that it becomes a game of one upsmanship in terms of rhetoric.”
“Iowa has always been a ‘must play here’ state,” he adds. “But candidates may be re-evaluating that. Sure, longshots like Rick Santorum play because it’s cheaper than any other, and he gets lots of free publicity. But other candidates have to decide if there is a path to victory. If someone else goes the McCain route and bypasses us and wins the nomination, we are probably done.”
Rants’ comments are a warning. He notes that he wants to see the caucuses succeed, because of their tradition for insisting on hand-to-hand contact with activists.
While the Iowa GOP, who sent Mike Huckabee the caucus winner in 2008, will be watched for the impact on the nomination, it should also be noted that the past two presidents are caucus winners: Republican George W. Bush in 2000 and Democrat Barack Obama in 2008.
That may have begun altering the perception of the Iowa caucuses from that of a first test of viability to the highest hurdle for the nomination.
Rants argues what is an emerging theme in the quietly developing caucus campaign, that Republican presidential prospects more associated with their fiscal and economic profiles may be looking for a way to steer clear of the Iowa GOP caucus electorate, which Rants calls “a more conservative lot than you will find in most states.”
We can't be so conservative now can we?/s
So, Iowa is more conservative? Come down here to the South and say that. These republican party hacks are doing all they can to inch the party into democrat party 2 territory. They are trying to rename the RINOs "fiscal and economic" conservatives. But the fiscal and economic conservatives are the TEA Party who want no part of these half baked RINOs and socialists.
This is just the republican party elitists' way of saying let us win or we'll take are ball and go away. A veiled bribe, "Iowa, you like your standing in the election process don't you? So play our way or you'll lose it." They hate Palin with a passion. Notice they are not really complaining about Huckabee winning, they know if Palin wins Iowa, she will be validated, vindicated and all of their hard work trashing her will come to nothing. They will try to find a way to stop her by hook or by crook. Even if it means dismantling the Iowa caucuses.
He adds in the post, which you can read here: “Now that’s all fine. But if you are Haley Barbour, a Mitch Daniels, a Mitt Romney, you have to ask yourself if there is a path to victory in a state like Iowa. There is no room to the right of Palin or Huckabee. And if they both run you can expect that it becomes a game of one upsmanship in terms of rhetoric.”This is the reason that the gop establishment is afraid of Palin. they can not go to her right. And a Palin run will make the GOP candidate that wins move to the right.