Blogs react to Iowa caucuses

The victories of Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and former Republican Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas in the Democratic and Republican Iowa caucuses, respectively, have naturally led to a great deal of discussion throughout the blogosphere.  While most liberal sites, even those of anti-Obama bloggers, were generally congratulatory toward Obama, conservative sites splintered between those that support Huckabee and those that are strongly opposed to his victory.

Here’s a sampling of what they had to say:“The Obama Phenomenon is Real”

Obama’s eight-point win in Iowa had liberal bloggers suggesting that Obama is in the driver’s seat for the Democratic nomination.  David Roberts, blogging at Grist, said that Obama’s victory cemented him as the front-runner.

Obama was always a gamble. Despite his missteps, there was always that faint hint of transcendence. The possibility of greatness, but also the possibility of horrible, cynicism-enforcing failure. The risk of a broken heart.

After tonight, though, the Obama phenomenon is real. He really did attract tons of new young voters. He really did sway tons of Independents and Republicans. It really does feel like a movement. A black candidate won big in a 95% white state. Something genuinely new seems to be happening.

Matthew Yglesias agreed.  “I think the manner of Barack Obama’s win is pretty impressive,” Yglesias said.  “I can’t be the only one who was a bit inclined toward a cynical roll of the eyes at the idea of winning on the back of unprecedented turnout, mobilizing new voters, brining [sic] in young people, etc. That sounds like the kind of thing that people say they’re going to do but never deliver on. But he did deliver. That’s impressive.”

Chris Bowers, writing at OpenLeft, also praised Obama’s campaign.  “Tonight, Obama won because he did something many campaigns have claimed they would do in the past, but never until now had never actually accomplished: he turned out young voters and new voters in record-smashing numbers,” he said.  “This has long been the holy grail of progressive politics, and until now no one had been able to pull it off. Well, Obama pulled it off. That is a remarkable and historic accomplishment. That is why he won.”

American Prospect blogger Ezra Klein, who has been an Obama skeptic, was nevertheless wowed by Obama’s victory speech:

Obama’s finest speeches do not excite. They do not inform. They don’t even really inspire. They elevate. They enmesh you in a grander moment, as if history has stopped flowing passively by, and, just for an instant, contracted around you, made you aware of its presence, and your role in it. He is not the Word made flesh, but the triumph of word over flesh, over color, over despair. The other great leaders I’ve heard guide us towards a better politics, but Obama is, at his best, able to call us back to our highest selves, to the place where America exists as a glittering ideal, and where we, its honored inhabitants, seem capable of achieving it, and thus of sharing in its meaning and transcendence.

Ken Ashford of The Seventh Sense posted a video of Obama’s speech, saying simply, “I put it up here not because it’s topical and of historical significance, but because it really is a good speech.  It reminds me of why I was drawn to the guy in the first place.”

Conservative blogger Andrew Sullivan said of the speech, “Simply put: he sounded like a president. The theme was not just change; it was a new unity. And as a black man, he helps heal the past as well as forge the future. This really was history tonight. To win so many white voices, and bring together so many minorities, and use the unifying language that leaves the toxins of race and partisanship behind: This was the moment America stopped being afraid. This was the America we have missed and have found again.”

Charlene Smith, writing for South Africa’s Thought Leader blog, praised Iowans for backing Obama.  “Damn, I love Americans,” she said.  “Just when you’ve written them off as hopeless, as a nation in decline, they turn around and do something extraordinary, which tells you why the United States of America is still the greatest nation on earth.”

And Jamia Wilson, writing at GirlHeadquarters, said that Obama had earned her support.  “Mr.Obama has the potential to change the way politics are done in this country. I am hopeful that Obama will stay true to his commitment to ‘cleaning up’ Washington, moving away from dirty politics and more toward honest, spirited, and principled social justice. Honestly, Hillary [Clinton] hasn’t proven to me that she is above the fray of ‘business as usual.’”

Huckabee: “One of the Great Political Stories”

In contrast to Obama, Huckabee’s victory drew very mixed reactions from conservative bloggers.  Jeff Kouba at Truth v. The Machine summed both sides up well.

Wow. One of the great political stories in recent memory, for a guy like that to come from absolutely nowhere, overtaking national figures like McCain and Rudy, and flying past Romney who was poured tons of money and time into Iowa.

Now, will Huckabee be able to run nationally? My guess is no. In 1988, Pat Robertson finished a strong second in Iowa, but did poorly in New Hampshire and wasn’t really competitive after that. The evangelical support among Republicans in Iowa is not exactly the national Republican average. In addition, Iowa doesn’t always pick the eventual nominee, in both parties, so this race is hardly over. It’s just beginning.

I’d rather be governed by Huckabee than Robertson any day of the week, but I do have concerns about Huckabee.

Stephen Green of Vodkapundit made those concerns clear as he blasted the “corn-sucking idiots” who supported Huckabee.  “I’ll put this in language even your tiny little Iowa brains can understand: What the f*** [sic] is wrong with you people?” he said.  “The news coming out of Des Moines (literally, French for ‘tell me about the rabbits, George’) tonight is distressing in the extreme. 32 years ago, your Democratic brethren took one look at Jimmy Carter — the worst 20th Century President bar Nixon, and the worst ex-President ever — and declared, “That’s our man!”

But Dave at NixGuy.com blasted back at Green, saying, “The condescension fairly drips here and it’s not only in the post, but check the comments as well.  Somehow I don’t think it’s going to be very persuasive among the hillbilly class.  There is a case to be made against Huckabee, but denigrating his faith, his profession, his region is not the way to do it.”

Rich Lowry at The Corner said that Huckabee has a shot at the nomination: “In the end, the devastating Huckabee line was the one about voting for the candidate who seems like someone you work with rather than someone who laid you off. Both he and Obama rejected their party’s establishments and old-style politics….Huckabee rejected (at least notionally) Rovian zero-sum politics and the Washington GOP establishment. My friend thinks Huckabee has staying power and is going to be strong in South Carolina and Florida. Evangelicals are now fully vested in him, so he has a strong base going forward.”

Other Dems: Hillary Clinton Stumbles, John Edwards Rumbles, Mike Gravel Grumbles

While Obama’s win was the big story, the third-place finish of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., was almost as big a story.  Even before the results were in, Swopa at FireDogLake criticized Clinton for not being bold enough:

For most politicians, throwing out some passionate true-believer rhetoric to reassure the base would be child’s play. But Clinton seems determined to live up to her overcautious stereotype, and you can see “microtargeting”-obsessed pollster/campaign guru Mark Penn checking off the notes she’s supposed to hit (e.g., strong with women, people who liked Bill Clinton, and those who value experience) in her messaging.

Marc Armbinder laid out a possible Clinton comeback plan, including a need to “find some way to go negative against Obama. Some Clinton advisers and aides say that the campaign have a storehouse of opposition research — old and new — that they’ll use against Obama. In Iowa, being directly associated with negative attacks is seen as uncouth and un-Midwestern; in New Hampshire, rude remarks as as welcome as questions and answers.”

Steve Benen of The Carpetbagger Report said that Clinton was still alive for the nomination, but: “Clinton isn’t going anywhere; she has the resources to keep the fight going over the long haul, and has solid support in Feb. 5 states. But now, she’s the underdog, and has no obvious avenues to retaking the lead.”

Former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., drew praise for a feisty concession speech that sounded more like a victory speech.  Josh Silverstein at Joshing Politics said simply, “What an amazing speaker, and what a great President he would be for our country.”

But Ed Brayton at Dispatches from the Culture Wars said that it was still an uphill climb for Edwards.  “Edwards needs a strong showing in New Hampshire. I don’t think he necessarily needs to win it, but he can’t take a big step back like only getting 10% while Hillary and Obama finished in the 40% range.”

Former Sen. Mike Gravel, D-Alaska, angrily reacted to reports that he was dropping out of the race after finishing with no delegates in Iowa.  J. Skyler McKinley, Gravel’s multimedia coordinator, said: “MSNBC pundit Keith Olbermann has incorrectly declared that Sen. Gravel has dropped out of the race following the January third caucus in Iowa. This is not true, and Sen. Gravel is still an active member in this race. We are requesting that MSNBC and Keith Olbermann retract their statement, and issue an apology to the campaign for promoting blatantly false misinformation.”  Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo snarked, “And you thought the comedy writers were on strike …”

Finally, Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., and Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del. earned plaudits on the way out of the race.  Prof. Marcus at And Yes, I DO Take It Personally praised Dodd, saying, “i was hoping for a better showing for chris dodd last night than he got, but i’m also not surprised… not only does defending the constitution, the rule of law, and calling for accountability barely register on the national media and political radar screen, damn few voters have really tuned in to what’s happening to our country.” [Capitalization as in original piece]

And Tara Rowe of The Political Game said of Biden: “Whoever gets the Democratic nomination sure as hell better pick up Senator Biden as an advisor. Secretary of State? Yes, that too. Biden had the experience, the foreign policy experience. Something none of the candidates have is foreign policy experience and don’t believe Hillary when she tells you that she does.”

Other GOP Candidates: Mitt Romney Works to Spin Defeat, Giuliani Works in 9/11

The big loser on the Republican side Thursday night was former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who finished a distant third to Huckabee. D.J. Drummond at Stolen Thunder blasted Romney as a flip-flopper.  “Romney has been trying hard lately to sell himself as a new version of Reagan, but Massachusets [sic] is not California, and Romney’s no Reagan Republican. For one thing, Romney changed his mind – as he has a right to do – on a number of issues, but unlike Reagan, who made the changes a number of years before he ran for President, Romney’s switches are recent enough to justify the `flipper’ tag pinned on Kerry.”

Huckabee backer Kathryn Jean Lopez at The Corner griped, “I wonder what this means about Romney’s get-out-the-vote organization. Wasn’t it supposed to be all that?”

Romney supporter Hugh Hewitt held out hope for a Romney resurgence.  “Shades of 1976 –the long march begins,” Hewitt said, referring to Ronald Reagan’s ultimately futile challenge to then-President Gerald Ford.  Baseball Crank mused, “Does anyone have the heart to tell Hugh that the winners in Iowa in 1976 were Carter and Ford, the eventual nominees?”

Bloggers immediately mocked former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani for his reaction to a distant sixth-place finish in Iowa.  “None of this worries me – Sept. 11, there were times I was worried,” Giuliani said, referring to the terrorist attacks on New York City, as he often does.  Melissa McEwan of Shakesville said, “Satire is officially dead.”  James Joyner of Outside the Beltway added, “Please, it’s simply unseemly to keep invoking the 9/11 attacks for even the most trivial matters.”  And Steven Taylor at Poliblogger said, “Giuliani is starting to sound like a senile old war veterans who can only talk about the day he had to jump out of a flaming bomber while Japanese Zeros tried to shoot him from the sky. Or, perhaps, one’s Grandpa who had to walk uphill to school in the snow.”

Finally, Paul Mirengoff at Power Line said he though he knew the biggest loser on Thursday.

But the deeper answer, I think, lies in the perception that Republicans haven’t governed very well during the past seven years. If the Republican Congress had performed better in general and if President Bush had handled the war in Iraq better (or arguably if he hadn’t launched it), one can easily imagine that George Allen (or perhaps Bill Frist) would be the frontrunner for the nomination right now. The perceived failures of Congress and of the president knocked both of these Senators out of the box, and Bush’s lack of popularity has Republicans flirting with non-traditional Republican options.

There’s irony here because I would argue that the flaws of the Republican Congress and of the Bush presidency don’t stem from adherence to conservative principles. But life is unfair. I’ve long suspected that the Republican party (which is synonymous in large segments of “the public mind” with “conservative”) isn’t perceived as having performed well enough to elect a mainstream conservative president this year. It may turn out that it isn’t viewed as having performed well enough even to nominate a mainstream conservative.