Skipping Iowa is strange strategy

By The Gazette Editorial Board

-----

There's been a lot of squawking in recent weeks about the relevance of Iowa's 2012 presidential caucuses. Most of it is just that.

We've seen traditional-recipe bashing - Iowa is too small, too white, too ethanol-obsessed and not urban enough to deserve such a prominent place in picking the leader of a diverse nation.

And there's a new, extra-cranky variety - Iowa's Republicans are too evangelical and too obsessed with social issues such as same-sex marriage to deserve such a prominent role in picking a GOP nominee.

Pundits say the verdict of Iowa's caucuses, these confounding precinct meetings, should be discounted. Some GOP candidates, such as former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, are thinking about skipping Iowa. Publicly, Huntsman says his opposition to ethanol and farm subsides would make him a corn state pinata. His moderate stands on gay civil unions and climate change are seen by some as deal-breakers for conservative Iowa activists.

The relevance question has really already been answered. Candidates are here. Journalists from all over the country are here to cover those candidates. And by February 2012, the insatiable thirst of our massive political/media complex churning and chattering 24 hours a day will be so desperate for a voters' verdict that Iowa will once again be the center of the political universe. Bank on it.

We assume President Obama will do pretty well on the Democratic side. But will Iowa's Republican caucus verdict be relevant or significant in the race going forward? Truth is, we won't know that until it's over.

It will depend on who wins, or actually, who beats expectations. Iowa has never been all about winners, although victors sometimes go on to grab nominations. Iowa has been about shaving the field down to size, exposing pretenders and christening contenders. And that's exactly what will happen on caucus night next year.

Republicans who take their responsibility very seriously will render a verdict that will reflect months of up-close campaigning. The candidates who come here are making their case to Middle American voters, some of the same voters they'll need to win what promises to be a tight general election. Skipping out on those voters, and refusing a loud bullhorn that Iowa's high-profile race hands candidates, is a very strange way to run for president. And, if the past is a guide, a largely unsuccessful strategy.

The notion that a contrary stand on any one or two issues disqualifies a hopeful from fair consideration in Iowa is incorrect. But don't believe us. Come here and find out.

Whether Iowa's result is truly important is up to the voters of New Hampshire, South Carolina and beyond. Iowa is the first lap in a what might be a very long race.

And we think it's a good place to start.

n Comments: thegazette.com/

category/opinion/editorial or

editorial@sourcemedia.net