Jesus Creed

Jesus Creed


The Iowa Caucuses

posted by xscot mcknight

What did you think of the results of the Iowa caucuses?



Advertisement
Comments read comments(72)
post a comment
Jennifer

posted January 4, 2008 at 12:28 am


WONDERFUL for Obama :-) I am very pleased.



report abuse
 

Tyler Braun

posted January 4, 2008 at 12:38 am


From what the “experts” were saying…things don’t look good for Hilary. Her demeanor was still that she was the best, but if you lose that doesn’t match up. I really liked Huckabee’s speech where he talked a lot about us instead of me. He needs to prove he can win over evangelicals and unbelievers alike before I think he can hold his own. Romney dominated the percentage of non-born again Republican votes. Whether you like Obama or not…you can’t say he isn’t a good speaker. One expert called his speech MLK Jr esque. Either it was an awesome speech or he is a homer.



report abuse
 

Wonders for Oyarsa

posted January 4, 2008 at 12:46 am


I was thrilled. A Huckabee vs. Obama campaign, where both agree not to be negative, to respect and admire each other, and debate the issues, could be wonderfully healing for this country.



report abuse
 

gmw

posted January 4, 2008 at 12:51 am


Quite pleased indeed. Obama full speed ahead!



report abuse
 

Chris Ridgeway

posted January 4, 2008 at 1:11 am


Surprised that Obama won. I expected Clinton first, then Obama, and Edwards at a distant third. Not surprised by Huckabee, because he’s been on my buzz list for weeks. But I’m still pretty confused on whether I would vote for him. I don’t like the “evangelical” candidate because my emerging tendencies wanna ditch that. But he’s funny, plays the bass guitar, and seems to be rather normal. Have you seen his Leno clips on YouTube? They’re good.



report abuse
 

eugene

posted January 4, 2008 at 1:14 am


I think you can now say that the primaries will get very interesting and intense. Backs are against the wall for some. But seriously, who would have thunk last year that Huckabee would have been in this position after Iowa? Anyone?



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted January 4, 2008 at 2:07 am


My opinion of this matter can be reduced to two words:
GO OBAMA!!!



report abuse
 

pam w

posted January 4, 2008 at 2:12 am


democratic turnout seemed to mirror the Jesus Creed caucus…they should be paying attention



report abuse
 

Denny Burk

posted January 4, 2008 at 2:27 am


Dear Scot,
You’ve got some Obama supporters reading your blog. Scandalous! :)
My response is here: http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=1095.
Much luf,
Denny



report abuse
 

don bryant

posted January 4, 2008 at 3:44 am


I am not an Obama fan ideologically but he certainly represents a certain sophistication in style and thought. Huckabee embarrasses me. As an evangelical Christian I get tired of the Robertson, Falwell and now Huckabee shoot-from-the-hip, folksy religious types. It represents what I want to leave behind, even if I am at root conservative. I am sad to see that Huckabee has so much sway with evangelicals. Not a good day for Republicans or the church.



report abuse
 

Jason Dye

posted January 4, 2008 at 3:59 am


without watching tv, i’m trying to follow the elections as closely as i can, but i still don’t think that i can get behind Huckabee.
however, if what Wonders for Oyarsa (#3) said proves to be true (and it’s not just hokum, smoke and mirrors), than i resound, “Amen. let the healing and positive energy begin.”



report abuse
 

Michael Bird

posted January 4, 2008 at 4:15 am


Scot,
To provide a non-American perspective, I think the two best candidates won. For the Dem. Nomination, I’m thinking “anyone but Hillary”. Obama certainly has the sophistication and intelligence that would make him a good Democrat President. I like Huckabee because he’s a moral conservative but an economic liberal. Sadly, I don’t think Huckabee will winover fiscal conservatives in the GOP who want to cut taxes for the rich, and Giuliani cannot winover moral conservatives because he appears to be morally vacuous. So I think it will come down to Giuliani or Romney at the end of the day for the Repub. Nomination. That’s how an Aussie expat living in Scotland sees it.



report abuse
 

Cam

posted January 4, 2008 at 4:40 am


I’m trying hard to know how to think about American politics (I’ve only visited twice). Perhaps watching more of the West Wing would help. Perhaps any American President or politician that helped make American politics more intelligible (at least to me) is a good thing. Obama not only reads books, but writes them too – surely this would be an improvement!



report abuse
 

Randy Holl

posted January 4, 2008 at 6:54 am


As a participant, I was surprised at the high turnout at the Republican caucus (so were the organizers) There was a real sense that people are tired of much of the politics as usual…want more positive approaches, want dialogue, and were quietly (1 button and 1 t-shirt) in a crowd of 194, heavily for Huckabee with 98 votes. If such a result can just change the tone of politics, it will be a good thing…the rest is yet to be determined.



report abuse
 

Ben Wheaton

posted January 4, 2008 at 6:55 am


Since I’m a McCain man, naturally I was pleased with his showing considering that he pulled the nose of the ethanol advocates only a few weeks ago.



report abuse
 

dhersh

posted January 4, 2008 at 7:00 am


I am intrigued by both Obama and Huckabee and agree with post #3, a race between the two of them could be refreshing.
I am by no means a Huckabee supporter, but I wonder don bryant (#10), why Huckabee embarrasses you?
My fear is that just as “evangelical” Christians in the past have been pawns of the Republican party and now “emerging” Christians may become pawns of the Democrat party. I mean, can I be an emerging Christian and prefer Huckabee (or whatever Republican) because I think their policies on health care, energy independence, and economy are the best for this country as a whole? Or will I get the same weird looks I got when I attended an evangelical church but supported Clinton (and Kerry)?
Will we question the sincerity of people’s faith based on what their politics are?



report abuse
 

Ben

posted January 4, 2008 at 7:29 am


I like the idea that voters are sending a message of change. Time will tell if Obama and Huckabee can continue to have success, but for me, they are the two candidates that represent change from the long standing politics of this country. Whether or not people support their specific stances on issues, I’d like to see the message sent that we’re no longer accepting the traditional politicians.



report abuse
 

Diane

posted January 4, 2008 at 7:32 am


If you take your cues on what the power elite is thinking from the op-ed page of the Washington Post (not a bad place to start), Huckabee is their worst nightmare. The Obama-Huckabee win speaks loudly of a grassroots clamor for change. If the population disillusioned enough that the elections break wide open, then it might really be a Huckabee vs. Obama face off though my gut still tells me Clinton will lead the Democratic ticket. Again, like others on this blog, I am getting my information without television. I do think the power elite is going to do everything it can to stop Huckabee.



report abuse
 

Diane

posted January 4, 2008 at 7:57 am


Interesting op/ed piece, “The Two Earthquakes” by David Brooks: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/04/opinion/04brooks.html?ref=opinion



report abuse
 

dhersh

posted January 4, 2008 at 7:59 am


I agree with you Ben. Huckabee seems different (in some, not all) ways from past Republicans (i.e. Bush) and Obama seems different (again in some, not all) ways from other Democrats. That is what intrigues me about both and is why I wonder why it was said Huckabee “embarrasses”
Peace



report abuse
 

Kris

posted January 4, 2008 at 8:26 am


I think it would be awesome to have a Huckabee/Obama race. They are both refreshing, appear trustworthy and not the same old typical politicians. I like them both.



report abuse
 

joe troyer

posted January 4, 2008 at 8:29 am


all leading candidates seem refreshing and a change of pace. that is why they get elected. at the end of the day, they get sucked into the same machine everyone else gets sucked into. business as usual. i am afraid huckabee is the same old neo-con in new shoes.



report abuse
 

Bill V.

posted January 4, 2008 at 8:31 am


I like dhersh (#16) comments on pawns. Good points.
I am not too sure what to say about Ben’s comments (#17). All candidates talk about “change” but no one is defining it. The Iowa Caucus is no exception. A lot of undecided-s in Iowa partly due to the fact “change” is not being clearly defined. It sounds good but no one is really providing substance.
The Iowa Caucus was a clear upset for Hillary. She came in third. That has to hurt. But she is also campaigning good in New Hampshire which has historically been strong regarding women and politics. She just may rise to the top of the heap in NH.
Also, everybody, please keep in mind there are more than 2 political parties in the USA. I for one am checking out other parties because none of the 2-party candidates appear to have much imagination or guts.



report abuse
 

josenmiami

posted January 4, 2008 at 8:33 am


Hi Michael (#12): I am still holding out for McCain as the best candidate, especially in the light of the unrest in Pakistan. Ben (#15): do you know what percentage McCain got? Although he was mnentioned in passing last night on the radio, no one mentioned his percentage.
I like Obama and Huckabee… Huckabee is charming and knows how to talk to people… but the ethics questions surrounding his accepting gifts as governor concern me. I REALLY like Obama’s civility … but his lack of foreign policy experience concerns me.
If it winds up Obama against anyone but McCain, I will probably vote Obama. If it is McCain versus Hilary or Edwards… I am voting McCain.
As one who believes in the value of democracy, I do believe it would be good for our country to have an alteration of power soon — from Republican to Democrat. Democracy requires regular alternation of power, rather than hegemonic, one-party domination.



report abuse
 

Ruth Tucker

posted January 4, 2008 at 8:34 am


The best thing about the Huckabee win, as he loves to remind us, is that big money doesn’t always prevail. Wouldn’t that be a wonderful trend for the future! I think my man Joe Biden must have gotten buried in a snow bank on a remote Iowa farm. I have heard only the top stories. Has anyone found him yet?



report abuse
 

josenmiami

posted January 4, 2008 at 8:37 am


#24 Ruth, I heard the Biden and Dobbs have withdrawn from the Presidential race after garning 1 or 2 percent of the vote in Iowa.



report abuse
 

art

posted January 4, 2008 at 8:40 am


I’ve never been a fan of Iowa or their caucus!
Hillary ’08!!



report abuse
 

Tom

posted January 4, 2008 at 9:06 am


missionalchurchleadersforobama.com – No wait. That’s too long for a domain name.
How’s this? eikonsforobama.com



report abuse
 

Ben Wheaton

posted January 4, 2008 at 9:20 am


joseinmiami,
McCain came in 4th, about 200 votes behind Thompson. He and Thompson were basically tied at 13% apiece.



report abuse
 

Allie

posted January 4, 2008 at 9:22 am


Three cheers for Obama!
Hip, hip, hooray!
Hip, hip, hooray!
Hip, hip, hooray!
I like the domain name, Tom. I’ve always been an Obama fan. I can remember watching his ’04 Democratic convention speech with tears in my eyes, completely blown away. I’m for Obama, all the way.



report abuse
 

Dan Brennan

posted January 4, 2008 at 9:34 am


Obama could the political story of the year, decade, and century. Too early to tell yet, but I think his win is exciting. Huckabee is fresh, too. I can’t see how a republican candidate will be the next in office, but it would be quite an interesting race if Obama and Huckabee faced each other.



report abuse
 

Randy Holl

posted January 4, 2008 at 9:46 am


regards #26..
For the non Iowans, the Democrats must have 15% of the support at each caucus to be “viable” and continue…unlike the Republicans that just do a straight vote…If a candidate has 14.5% he or she gets 0% from that caucus. So Dodd and Biden and others may show very small numbers (of the total delegates selected) but actually could have had up to 15% of the support.



report abuse
 

ron

posted January 4, 2008 at 9:49 am


Perhaps Andrew Sullivan http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/01/the-state-of-th.html captured the significance of the evening: “Twice as many people turned out for the Democrats than the Republicans. Clearly independents prefer the Dems. … Now look at how the caucus-goers defined themselves in the entrance polls. Among the Dems: Very Liberal: 18 percent; Somewhat Liberal: 36 percent; Moderate: 40 percent; Conservative: 6 percent. Now check out the Republicans: Very Conservative: 45 percent; Somewhat Conservative: 43 percent; Moderate: 11 percent; Liberal: 1 percent.”
Twice as many people turned out for the Dems as the Republicans, those who turned out were much more balanced and centrist in their points of view.



report abuse
 

Bill V.

posted January 4, 2008 at 9:57 am


Dodd and Biden are out.



report abuse
 

KJ

posted January 4, 2008 at 10:05 am


Highly recommend the David Brooks column linked above. His conclusion:
So the race will move on to New Hampshire. Mitt Romney is now grievously wounded. Romney represents what?s left of Republicanism 1.0. Huckabee and McCain represent half-formed iterations of Republicanism 2.0. My guess is Republicans will now swing behind McCain in order to stop Mike.
Huckabee probably won?t be the nominee, but starting last night in Iowa, an evangelical began the Republican Reformation.



report abuse
 

Kim

posted January 4, 2008 at 10:19 am


I’m truly for Huckabee. If I were to vote democrat, I’d be glad to see Obama win the nomination. I’m very happy about the Iowa caucus results and would enjoy following a Huckabee/Obama race!



report abuse
 

Alice

posted January 4, 2008 at 10:23 am


Our whole family traipsed through the cold and snow two blocks to our neighborhood elementary school to participate in the caucus. The atmosphere was absolutely electric.
At first, our entire precinct was to be in the school’s media center. It quickly became apparent that there was NO WAY all the people would fit in there, so we were herded down to the cafeteria … and eventually didn’t fit there. When the caucus actually started there were so many Obama supporters that our group had to move up to the media center again. There we stood (and sweated) and ate cookies together. For fun, we asked how many were caucusing for the first time … I would guess that 95% of the hands went up.
To count ourselves, we counted off like kids in a kindergarten classroom … and yet it was a solemn moment … everyone quiet, heads craning to see who the next person would be to shout out their number. When the last person yelled out their number, a little African-American boy yelled out, “Obama has 118 votes!!!” It was beautiful.
Bottom line was that Obama supporters beat both Clinton and Edwards supporters 2-1. We had 118 to Edwards 58 and Clintons 54. However, Obama got 3 delegates, Edwards and Clinton each 2 … so it made the vote look much closer than it actually was.
Many folks in our room were Independents or Republicans who had registered as Dems that night just so they could caucus for Obama.
We all traipsed home and watched the results on national tv. Our kids were thrilled. They’d never seen such a quick cause-effect scenario before!
We thought Obama’s speech was historic. To us, the comparison in demeanor and content between Obama and Huckabee was stark … very stark.



report abuse
 

tim atwater

posted January 4, 2008 at 10:35 am


the best in this in my view is the real chance for redemptive reconciliation…
i agree with those who’ve said the two best won in each race…not ‘best’ ontologically (we’re all loved by God) but best for healing, reconciling, breaking out of the molds (moulds?) each party has been stuck in…
Best of all is the church breaking off hopefully forever with the far-right… and knee-jerk establismentarianism…
(in my view)
happy Epiphanies!



report abuse
 

eugene

posted January 4, 2008 at 10:46 am


again, suprised about last night but there’s a long way to go. wrote some thoughts here:
http://eugenecho.wordpress.com/2008/01/04/thoughts-about-the-iowa-caucus/
the lesson about huckabee: don’t mess with chuck norris!



report abuse
 

Alice

posted January 4, 2008 at 10:56 am


Can I just say …without starting something here … that I thought it looked a bit ridiculous when Huckabee was doing his speech and Chuck Norris and his very glamorous wife (? – girlfriend?) were both standing behind Huckabee? When we finally realized who the familiar face was behind Huckabee, we all fell over we were laughing so hard. It had a bit of a weird circus feel to it.
When Obama spoke, it was just him … with a huge crowd of diverse supporters in the background. It just felt like a much more serious moment … befitting the seriousness of our country’s current circumstances in the world.



report abuse
 

watchman

posted January 4, 2008 at 10:58 am


I’m hoping to see a rebirth in populism. I see this especially in Obama. He raised a huge war chest from over a half million people. This is opposed to the usual PAC, and lobbyist donations. Also, Huckabee struck a populist chord in Iowa.



report abuse
 

Randy Holl

posted January 4, 2008 at 11:10 am


It occurs to me after looking at the comments here…
Does it matter whether we are labeling ourselves “evangelical”, “emergent”, or whatever when it comes to politics? Isn’t the real issue whether we are, in fact, salt and light to whatever political persuasion we have? Or are we still seeking influence by mere political power from whichever side of the street we think is “orthodox” for us? Last time I checked the real hope of the world is not in any of those, no matter how wonderful they are, who got support last night.



report abuse
 

joe troyer

posted January 4, 2008 at 11:15 am


i am still hanging on for ron paul.



report abuse
 

Nathan

posted January 4, 2008 at 11:38 am


I too am hanging on for Ron Paul. He is the only guy on either side that isn’t business as usual, given our plutocracy.
Cheers.



report abuse
 

JD

posted January 4, 2008 at 11:52 am


I’m disappointed that Biden and Dodd left the race so soon. There were only ~2500 democratic caucusers altogether, compared to republicans who had like ~115,000 caucusers (the percentages are misleading I think). That difference makes me wonder whether either of those guys might have had a much better chance in other states. But in any case, with such low turnout on the dems side I think it’s still all in the air.



report abuse
 

Dan Ra

posted January 4, 2008 at 12:05 pm


Someone mentioned above about Obama’s lack of foreign policy. Huckabee not only lacks foreign policy experience, he doesn’t seem to know the biggest political news around the world (NIE on Iran, Pakistan and martial law)!!
Obama ’08.
Scot, ‘fess up. Endorse a candidate!! =)



report abuse
 

Beyond Words

posted January 4, 2008 at 12:06 pm


Huckabee doesn’t embarrass me, but the media’s focus on his evangelical following does. Even the commenter named Nina (missed her last name) on Fox News last night couldn’t keep the disdainful expression off her face when she offered her opinion. She kept attributing Huckabee’s success to the evangelical bastion Iowa is. Sorry, Nina, Iowa is a fairly liberal state and it’s not in the Bible belt.
I think something else is at work here. There’s a paradigm shift toward the grassroots in leadership models. Huckabee knows how to let the people behind him lift him up instead of relying on top down organizational strategies. He’s not an elitist Republican–and that, if anything, will be his downfall. There are too many rich and powerful Republicans who will tear him down.
Like Randy in comment #42, I don’t put my hope in our national leaders, but I do pray for them, and believe we should hold them accountable just like Paul did the Roman magistrates.
BTW, Chuck Norris does embarrasses me.



report abuse
 

Scot McKnight

posted January 4, 2008 at 12:11 pm


I want to reiterate our civility policy here … avoid making derogatory comments about any of the candidates.



report abuse
 

Bob Cornwall

posted January 4, 2008 at 1:24 pm


I am ecstatic!!! Barack Obama has broken through and delivered the message we need to hear. If we’re willing to join together and work together then there is hope for a new tomorrow.
Obama has give a big NO to the politics of fear and division.
Wonderful!



report abuse
 

qb

posted January 4, 2008 at 1:59 pm


Thrilled that Obama won on the Dem side; terribly disappointed that Huckabee won on the GOP side. For weeks I’ve been trying to put my finger on what it is that disquiets me so deeply about Huckabee; then he hired Ed Rollins, and I finally figured it out. To wit:
Huckabee is not what he would like us to think he is. Ed Rollins is a win-at-ALL-costs, Sherman’s-march-to-the-sea kind of guy with a long nasty streak. Hiring Rollins may have been politically shrewd, but Rollins is not the kind of man (as his recent comments and conduct have amply shown) that will project the down-home holiness and self-restraint and kindness that Huckabee’s Lord requires of us. If Huckabee is who he claims to be, he is unequally yoked with Rollins and is guilty of terribly judgment; and if Huckabee is not who he claims to be, he and Rollins are peas in a pod. I suspect the latter.
qb



report abuse
 

Jeff Hyatt

posted January 4, 2008 at 2:14 pm


Completely shocked at Sen. Clinton’s showing. Not surprised at Sen. Obama’s turn out. I still think it is wide open on the Republican side.
God bless us all!



report abuse
 

kent

posted January 4, 2008 at 2:26 pm


One comment that has stayed with me is that one candidate that has won the Iowa caucus has ever won the presidency.



report abuse
 

kent

posted January 4, 2008 at 2:26 pm


that should read no candidate… sorry



report abuse
 

Bill V.

posted January 4, 2008 at 2:37 pm


Responding to #49 – I am not sure what Obama has done. I still see him a novelty act. He hasn’t done much as a senator and he comes off being more window-dressing for the Democrats.
Also we need to remember, Washington is a sub-culture. One person will not necessary change the way our republic does the business of government. There are 2 other branches of government.
You need to demonstrate how Obama has given a big NO to the politics of fear and division. Winning a caucus is only one step to winning an election and the vote of the American people.



report abuse
 

RJS

posted January 4, 2008 at 2:43 pm


JD #45 – more than 200,000 or so voted in the democratic caucuses. The number in the results are State Delegate Equivalents – not voters. In contrast it was about 115,000 republicans. Different parties, different methods, big turn out for both parties.
kent #52,53 – Bush won in 2000 did he not?



report abuse
 

B-W

posted January 4, 2008 at 2:44 pm


#52 (#53, really) asserts that no candidate that won the Iowa caucus has ever won the presidency. That’s not true. Here’s a link to some Iowa caucuses over the past few decades. While there aren’t a lot of folks to win both the Iowa caucus and the presidency (and most who did were running opposed. But not all), clearly a few have.



report abuse
 

B-W

posted January 4, 2008 at 2:49 pm


That should have said, “Most who did were running UNopposed.”
But, again, not all. And it’s important to note that point.



report abuse
 

Matthew

posted January 4, 2008 at 3:35 pm


I think there is too much smoke for just a little fire.
http://www.matthewsblog.waynesborochurchofchrist.org



report abuse
 

Julie

posted January 4, 2008 at 3:47 pm


I love that history was made: Obama, first black candidate to win a primary. Wow.
And to the foreign policy points – Obama is the only candidate who has lived abroad (Jakarta), who has personal connections to a foreign country (Kenya). I call that street cred.
And, he raises his money from supporters, not lobbyists. Go Obama.



report abuse
 

B-W

posted January 4, 2008 at 3:55 pm


Thinking more about the Iowa caucuses, and the general lack of actual winning Presidents who won the caucus, I got to thinking about something I brought up in another thread. At the time, I commented how a candidate can win, even if a majority would have preferred any other candidate, simply because the winning candidate got the plurality of the vote (that is to say, more people voted for that candidate than any other particular candidate. This has actually been the case in many of our recent presidential elections. And I haven’t even gotten into the electoral college yet!).
Anyway, someone mentioned in response to my original comment back then that this would be solved by a “run off” system (such is as indeed used in some municipalities). The idea is, you vote for a 1st choice, and also a 2nd choice (maybe even a 3rd or 4th). If your first choice is the lowest-ranked out of all the choices, and no other choice wins more than 50% of the vote, your second choice is used, and the votes retabulated. This process can be repeated until some candidate gets 50% or more of the vote.
Perhaps part of the reason the Iowa caucus has generally failed to produce a winning candidate is because the caucus uses something similar to (but not the same as) this method (although this is currently only true of the Democratic caucus). I think the cut-off in the Iowa caucus this year was 15%. If a candidate didn’t have enough delegates at the caucus to get 15% (and thus be considered “viable”), those delegates could support another candidate.
I can’t be sure, but I’m guessing that this system is at least partly responsible for the Obama victory. However, because it’s not used for the “real” election (Actually, that should be elections, plural, since in most states, whoever wins that state gets ALL of the electoral votes for that state), it can often produce a rather different result.



report abuse
 

Christine

posted January 4, 2008 at 4:08 pm


Bill V #54 – Glad you mentioned the other branches of government. Personally, I’m most happy when the president is of one party and Congress is controlled by the other. Good checks and balances, though it does sometimes make it harder to get things done. That’s not always a bad thing, imo.
Julie #59 – Seriously, I don’t think that Obama having lived in Indonesia from the ages of 5-9, approx., gives him street cred in terms of foreign policy. I lived overseas as an adult for over a year and that certainly doesn’t improve my qualifications to run the country. Neither does my having ‘ties’ to another foreign country.
This isn’t addressed to you personally, Julie, ’cause I’ve seen other Obama supporters saying the same thing. I just think if one has to resort to a candidate living in another country when he was 6 or 7 as giving one experience in foreign policy, well, that says a lot about the candidate’s lack of foreign policy experience, ya know? But hey, Huckabee hasn’t had any foreighn policy experience either.
I’m intrigued by Obama, but need to see and hear more before I make up my mind. As far as the republican side of things, am glad McCain is stayin’ alive!



report abuse
 

Bill V.

posted January 4, 2008 at 4:09 pm


Obama being the first black candidate to win a primary seems somewhat irrelevant to his campaign. It’s speculative to see this getting him to the White House.
He lived in Kenya. Good for him. He may have a good Kenyan policy but you can’t generalize and attempt to apply it to his overall foreign policy.
Lobbyists can donate personally and not through the auspices of the lobby group. I think, all the candidates will take money from lobby groups or lobbyists one way or the other.



report abuse
 

Tim

posted January 4, 2008 at 4:14 pm


I imagine Pat Robertson may regret endorsing Rudy since Huckabee, a real evangelical, has done so well in Iowa. That endorsement continues to amaze me–with Rudy being about as liberal as Hillary–just Republican. Whoever moves forward, we need someone to get us out of Iraq. That seems to be the defining need in our country at this time.



report abuse
 

Wonders for Oyarsa

posted January 4, 2008 at 4:30 pm


Frankly, in my dream world, I see Obama losing ever so slightly to Hillary Clinton, and then running as the vice presidential candidate under Mike Huckabee… ;-)



report abuse
 

Korey

posted January 4, 2008 at 6:18 pm


I think large cultural shifts, of which the emerging conversation is a part, are affecting and altering both parties. The size of the wins by both Huckabee and Obama are indicative of this change. They were both not establishment candidates. They both possess a certain authenticity. They both emphasized positive unifying themes that aren’t in lock step with the bitter partisanship of their party leadership. I like them both, along with McCain and Paul, but am definitely inspired by Obama and plan to vote for him when he’s the nominee.



report abuse
 

Ted M. Gossard

posted January 4, 2008 at 6:18 pm


I also like both of these candidates. I’m open to others. But probably would favor these two for the general election.
I would like to see this, and would like to imagine an historically civil campaign, with no mudslinging and a good, thorough and respectful debate on issues. That could set a precedent. Always good to dream.



report abuse
 

Peggy

posted January 4, 2008 at 10:59 pm


WforO #64,
I had that same thought! :) Very interesting….
I’m still wondering what kind of showing Fred Thompson will make…lots of miles to go, friends 8)



report abuse
 

Andy Rowell

posted January 4, 2008 at 11:47 pm


I have put my post below:
http://www.andyrowell.net/andy_rowell/2008/01/poor-polling-we.html
How many evangelicals voted for Democrats in Iowa?  We’ll never know.  And if things don’t change, we won’t know in future primaries either. 
Iowa has many evangelicals.  Many more Democrats (239,000) voted than Republicans (112,000).  But the press is making a big deal about how most evangelicals picked Mike Huckabee.  This is based on polling of only Republicans.  If there are many evangelicals in Iowa and twice as many Iowans voted for a Democrat, then probably many evangelicals voted for Democrats.  (Many of the young evangelicals pastors I know like Barack Obama and this seems to be borne out in an informal poll at Christianity Today where Obama only trails Huckabee).  But we’ll never know how many evangelicals voted for Democrats because all of the media organizations use the same polling data and the pollsters didn’t ask Democratic voters anything about their religion.
It seems that Edison Media Research and Mitofsky Interational is doing the entrance/exit polls for all of the primaries for all of the major news organizations. Here is a quote on the Edison site:"In partnership with Mitofsky International, Edison currently conducts all exit polls and provides election projections and analysis for ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox, NBC and the Associated Press."  No wonder all of the headlines today sound the same.  They are all relying on the same very limited data! 
Edison/Mitofsky asked very different questions to the Republican and Democratic voters.  The results are at the New York Times website.  The exact same results are at CNN’s website: Republican results, Democratic results.  No questions about religious preferences were asked of Democratic voters while two questions were asked of Republican voters.      Worse, if things don’t change in the polling, we won’t know for any information about the religious preferences of voters for the other primaries either because Edison/Mitofsky is the only one doing polling for all of those primaries as well.
The media organizations should demand better from the Edison/Mitofsky.
Andy Rowell
Th.D. Student
Duke Divinity School
Blog: Church Leadership Conversations



report abuse
 

Julie

posted January 5, 2008 at 3:34 pm


Edited to add: Obama wins as first black candidate in an Iowa caucus. Should have clarified.



report abuse
 

Alice

posted January 5, 2008 at 5:11 pm


My husband and I (Fuller Seminary, Trinity Divinity School – respectively) both voted for Obama. We decided we might not be evangelicals anymore based on the media’s loosely held definition. We decided we would not like to be evangelicals, if the word has come to mean what the media portrays.
We are Christians who voted for Obama. Period.
I’d imagine you would find 1,000s of us in Iowa.



report abuse
 

Shane Vander Hart

posted January 6, 2008 at 1:25 am


I was thrilled with the Huckabee win, but not surprised he was polling well in Iowa. He won overwhelmingly in my precinct. I wasn’t surprised by Obama’s win, but I was surprised by the magnitude and energy. He was the second choice for many of the lower tier candidates of the Democratic party (candidates with less than 15% – their supporters can choose another candidate in the Iowa Democratic Caucus), Hillary was the second choice for no one.
I’m a Huckabee supporter, but would enjoy a Obama/Huckabee race. I like Obama – he’s my favorite Democrat candidate, but I don’t like his stand on social issues and he has no experience governing.



report abuse
 

JACK

posted January 7, 2008 at 2:26 pm


I think it turned out much how one would predict, frankly. Although I must admit I don’t understand some of the comments about Huckabee on this thread. Maybe it is just me, but I don’t see him as “different from past Republicans”. I really would love to know what substantively people are seeing, because I don’t have a clue. In fact, he seems to be running precisely George Bush’s campaign of 2000, which relied heavily on folksy connection with people and his “ordinariness”.
As for Obama, my only question is whether their is substance behind his “change” message. I don’t know yet. I hear the word “change” quite a lot. I hear a lot of pious-sounding, sentiment-evoking statements about tone and style, but I haven’t really seen evidence that he’d substantively change things. That’s not to way in good or bad on his candidacy per se. His popularity has just struck me as sentimentalism.
Frankly, that’s what seems to be the common factor between the popularity of Huckabee and Obama.



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

More Blogs To Enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting Jesus Creed. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here are some other blogs you may also enjoy: Red Letters with Tom Davis Recent prayer post on Prayables Most Recent Inspiration blog post Happy Reading!  

posted 11:15:58am Aug. 16, 2012 | read full post »

Our Common Prayerbook 30 - 3
Psalm 30 thanks God (vv. 1-3, 11-12) and exhorts others to thank God (vv. 4-5). Both emerge from the concrete reality of David's own experience. Here is what that experience looks like:Step one: David was set on high and was flourishing at the hand of God's bounty (v. 7a).Step two: David became too

posted 12:15:30pm Aug. 31, 2010 | read full post »

Theology After Darwin 1 (RJS)
One of the more important and more difficult pieces of the puzzle as we feel our way forward at the interface of science and faith is the theological implications of discoveries in modern science. A comment on my post Evolution in the Key of D: Deity or Deism noted: ...this reminds me of why I get a

posted 6:01:52am Aug. 31, 2010 | read full post »

Almost Christian 4
Who does well when it comes to passing on the faith to the youth? Studies show two groups do really well: conservative Protestants and Mormons; two groups that don't do well are mainline Protestants and Roman Catholics. Kenda Dean's new book is called Almost Christian: What the Faith of Ou

posted 12:01:53am Aug. 31, 2010 | read full post »

Let's Get Neanderthal!
The Cave Man Diet, or Paleo Diet, is getting attention. (Nothing is said about Culver's at all.) The big omission, I have to admit, is that those folks were hunters -- using spears or smacking some rabbit upside the conk or grabbing a fish or two with their hands ... but that's what makes this diet

posted 2:05:48pm Aug. 30, 2010 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.