Why Huckabee and Obama did so well in Iowa

Although Huckabee and Obama are politically two very different people when it comes to platforms and stances, they are very similar when considering the turn of events post-Iowa caucus. Both are “rookies” in their respective parties, but both have won the first state in a series of upcoming primaries and caucuses to decide who will be the presidential candidate for the two major American parties, the Democratic and Republican Party. With the next state New Hampshire’s primaries coming in four days on Tuesday, it is important consider why these two “underdogs” won .
First, it is important to consider the support Huckabee won from the Christian right. According to the Associated Press of January 5, 2008, Huckabee’s social policies and religious past as a Southern Baptist minister have greatly helped him in the Iowa caucus. In fact, the Washington Post of the same date notes that as of right now, Huckabee is the only candidate who has the support of the religious right. The BBC of December 20, 2007 notes that whereas McCain, Romney, and Guliani are strong fiscal conservatives and have some socially conservative policies, none of them have the religious background that appeals to the evangelicals like Huckabee does. The Wall Street Journal of January 4, 2008 reports that in Iowa, evangelicals represented 60% of all the Republican votes. As a result, Huckabee was able to win because he had a strong voter base in Iowa.

Second, Clinton’s flawed campaign strategy helped Obama win the Democratic votes in Iowa. Many magazines in the fall claimed that Hillary Clinton was the “inevitable” Democratic nominee. However, with the surprise victory of Obama in Iowa, it would appear that she is doing something wrong. The Wall Street Journal of January 5, 2008 reports that the reason for this loss in Iowa is because of her flawed campaign theme, which has hurt her more than it has helped. While Obama’s theme is “Change,” Clinton’s primary theme is that of experience. However, Obama’s win in Iowa is a sign that most Democrats want to separate themselves from the Clinton era. Even Bill Clinton described his wife Hillary's campaign as one of going "back to the future;" however, Obama’s theme of turning a fresh page clearly has won voters. The SF Gate of January 5, 2008 reports that “entrance polls in Iowa found that 52 percent of Democratic caucusgoers said a candidate's ability to bring change was the most important factor in their decision.” Of those people who said change was the most important, an overwhelming majority of them choose Obama. Only 20 percent told polls that experience was the most important factor in their decision. Clearly, Clinton’s theme of experience was flawed and helped give Obama the win in Iowa.

Lastly, the vast number of young people who attended the Iowa caucus helped Obama win. According to the Los Angeles Time of January 4, 2008, Iowa's results showed that “young people were more ready to take a chance on a fresh face.” Young people from 18-the late twenties came in larger numbers than ever. It is estimated that three times as many young voters participated in the Iowa caucus than before, making yong voters 23% of the caucusgoers in thie year’s Iowa caucus. The New York Times of the same date reports that “Obama drew support from 57% of voters in the 17-24 and 25-29 age categories. Clinton scored heavily among voters 60 and older.” It is therefore apparent that Obama’s appeal to the younger generation coupled with their activism is another major factor in why Obama was able to win Iowa.
While the New Hampshire state has a population quite different from that of Iowa and well-known as a “maverick state” when it comes to primaries, it is clear that Huckabee and Obama have the political momentum they need to continue to do well in the preliminaries.