Share This Article with a Friend!

Assault on America, Day 398: What would have happened in Iowa if Democrats could count

No Iowa Caucus Results
“The Democrat Caucus is an unmitigated disaster. Nothing works, just like they ran the Country. Remember the 5 Billion Dollar Obamacare Website, that should have cost 2% of that. The only person that can claim a very big victory in Iowa last night is ‘Trump’.”

President Donald Trump tweeted this message at 6:30 in the morning on February 4, hours after the Democrat Iowa caucuses results would have/should have been reported. Some sort of technical “glitch” (or something more sinister, a huge Bernie Sanders win?) prevented the party from releasing results from its first-in-the-nation Hawkeye State gatherings. Or who knows, maybe the Democrats recruited Adam Schiff to oversee the process and he brought in the Russians and Ukrainians to do the tabulating. You never know… it could happen.

Imagine if a Super Bowl winner wasn’t evident when the clock hit zero. There’d be a nationwide revolt. Good thing Democrats weren’t in charge on Sunday!

This hours-long delay may not end up altering the Democrat presidential race, but it’s a public relations disaster for party leaders. What an incompetent collection of dolts. Imagine the conspiracy theories that will circulate if/when the “winners” don’t match the polls… Scary.

At any rate, since no one knows when the actual results will show up -- if ever -- here’s a look at what I surmised would happen. Call it a look into a giant Iowa-sized crystal ball (one that works, unlike the Democrat machinery!):

All hail President Bernie Sanders!

We may be getting a bit ahead of ourselves in declaring the Vermont senator’s victory in November, but if you witnessed news coverage of the septuagenarian’s resounding Iowa win on Monday night -- and you frequently engage in fantastic dreaming -- you just might be making travel plans to Washington DC ahead of time to be at “The Bern’s” inauguration next January 20 (assuming he’s physically capable of attending).

Monday’s outcomes ended over a year’s speculation regarding the general mood of Democrat voters, and it turns out the liberal party faithful’s thirst for change isn’t really all that apart from Republicans’ similar longings four years ago (Iowans placed Ted Cruz and Donald Trump one-two and both were anti-establishment, so it works). In coming out on top this time, Sanders avenged a bitter quarter-point loss to Hillary Clinton in the last nominating cycle.

Judging by the somber mood of some Democrat pundits as the leaders were revealed, Sanders’ win was no cause for celebration. Clearly the Democrat establishment is just one episode -- or a series of Sanders wins -- away from a complete breakdown. Seeing them try to remain optimistic and impartial while talking down The Bern reminded this observer of Bill Kristol and his fellow #NeverTrumpers commenting on the 2016 GOP race as they were forced to experience Trump win after Trump win. They’re paid to comment… but can’t they keep the contempt off their faces?

Joe Biden came in second. Amy Klobuchar came in third, edging out Elizabeth “Pocahontas” Warren and Mayor Pete Buttigieg the boy wonder.

As is always the case, both sides (the so-called “moderates” vs. the burn-it-down-lefties) spun the results in a way that suggests their candidate came out strongest. The Biden people will now argue their favorite was up against a sustained two-pronged attack from “Pocahontas” Warren and Sanders -- and as the national frontrunner, Grampa Joe also faced head-on attacks from numerous other sources all throughout the campaign. What the Biden apologists are saying is somewhat true… but does anyone believe it influenced the outcome?

There were Biden’s infamous run-ins with Kamala Harris and Cory Booker during last summer and fall’s debates and a steady stream of criticism -- from multiple sides -- of he and son Hunter during Trump’s impeachment farce. Similar to what Jeb Bush encountered on the Republican side in 2016, it’s tough to run as a legacy candidate, especially one who has none of the charisma or personal selling points of “The One” who came before him.

All things considered, Biden did about as well as could be expected last night. Sanders nearly won in Iowa four years ago when he was still viewed as a kook-fringe candidate and one-trick socialist pony who happened to be the lone alternative to the establishment’s less-than-desirable darling. People forget (intentionally or otherwise) that the preordained-to-win Hillary Clinton only bested Bernie by a quarter point on Caucus Night, 2016 -- and a lot of folks accused her of pilfering the result.

Sanders won’t have to worry about “stealing” accusations this time, but Biden isn’t exactly dead in the water now because he didn’t win in Iowa. A second-place finish still qualifies him for viability and he’ll take a similar approach to next week’s New Hampshire primary (where Bernie drubbed Hillary in 2016 and current polls show him way ahead this year, too). Biden’s hopes rest on his ability to keep the Democrat African-American vote in his corner, which tends to be more conservative (in an electoral sense) and not as driven towards shiny socialist objects and cultural progressivism that the Vermont senator offers.

For a few weeks now most people figured Sanders would take Iowa. Joe’s been knocked down but it’s hardly time for an eight-count. If Bernie wins in Nevada in a couple weeks, watch out!

The one “surprise” of the evening was the relatively good finish for Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar. Though polls showed her gaining ground in her neighboring state, a good many commentators dismissed the last-minute movement as a prelude to disappointment. Iowa voters apparently felt otherwise, as many of them must’ve flipped a coin between the so-called “moderates” in the Democrat field and decided the appropriate compromise choice was the (literally) shaky, bob-haired senator with the quaint midwestern accent and a fondness for floating between perceived extremes.

Klobuchar may get a bit of a bounce in the national polls now but it’s hard to see her seriously contending for the top prize. Biden looks to be a much stronger long-term candidate than Amy and there’s always the Bloomberg factor out there as well. All of them will fiercely compete for the not-Bernie vote and the pie isn’t all that large to begin with. Will Biden’s black Democrat backers suddenly drop him for… Amy Klobuchar? I don’t see it.

Klobuchar will stay in it long enough to be considered for the eventual winner’s veep choice, but as a gal who’s as white as the Minnesota snow, what are the chances of being given the number two bid? If Bernie wins, he’ll choose someone like Georgia’s Stacey Abrams and if Biden falls into the nomination, he'll definitely select a minority woman to offset his multitude of vulnerabilities. Too bad, Amy.

It'll be a harder slog from here on out for Elizabeth “Pocahontas” Warren, whose lukewarm finish in the Hawkeye State might be considered a crushing blow to her dreams of occupying the great White House teepee on Pennsylvania Avenue. As the only top-tier woman Democrat candidate left in the race (up until this point, at least), there isn’t a definite “path” to the nomination for the Massachusetts big government touting, but still capitalist (according to her) 70-year-old.

Voters tend to forget about also-rans early in the process even though only a microscopic few delegates have been awarded thus far and, let’s face it, Iowa isn’t exactly representative of the true Democrat base. Warren is somewhat unique among this year’s Democrats because she would appear to appeal to a much wider swath of party followers, receiving some favor from the limousine liberal “The View” set who like her “plans” to federalize everything, a wealth tax for the uber-rich, fierce “resistance” to the hated Donald Trump, and… the fact she’s a “she”.

There are no doubt a lot of Democrats who still think Clinton was cheated (by Trump, the Russians, phony claims of voter suppression, etc.) out of being the first woman president. Despite a borderline embarrassing campaign introduction, Warren quickly established herself as the best female option among the male-dominated field with its Obama holdover Biden as the clear leader. “Pocahontas” survived several bumps in the road, too -- her lack of Native American DNA, several factual inaccuracies in her background and a number of pointed attacks from her competitors regarding the cryptic unfeasibility of her various pie-in-the-sky proposals.

Warren briefly took over the national polling lead in October, something Bernie is yet to accomplish (but maybe will now?). It’s hard to pinpoint exactly why the screechy fem with granny glasses started her slide, but with the Iowa flub, her staff’s got to be thinking, ‘What lies the future? Will I have a job in a month?’

The same goes for former South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg’s hires (Boot-edge-edge for the pronunciation challenged). As the youngest and freshest face (Tulsi Gabbard’s about nine months older than Pete) in the Democrat field -- and arguably the most unknown -- it’s never been evident why the thirty-something believed he was presidential material in the first place. Maybe Pete figured he could catch Obama’s “I’m a young guy” thunder, or he surmised being openly gay would lasso the neophyte “woke” crowd who only cares about what you are as opposed to who you are.

But the former military man just didn’t offer enough to keep him above water when it counted. Similar to Warren, there was a period of time when Buttigieg actually led the Iowa polls, but then as people got a closer look at him, he sagged considerably. As a “centrist” candidate who isn’t all that moderate, big government-loving Democrats who reject outright socialism found a better alternative in Biden. And let’s face it, electability is on the minds of all party faithful these days. Impeachment will go down in flames this week and Democrats understand they’ll need a Sanders or Biden-like tough guy to go up against Trump.

Sorry, “Pete” supporters, Buttigieg doesn’t come across as especially threatening. Just saying.

Even with the Iowa results now in hand, there are a few things to consider. The specter of Michael Bloomberg is still out there, and the New York billionaire’s (no, not Trump) shadow hangs over all of the candidates like a buzzard circling a festering roadkill carcass. According to the Real Clear Politics average, Bloomberg is in fourth place nationally, which isn’t bad considering he entered way late and didn’t spend time campaigning in the early states like the others. He’s obviously taking voters from Biden, too, which can’t be making the Obama-legacy ruling elites happy, either.

And “Little Mike” hasn’t been in any of the debates. So much for all the pundits saying that debate presence is a must for campaign recognition. What’s (DNC Chairman) Tom Perez to do?

It’s not clear how poorly Tulsi Gabbard, Andrew Yang and billionaire enviro freak Tom Steyer did on Monday evening, but collectively they didn’t earn much mention from the pundits. The story is elsewhere and their candidacies simply didn’t catch on. Not everyone wins in politics, especially when there are so many compelling (NOT!) choices in front of voters. How would any sane person hope to beat Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden? Talk about crazy.

Iowa Republicans chose Donald Trump, and the president should be pleased with what appears to be a pretty impressive turnout considering there was no horserace to “bet” on. Trump received 97.1 percent and 31,398 votes to best Bill Weld (1.3 percent and 423 votes) and Joe Walsh (1.1 percent and 348 votes). “Other” got .5 percent and 151 votes… so 151 people actually went through the caucus process to do a write-in? Nuts.

The passion is definitely there for the GOP which bodes well not only for Trump’s reelection chances but also for congressional and senatorial candidates across the fruited plain. Republicans need to take the House back… or prepare for impeachment round two, three, four…?

With the first actual votes now counted and the emergence of Bernie (“Nobody likes him and nobody wants to work with him.”) Sanders, one large question looms: Will we see the emergence of a Democrat “white knight” candidate in the next few weeks? No doubt Hillary Clinton will be under enormous pressure -- from the panicked Democrat establishment -- to swoop in and save the party from Bernie’s young, hairy and ticked-off minions.

Sanders embodies many of the qualities Democrat voters love; he fights, never backs down and seems to have a government answer for everything, including income inequality, racism and sexism. But Bernie is ancient, not really all that likeable to the mushy middle and… he’s a man.

Democrats should enjoy their one day of public-attention grabbing fun because all eyes shift back to Washington tonight to see how President Trump will handle his State-of-The-Union address flanked by his not-so-loyal opposition in the last gasps of a doomed impeachment trial. Will Bernie Sanders show up? No matter; he’s already full of glory after Iowa.

Share this