Experience, religion and national security for Republicans; unity, history and nationwide appeal for Democrats.

Mario Canseco - Just a few days are left before voters in Iowa attend their caucuses. This simple process will get the world closer to knowing which two persons will represent the United States’ two dominant political parties in the 2008 presidential election.

For months, we have witnessed a wide range of questions, requesting the views of Americans on whether their country is ready to elect a woman or an African American as their head of state, the prospects of third party candidates and independents, and countless head-to-head match-ups between the key contenders. Even non-Americans have participated in the public opinion exercises, discussing their views on prospective White House dwellers and their chances.

A year ago, a showdown featuring New York senator Hillary Rodham Clinton as the Democratic nominee and Arizona senator John McCain as the Republican nominee seemed perfectly feasible. The race has since undergone several twists, typified by the apparent volatility of public opinion in Iowa and New Hampshire on the Democratic side, and the absence of a national frontrunner for Republican supporters.

McCain heads to January as the GOP candidate with the most to gain. A few weeks ago, his bid seemed stranded, partly due to his defence for the current strategy in Iraq, and his decision to discuss immigration reform in a broader fashion than his rivals. Recent surveys have shown some Americans offering support for their current president’s "surge" in Iraq, coinciding with McCain’s newly found success in New Hampshire.

As far as immigration goes, the interesting trait has been the behaviour of the GOP candidates, rather than their policy proposals. The staunchest opponent to a temporary worker program—Colorado congressman Tom Tancredo—abandoned his long-shot bid and endorsed former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who had been chided by former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani for allegedly employing illegal immigrants. Romney was not particularly welcoming of Tancredo’s endorsement, pointing out some differences in specific areas. Only California congressman Duncan Hunter remains adamant in his rejection to amnesty, but his numbers in state and national polls have been negligible.

Romney’s speech on religion, designed to dissuade questions about his Mormonism, ended up creating more controversy. His recollection of "seeing" his father fight for civil rights alongside Martin Luther King became a laborious argument over semantics, and left him in a vulnerable position nationally and in second place in Iowa surveys. In New Hampshire, he is expected to win, but carrying extra baggage into the remaining contests.

Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee has become the solid leader in Iowa, but national polls show him lagging all prospective Democratic rivals. Huckabee holds the conservative credentials that appeal to a large number of GOP supporters, but without a clear policy plan, he could be destined to replicate the tragic failure of Democrat John Kerry in 2004, whose public appearances only served to further enrage the same 48 per cent of supporters he began the race with. Huckabee’s decision to link a political assassination in Pakistan to the need for tighter borders was dumbfounding.

Texas congressman Ron Paul has become, understandably, a key force in the race. His numbers in national polls do not suggest the level of support that blogs, chat rooms and Inboxes would point to. His followers are expecting a good showing in Iowa and New Hampshire in order to boost his nationwide appeal, and Paul’s stance on foreign policy has been markedly consistent. The first two contests will be the true test for Paul’s supporters, and will allow an opportunity to see if Internet users can translate into likely voters.

Actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson had a very brief infatuation with the American public. Many observers questioned his decision to join the race at the later stages, and his numbers in Iowa and New Hampshire are definitely troubling. For a candidate who was supposed to have a national presence and be assisted by his fame, a fourth-place finish in both states could compel a quick return to television.

Giuliani has not fared well in Iowa and New Hampshire, but is counting on Florida and the barrage of primaries in February to turn his campaign around. He has performed adequately in debates, and could provide an interesting counterpoint to the Democratic candidates in the national U.S. race. The war on terrorism will remain his favourite issue, but it is unclear if the Red States that supported George W. Bush’s call to stay the course in Iraq and Afghanistan will respond equally to Giuliani, seven years after 9/11.

For the Democrats, 12 months of campaigning have led to a three-person race. Rodham Clinton was caught by Illinois senator Barack Obama in New Hampshire, while former North Carolina senator John Edwards has performed splendidly in the Hawkeye State.

Aside from the obvious questions of electability, two things have become clear in recent surveys. Obama is the best performer in national races against the top Republicans, and Edwards could clearly become more attractive in southern states than Giuliani. These considerations will undoubtedly cross the minds of caucus goers in Iowa, and a victory for either Obama or Edwards could force Rodham Clinton into a position she has not been in since the race began: second place.

The remaining Democratic contenders have offered interesting tidbits. New Mexico governor Bill Richardson has emphasized energy independence, Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich has urged for a non-interventionist America, Delaware senator Joe Biden has focused on foreign policy, and Connecticut senator Chris Dodd touted his experience. Former Alaska senator Mike Gravel has not been included in some surveys. It is hard to say if any of them will be considered as possible vice-presidential nominees, but their chances of surpassing any of the top three contenders in the five opening contests are inexistent.

Iowa voters in both parties will have three issues to ponder, and they will become part of the discussions that make a caucus so unique. Republicans must assess whether experience and age will retain the White House, whether religion and values will be enough to encourage their base, and whether their party can withstand another race fought mainly on the topic of terrorism and national security.

For their part, Democrats must assess whether the wife of a former president can be seen as a uniter, whether an African American will be able to garner sufficient support in the ballot boxes of the entire nation, and whether on this particular occasion, a history-making candidate should be set aside in favour of a white male who can get votes in the south.

Archive Search

Search the Angus Reid Global Monitor Politics In Depth archive.