“Change Won”
“Change won.”
These were John Edwards’ optimistic words in the wake of his second-place finish to Barack Obama in the Iowa caucuses. But the real author of this phrase was Obama himself. As the dramatic Iowa results make clear, Obama not only successfully identified his campaign with “change,” but came to represent the hope of many Democratic stalwarts that he can best lead the party and achieve positive change. By inference, Hillary Clinton, with her staunchest Iowa support coming from older women, did not convince most Iowa Democrats that she represented change. Opposition to President Bush and Republican policies, yes. A hopeful agent of change, no.
We have heard and repeated many times that Iowa and New Hampshire are not typical slices of the American electorate, but the momentum generated tonight for the Obama candidacy is significant and the race has been fundamentally altered. The Democratic field has immediately shrunken with the withdrawal of Biden and Dodd. Richardson needs a strong showing — and soon — to remain viable. National polls in the immediate days ahead should show a significant change in Hillary’s national numbers. It’s a three-way race.
Examine the clips of the three Democrats’ remarks tonight to their respective supporters. It is clear that Obama is trying now to fashion a bipartisan appeal aimed at attracting independents and Republicans. His foreign policy remarks took a high road as well. I would expect favorable reviews in national and international media.
Mike Huckabee’s dominant victory on the Republican side is also momentous, but seems to be more of a protest vote than a signal of the rise of a nationally viable candidate. Here, too, “change won,” but it is not yet clear who will be the beneficiary. As Bill Bennett remarked on CNN, the Democratic field has narrowed while the Republican field expands. On to New Hampshire.