Here's some loosely-combined notes from the poll-crunching activities at the Quality Inn outside Iowa City that occupied my morning. From what I've determined in looking at past results and current polls. It depends on turnout, as everyone knows, but it also depends on whether the undecided break, and whether each of the top four break 15% in each of the ~2000 precincts.
As for turnout, one thing that has been a constant in previous caucus events here in Iowa caucuses is that the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party shows up to vote. 2000 wasn't very competitive in IA, NH was, but Bradley got 35% of the vote here. 1992 was Harkin's all alone. We have to go back to the 1980's to find competitive caucuses in Iowa, and as Tom pointed out, this has created a lack of institutional memory.
Maybe the ideological ground has shifted since the 80's in Iowa, but I wouldn't bet on it. Especially given that this nation is amidst an occupational war that a majority of Democratic voters are against, war-protesting voices have a strong role in the Iowa caucus.
I hope that there will be some taping of the caucus events. Will debates spark out on the Iraq war? You betcha. Will passion and principles be on display? I gotta think so. The 1980's, in terms of unilateral military action by the US, were timid compared to Bush II.
What's happened here in Iowa over the last week is that less interested voters are paying attention, casual supporters are outing themselves, the media has pushed non-issues to the forefront, and differences between the candidates have been mitigated (doesn't hurt the cause for Edwards/Kerry that they suddenly sound like Howard Dean). That's going to stop at 6:30 tonight, when the differences emerge again.
Remember who finished 3rd or 4th in the 1984 Iowa caucus amongst Democrats? Mondale won with 49%, Hart finished second with 17%, but surprisingly, McGovern got 10% and Cranston got 8%. That's 50% to the establishment, and 35% to the organizing kids and peace-mongers.
In 1988, the major theme was the ongoing deteriorating economic condition of rural Iowa, and Gephardt's populism won 31%, with Jesse Jackson getting 9% of the vote.
The numbers of uncommitted that stick being so is a wildcard this cycle. In the past, it's varied from 36% in '72, 37% in '76, 10% in '80, 9% in '84, 5% in '88, 12% in '92, and 2% in'00.
Zogby is showing 9% undecided & 5% to Clark/Kucinich. The DMR is showing 5% undecided % 5% to Clark/Kucinich, 3% other. SUSA is showing undecided at 3% and other at 10%.
Combined, the three polls have a possible 14%, 13%, and 13% uncommitted in the caucus tonight. Now, every precinct is going to have a different flavor, but with 4 candidates stacked at the top, above 15% overall, the uncommitted number is going to be key, and thus drop. Overall, I expect Kucinich to do much better than expected (1st and 2nd tallies); but his supporters will move to Dean first, Kerry second. If four of the top candidates stick above 15%, this will matter quite a lot. It's when one of the top four candidates, in anyone of the ~2000 precincts in Iowa, fall below 15% that another, more volatile, wildcard comes into play.
It seems unlikely that this will occur to either Dean or Kerry anywhere. Dean has organizational strength in all 99 counties. Kerry dumped ~$2.5 million of his own money into Iowa this last month and hired establishment Democratic Party officials in his statewide effort. Reading the regional polling of Zogby, falling below 15% seems most possible (but not likely overall) to happen to Gephardt in parts of eastern (I haven't seen a single Gephardt supporter in two days) Iowa; or Edwards, in pockets all over the state, if the soft support that he has doesn't materialize.
Gephardt supporters spread out equally (22% Dean, 24% Kerry, 18% Edwards), according the the latest Zogby; but in the east, Dean's only the second choice of 12% total, compared to 26% total for Kerry. If Edwards doesn't show 15%, it spreads 16% Dean, 17% Gephardt, and 44% to Kerry.
I'm not sure why the media hasn't explained the strength of Kerry (establishment backing), Dean-alternative, as much as they have Dean's (orgainzational strength), but it's fairly obvious when you attend a candidate-wide event here in Iowa that Kerry has broad support amongst the party hierarchy. It's a bland, top-down, and probably been dormant all along, just waiting for the money dump. Reminds me of Mondale in 1984.
Bottomline, can Dean get over 30 percent. I'm just guessing yes. The cards can fall multiple ways tonight. The situation here on the ground reminds me of seeing the 2002 CA Democratic convention unfold. If you were unaware of the polls, showing Kerry way ahead of Dean, and made your perceptions based on the party activist reactions to the candidate speaking events, you'd have determined that Dean was the frontrunner. The establishment might have given Kerry the best speaking slot in that convention, but the crowd snored; yet the next day for Dean the same folks roared.