The Iowa Caucus: Shakespeare Was Right About the Masses
In reviewing the Iowa Caucuses, wherein former Governor Mitt Romney achieved his desired victory with a margin of eight votes over former Senator Rick Santorum, I can only conclude that the votes demonstrate conclusively Shakespeare was right about the masses and their follow the pack mentality.
Reference Julius Caesar and the Brutus and Marc Antony speeches after the assassination of the late emperor. Brutus whips the crowd into a frenzy about Caesar's excesses so that they will excuse his actions and that of his cronies in perpetrating the murder. Then, in an act of bravado and ultimately very stupid display of democracy, he allows Caesar aficionado Marc Antony to say a few words about his friend and mentor, provided that he says nothing inflammatory about their deed.
In the brilliant "Friends, Romans and Countrymen" speech orated by Antony, he starts off deferentially, almost meekly, as he "comes to bury Caesar, not to praise him," but in so doing cites Caesar's greatness, slowly building the momentum towards the conclusion that Brutus and his pals have effected an act of betrayal.
While the Iowa caucus is not about unsavory actions of the sort that inhabit Julius Caesar, it shows how people immediately turn their attentions away from their favorite candidates, reacting almost en masse when, after certain accusations hit their mark, they abandon one to a scrap heap and head on to a new favorite son.
Examine the evidence. In the summer, somehow Michele Bachmann won the Iowa Straw poll and was incredibly in the top position. No one really expected her to eventually win the nomination, but the media, in its ever present zeal to raise ratings, made it appear she had a chance and attention was focused ever more on her.
When they zeroed in on her husband's clinic and its supposed "cure" for gay people, people started to wonder about her, just as the clamoring started for Rick Perry to enter the race.
And there he was, Rick Perry, three term governor of Texas, sure to steal the thunder from Mitt Romney, who'd seemed the man to beat for the nomination, but who never rose above 25%.
Unfortunately, no one outside Texas knew much about Rick Perry until his disastrous debate flaws convinced so many people he wasn't the best man to unseat Barack Obama.
As the questions about Perry grew, along came Herman Cain, with his 9-9-9 plan for taxation that most economists thought was nuts. But it was his very eccentricity -- not to mention that he was a conservative African American businessman -- that vaulted him to the top of the polls.
And then, it wasn't his outrageous economic plan but his suspected peccadilloes which caused the media to question him tirelessly until he dropped out of the race.
All the while, Governor Romney, attacked by one and all, continued to stay at the 25% mark, never really rising above or below and convincing many that he would never win, because the majority of Republicans clearly didn't want him.
Suddenly former Speaker Newt Gingrich, perhaps the most famous of the challengers, who'd not been able to get big numbers, did particularly well at some debates, and the fickle Republicans, who'd by now discarded front-runners Bachmann, Perry and Cain, suddenly turned to Newt. Until Ron Paul and Romney's attack ads started flowing and then Newt went tumbling down.
Ron Paul, everyone's favorite go-to-guy for quotes and clearly out of the mainstream, a maverick's maverick, with no chance to win the nomination or the election, suddenly rose to the top of the heap. He was a proven fundraiser, who'd nonetheless never gotten past go in his past tries for national office. Somehow, with almost no one left except Romney, who the majority of the GOP didn't want, Paul was able to get an almost Gene McCarthy sort of following with young folks coming on board.
Except that Ron Paul, with his record, had no business competing for that sort of constituency. He's no liberal at all, except for anti-war rhetoric, which appeals to many. He's against any sort of state funding for human betterment, such as student loans and urban development, has a questionable stance about gay people (see his comments after meeting Sacha Baron Cohen in Bruno) and this is the sort of man anyone but right-wing young kids want to follow?
Others started attacking him now, but his singular and peculiar allure seemed almost unstoppable, except that the evangelicals, who'd given up on Bachmann and Perry, and, because of Gingrich's marital history weren't too keen on him, desperately wanted to rally behind someone to stop Romney and not turn the caucus into a national mockery if it went for Paul.
So, what to do? They looked around and suddenly at the bottom of the barrel they saw perennial 3% Rick Santorum, former Pennsylvania senator who'd been ousted from office in a landslide, and it didn't matter that his views wouldn't cut it to a national audience. They liked him fine, mostly because he was still available and as yet undamaged.
So, in typical Shakespearean mob fashion and showing absolutely no loyalty to any previous candidate they'd admired, they suddenly shifted, almost completely tossing Bachman, Perry and Newt Gingrich aside, drew enough away from Ron Paul and put their cards on the guy no one had previously cared about for over a year just to make a run at Mitt Romney.
Amazing. It almost worked until Romney pulled it out by a landslide of eight votes. Except by their actions they took an unexamined guy from the cellar, propelling him to the national spotlight, and guess what's going to happen to him in the weeks ahead? We might just wind up with the first draft movement in the modern political era if momentum against Romney continues, even if he, as is expected, wins New Hampshire.
Don’t be surprised if a new conservative enters the race before Florida, depending upon what happens in South Carolina.
And who's enjoying all this the most? Besides the media, of course? Why the unchallenged presumed Democratic candidate, Barack Obama.
Michael Russnow's website is ramproductionsinternational.com
Follow Michael Russnow on Twitter: www.twitter.com/kerrloy
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
cartouche
Kerry Lauerman
Joan Walsh
Salon.com
Comments
The results were predictable. In a certain sense, it's just too bad that all the monetary resources had to be thrown at it again rather than the traditional approach of van/motor coach touring to press flesh, drink copious cups of diner coffee and visit with real people. The posturing is directed at the rest of the country rather than at Iowa.
An 8 vote victory in a primary/caucus is not a victory but rather it's a message. It's a message that things could get quite interesting.
I'll go back to something that I wrote here on OS yesterday--if this "august" group of Republican contenders is the best that the Republican party in the U.S. can come up with then that group is in trouble indeed.
". . . Shakespeare was right about the masses and their follow the pack mentality." Wha?
I see Romney's superpac raising some interesting ads featuring some of Santorum's outrageous statements of the past while Gingrich brings out the venom and directs all of it at Romney. How much will this effect the campaign of each? I'm not sure, but it should be an interesting week, politically speaking.
The cost of indecision for Republicans is the time it takes to build an organization. I've always believe Cain was more interested in 2016 than 2012 and that he was working on name recognition and organization. Sometimes I still see him as a potential anti-Obama- still.
Finally, I agree Obama must be smiling to himself and whistling, but deep pockets have worked very hard to rid US of Obama, and I am glad he is constantly building his organization because he'll run against the Republican who makes Obama's campaign contributors look po'. I think Koch and other billionaires are willing to pay whatever it takes to rid our nation of a fine president who just got elected as America unraveled economically.
Got people's attention!......Yup.
Slippin' anti-constitution laws (NDAA) in easily now!.....Yup.
Arming police forces with military tanks and drones!......Yup.
Bank account blown!.......Yup.
Borrowin' from China!......Yup.
Employment shot to shit!......Yup
Economy about to hit the 2nd (worse) half of the recession......Yup
Wise up folks; this isn't an election - it's a distraction!
The GOP clearly DOES NOT want to win in Nov. Whoever is sitting in the Oval Office when the whole mess collapses will forever carry the can for it - guilty or not.
.
Unless, of course you can make yourself believe that the GOP really cannot find a decent candidate to offer.
Fix this, then MAYBE your analysis will make sense.
Obama is a far better president than his cousin, George, was.
Jeb is waiting till his cousin, Barack, is President for another term, then he will run.
Barack, George 1, George 2, Jeb, Sarah Palin, and John Hinckley Jr are all descendants of Samuel Hinckley. So, except for Clinton years, a Hinckley has been in power since 1980 when George 1 was VP and his cousin John shot Reagan.
We shall call them the Hinckley Dynasty.
Obtain the BBC Acorn DVD "Othello" with Anthony Hopkins and Bob Hoskins, the tutorial! A 1981 production by Royal Shakespeare Co. Digitized. It is not pretty.
And this: "Don’t be surprised if a new conservative enters the race before Florida, depending upon what happens in South Carolina." How's THAT gonna happen. Who, pray tell, might that 'new conservative' be? And how might they git theirselves on the ballot at this late date?
This is so much blaflum, so typical of OS, yet, yet, it might just work on the NYTIMES or Boston Globe.
What new conservative might plausibly enter the race now? Is Jindal right wing enough?
1.Romney with his "Keep America, American" comment, an appeal to nativist nationalism once used by the KKK.
2.Santorum with his silly comment about..."make black people's lives better by giving them somebody else's money."
3.Paul with his continued opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Maybe its only a coincidence that those were the top 3 finishers.
As opposed to everyone else who says one thing while campaigning, and then does another? That kind of rhetoric?
Ron Paul has voted against war consistently for 30 years. He has not flip-flopped, he has not caved to corporate interests.
"state funding for human betterment, such as student loans and urban development, has a questionable stance about gay people"
1. The idea that "human betterment" can only come through the stroke of a pen from an elite on high is ridiculous. Human's better themselves, and those around them voluntarily. The government's idea of bettering others is to take from one person to give to another.
2. The reason college is so expensive now is because of government student loans that have guaranteed schools the money no matter their asking price.
3. Urban development? Don't you think we'd have more cash on hand to develop our towns and cities if the government cut it's ridiculous pursuit of empire? And who says it's up to government to make your 'burg a better place to live? We the people can accomplish a hell of a lot more than any bureaucrat can. Imagine if the Occupy movement were government run...they'd still be setting up the first tent.
4. I don't care if Ron Paul is the biggest homophobe this side of Sean Hannity, as long as he sticks to his record and votes in line with civil liberties - his personal opinion be damned - then great. No one in the field of candidates, our President included, is stronger on civil liberties - on allowing each individual to live how they see fit - than Ron Paul.