Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
OBAMA, HUCKABEE, WIN IOWA.
Obama wins the Democratic Caucus in Iowa, with 37 percent of the vote, leaving Edwards and Hillary to battle it out for second. On the Republican side, Huckabee took the gold, followed by Romney, then Thompson, then McCain.
All of this has been so fully gamed out that it's hard to add any new insight to the issue. Obama is now the favorite. Clinton's aura of inevitably has been banished, and whatever momentum she had has been crushed. It's tough, though not impossible, to imagine her regaining it. Edwards' path to the nomination is unlikely. Gravel's coronation looks increasingly uncertain.
On the Republican side, Huckabee doesn't look like a winner to me, but he may well have dealt a fatal blow to Romney's chances. The path is open for McCain to take New Hampshire, but it's hard to see what comes after it.
Howard Dean was just on the teevee saying the Democrats had twice the turnout of the Republicans. In 2004, 125,000 Democrats caucused. Tonight it was more than 200,000. That's meaningful. Much of the spike was among the young. That's even more meaningful. It's the demographic that so often turns away in disgust arising in empowerment.
And atop it all, Barack Obama won. A black man just won the Iowa caucus. And he won not because of his race, nor in spite of it; not because of the novelty of his campaign, nor because of its historic import. He won because a broad swath of Americans found him to be the most inspiring, the most elevating, the most attractive of the candidates. He won because so many Iowans felt their heart quicken before his words that they smashed all turnout records in order to add their voice to his. It's a remarkable night. Not just for Obama, or for Democrats, or for political junkies. For the country.
COMMENTS (23)
Gravel's nomination looks increasingly unlikely.
Increasingly?
Go Obama!
Posted by: Warren Terra | January 3, 2008 10:09 PM
To be fair, winning in Iowa and winning among whites is more or less the same thing.
Posted by: Anthony Damiani | January 3, 2008 10:18 PM
I'm not crazy about Obama, I like him better than Clinton, but significantly less than Edwards. I'm worried that his recent criticisms of Edwards have been to the right in a subtle, but meaningful way. I hope I'm wrong about him, but talking in broad terms and making some rightward overtures as he became the favorite sounds familiar from Clinton and frankly I think Clinton was a big disappointment.
As for the Republican winner, I think a close second would've kept Romney alive, but this probably destroys him. I don't think Huckabee can last past South Carolina, nor do I think McCain will play well outside of New Hampshire, so I think Guiliani's strategy is gonna pay off.
Posted by: Matt | January 3, 2008 10:18 PM
At least Rudy the Ghoul seems headed for the political coffin he belongs in. (I'd luv to add the stake in the chest for good measure).
I'm not so sure that Edwards is finished. NH and SC plus Feb 5th are still ahead.
Kos is saying that Obama's performance is weighted by a large 17-29 y.o. turnout (57% of Obama's support), and that's good for him, the Dems in general, and the country if repeated elsewhere.
I'm predicting a sell-out for the next week of Tums in Wall Street, K Street, and PA Avenue with the Huck being first - way ahead of Romney and smoking the other 'contenders'.
Sweet progressive/populist dreams, everyone!
Posted by: JimPortlandOR | January 3, 2008 10:18 PM
A wonderful concession speech by Edwards. I'm happy to see Obama win but happy to see Edwards get second.
Posted by: Mike | January 3, 2008 10:21 PM
Woohoo! This Obama supporter is pleased. Good for Edwards at #2 too.
Ezra, I didn't know you could do the inspiring prose thing. Nicely done!
Posted by: Chris M | January 3, 2008 10:23 PM
"At least Rudy the Ghoul seems headed for the political coffin he belongs in. (I'd luv to add the stake in the chest for good measure)."
I think this is actually great news for Rudy. Romney was gonna be his toughest competitor on a national scale and he was crushed.
I also think Edwards, unfortunately, is pretty clearly done. His NH and SC campaigns were only winnable if he could've captured momentum out of Iowa. A very close second might have done that, but he's much closer to third than he is second.
Posted by: Matt | January 3, 2008 10:24 PM
I wouldn't be surprised to see Edwards drop out relatively soon and give his enthusiastic support to Obama - i.e., not just endorsing Obama, but campaigning for him.
Edwards seems to pretty clearly think that Hillary must be stopped, and that Obama is vastly preferable. I think he'd rather make an impact in helping to cement Hillary's defeat than just hang on after it's clear he doesn't have a chance.
Posted by: Jason C. | January 3, 2008 10:34 PM
Jason C.:
Why wouldn't Edwards have a chance? He got outspent by a mile and yet made a fantastic showing.
Posted by: Joe Klein's conscience | January 3, 2008 10:41 PM
this has been a great and memorable night!
Posted by: jacqueline | January 3, 2008 10:43 PM
In my opinion, it benefits Obama if Edwards stays in because it will help Obama in Southern primaries.
In South Carolina, I expect that Obama will win a strong majority of the black vote. Obama, however, has performed dismally in polls of white Democrats in South Carolina.
A strong Edwards campaign would be able to pull a plurality win or even a majority of the populist Southern white vote, throwing South Carolina, and perhaps, several other Southern states to Obama.
Posted by: seank | January 3, 2008 10:45 PM
Why wouldn't Edwards have a chance? He got outspent by a mile and yet made a fantastic showing.
I support Edwards, but I don't think there's any way to spin this as a "fantastic showing." His whole campaign was premised on winning Iowa and riding the momentum to the nomination. Now Obama's beat him by seven points.
And maybe that's because he got outspent. But Edwards is going to get outspent at every stage. A good showing given a financial disadvantage isn't going to cut it. If he can't win while being outspent, he can't win.
Posted by: Jason C. | January 3, 2008 10:47 PM
OK, it's not my election, but if it were, I'd be an Edwards supporter. I'm still hoping...
Posted by: A Canadian Reader | January 3, 2008 10:55 PM
Why wouldn't Edwards have a chance? He got outspent by a mile and yet made a fantastic showing.
Well, Iowa was absolutely Edwards's strong state. A strong second in 2004 in Iowa gave Edwards some respectability as a candidate, because all of the people previously mentioned as contenders were way behind him, with the noticeable exception of Kerry. Edwards has essentially lived in Iowa since 2004, and a strong endorsement there was essential. If he'd won in Iowa Edwards could perhaps have claimed to the the anti-Clinton; but now that position has been filled. Edwards is not polling well in NH or SC, and he has not been able to raise any money. It looks like Obama v. Clinton, and the momentum is with Obama.
Posted by: Anonymous | January 3, 2008 10:56 PM
Heaven help us all. The knives are going to come out in the general, Obama's supporters will go "how could they possibly do this to Barack Obama?" instead of "how can we fight back?" And we'll lose.
It's a real shame about Edwards.
Posted by: Fnor | January 3, 2008 10:58 PM
erm, the 10:56 is Anonymous - not that anyone cares, but I believe in Pseudonymous blogging.
(and I really preferred the software at Ezra's old digs).
Posted by: Warren Terra | January 3, 2008 10:58 PM
Ouch. And that one was really dumb. I meant to say the 10:56 was I, not that it was Anonymous. Sorry for the double-correction.
Posted by: Warren Terra | January 3, 2008 11:03 PM
Fnor,
Yeah...an African-American man who also has a background in community organizing probably doesn't know how to fight for what he believes in.
Give me break.
Posted by: Mike P | January 3, 2008 11:33 PM
Fnor, where's your evidence that Obama's advisers lack the necessary campaigning skills to respond to dirty attacks? I guess it's still conceivable that they'll fold like Kerry, but nothing that's happened so far gives me any reason to think that's the case. Obama has done well enough in responding to the Clinton people's attempts to insinuate cocaine and Islam into the discussion. Why would he fail to respond to Republican attacks?
Obama's not the first guy to use the rhetoric of hope and unity. GWB and Reagan did too, and they turned out to be effective and partisan Presidents.
Posted by: Tom | January 3, 2008 11:39 PM
To see a tongue-in-cheek review of the Iowa primary in pictures...link here:
www.thoughttheater.com
Posted by: Daniel DiRito | January 4, 2008 12:27 AM
Stop analyzing and start believing, and then be inspired. Think Bobby Kennedy, but with a better ending. I'm pinching myself, a mid-fifties lifelong liberal Democrat who has spent virtually my entire life voting for the lesser of two evils or somebody just so-so. Maybe this guy will be the one who leads Americans toward their dreams and aspirations, who can inspire us to do good things.
Posted by: LKitsch | January 4, 2008 1:11 AM
LKitsch:
I'm 46, and I feel exactly the same way. It's funny to hear all these twentysomethings talk about how ill-informed and naive Obama supporters are. I've been a political junkie since I campaigned for Walter Mondale in 1984, and I think having someone who can sell the program is way more important than policy details.
And I've never seen anyone who can sell it like Obama, except for maybe Reagan.
Posted by: brewmn | January 4, 2008 1:55 AM
"Heaven help us all. The knives are going to come out in the general, Obama's supporters will go "how could they possibly do this to Barack Obama?" instead of "how can we fight back?" And we'll lose.
It's a real shame about Edwards.
Posted by: Fnor | January 3, 2008 10:58 PM"
Not only was he a community organizer, he was a community organizer and a politician in Chicago. Chicago politics is a trial by fire. He beat out a popular Black Panther there once to get black support for the State Senate. Clinton has no idea what she's doing and has no strategy now that her inevitability is gone. Edwards has only won primaries in states he was born in and failed to take out the knives when debating Cheney. Just because someone knows how to make nice doesn't mean they can't fight. I've been told by many people I'm one of the nicest people they've ever met. I also knocked bullies unconscious when I was a kid. These things aren't mutually exclusive.
Posted by: Reality Man | January 4, 2008 2:40 AM