High Fructose Hijinx – Sugardaddy Romney and the Iowa Straw Poll
R. Kent Nowviskie
August 12, 2007
The smell of corndogs and cotton candy wafted across the Corn State of Iowa this Saturday, as corny politicians made corny promises that dripped saccharine-sweet from their wagging, bragging tongues. The empty promises flowed forth like the sickeningly sweet high-fructose corn syrup that flows out of the cornfields of Iowa’s government-subsidized corporate agricultural conglomerates.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the candidate with the corniest promises of all seemed to come out on top. One-term Massachussetts governor and corporate bigwig Mitt Romney placed first, receiving an underwhelming 31.6% of the 14,302 votes cast. While the Romney campaign may be basking in the dubious glory of winning the vote at this less-than-critical state GOP fundraiser, a closer examination of the votes reveals that the results are ultimately embarrassing for the multi-millionaire’s campaign.
Romney’s efforts to prove himself King of the Hill in the Ames Straw Poll have cost him millions upon millions of dollars, and his campaign had invested months of effort in building up for the event. In the months leading up to Saturday’s festivities, Romney’s campaign hired sixty “Super-Volunteers” to push his candidacy in Iowa. These so-called “volunteers” were paid $500 to $1,000 per month for their services. Furthermore, the Romney money-machine spent more than $2 million on television advertisements alone. And that’s on top of the many thousands spent on a glossy, PR-firm driven direct mail campaign.
When it came time for the straw poll itself, Romney spent even more of his megabucks on busing thousands of “supporters”, most just looking for a free lunch and free hotel room, to Ames, where they were expected to vote for him after finding themselves bedazzled by the over-the-top, slickly-produced festivities he'd arranged. After all, hadn’t Mr. Romney spent $200 thousand to hire a consultant to throw a great party for him, and hadn’t he dropped hundreds of thousands more on a super-cool light-show, giant jumbotron screens, a 30’ climbing wall, and “the best barbecue in the state”?
But no matter how much pork (barbecue) Mr. Romney delivered to Iowa that day, when the votes were tallied, he still came out looking even more lackluster than he did going in. Here was the guy who erected the biggest (bread and) circus tent, offered the most high-tech entertainment, and purchased many thousands of tickets for Iowans who were supposed to vote for him, and he still only ended up with 31.6% of the votes.
Contrast that, if you will, to the surprising performance of one of the underdog candidates in this race. Congressman Ron Paul, MD (R – Texas) has spent a total of about three weeks campaigning in Iowa since the start of the election season, and only just opened his Iowa campaign headquarters three days before the straw poll, yet he managed to shoot past everyone’s expectations and his status in the so-called “scientific” opinion polls to garner 9.1% of the vote.
Paul, distracted by the fact that his wife Carol fell ill and was hospitalized on the morning of the event, still managed to rally the most enthusiastic and vocal group of supporters there. Even such megalithic media monsters as CNN and Fox News reported that his supporters were the most visible, and callers to C-SPAN during its coverage of the event were overwhelmingly in support of Ron Paul. Thousands of unpaid, grassroots volunteers had descended upon Iowa from all over the United States. Those who weren't Iowans could not vote in Iowa’s poll, but they were still effective at spreading the word about Paul’s stance on returning to the Constitution and restoring the rule of law.
This surely had an influence on the Iowan attendees, and even more found themselves in agreement with Paul’s speech, which went well in spite of the scathing, sarcastic introduction from emcee Laura Ingraham, who made no attempt to mention his strong points, as she did with the other candidates, but instead seemed so upset at being drowned out by the cheers of Paul’s supporters that she quipped, “The inmates have left the asylum”, demonstrated her lack of Constitutional and historical understanding when she mocked the letters of marque and reprisal Paul introduced to help catch Osama bin Laden, and showed her derision of the growing anti-war movement within the Republican party when she referred to their procession into the building as “the peace train.”
But despite all these high-fructose hijinx and the essential meaninglessness of this contest, a few lessons have emerged from yesterday’s events in Ames:
First of all, Romney’s relatively meager showing demonstrates that no matter how many megabucks the corporate-candidate media darlings throw at us, voters are dissatisfied with their empty promises and are looking increasingly toward the lesser-known candidates.
Secondly, the results of the voting make it more than clear that Paul’s oft-cited 1% standing in the “scientific” opinion polls is not in any way indicative of his actual performance in a real, boots-on-the-ground vote. For Paul, this was a breakout vote and a chance to show that his internet support does indeed translate into real votes.
And last, but certainly not least, an examination of how the candidates spent their money on this venture offers us perhaps the most telling lesson of all. While the Mitt Romneys of this campaign try to dazzle us with dollars, Ron Paul shows that he can turn out the vote and barely spend a dime.
Given a choice between Mitt Romney, who spent roughly $2,200 for each vote he received, and Ron Paul, who only spent about $200 for each of his votes, I’d look past the flashing lights and jumbotron TV screens and consider who gets the most bang for his buck.
Stripping away all the corny stuff and looking at what each of them got for their money in this straw poll, I know exactly which one I’d trust with my tax dollars. Sorry, Mitt. You lose.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the candidate with the corniest promises of all seemed to come out on top. One-term Massachussetts governor and corporate bigwig Mitt Romney placed first, receiving an underwhelming 31.6% of the 14,302 votes cast. While the Romney campaign may be basking in the dubious glory of winning the vote at this less-than-critical state GOP fundraiser, a closer examination of the votes reveals that the results are ultimately embarrassing for the multi-millionaire’s campaign.
Romney’s efforts to prove himself King of the Hill in the Ames Straw Poll have cost him millions upon millions of dollars, and his campaign had invested months of effort in building up for the event. In the months leading up to Saturday’s festivities, Romney’s campaign hired sixty “Super-Volunteers” to push his candidacy in Iowa. These so-called “volunteers” were paid $500 to $1,000 per month for their services. Furthermore, the Romney money-machine spent more than $2 million on television advertisements alone. And that’s on top of the many thousands spent on a glossy, PR-firm driven direct mail campaign.
When it came time for the straw poll itself, Romney spent even more of his megabucks on busing thousands of “supporters”, most just looking for a free lunch and free hotel room, to Ames, where they were expected to vote for him after finding themselves bedazzled by the over-the-top, slickly-produced festivities he'd arranged. After all, hadn’t Mr. Romney spent $200 thousand to hire a consultant to throw a great party for him, and hadn’t he dropped hundreds of thousands more on a super-cool light-show, giant jumbotron screens, a 30’ climbing wall, and “the best barbecue in the state”?
But no matter how much pork (barbecue) Mr. Romney delivered to Iowa that day, when the votes were tallied, he still came out looking even more lackluster than he did going in. Here was the guy who erected the biggest (bread and) circus tent, offered the most high-tech entertainment, and purchased many thousands of tickets for Iowans who were supposed to vote for him, and he still only ended up with 31.6% of the votes.
Contrast that, if you will, to the surprising performance of one of the underdog candidates in this race. Congressman Ron Paul, MD (R – Texas) has spent a total of about three weeks campaigning in Iowa since the start of the election season, and only just opened his Iowa campaign headquarters three days before the straw poll, yet he managed to shoot past everyone’s expectations and his status in the so-called “scientific” opinion polls to garner 9.1% of the vote.
Paul, distracted by the fact that his wife Carol fell ill and was hospitalized on the morning of the event, still managed to rally the most enthusiastic and vocal group of supporters there. Even such megalithic media monsters as CNN and Fox News reported that his supporters were the most visible, and callers to C-SPAN during its coverage of the event were overwhelmingly in support of Ron Paul. Thousands of unpaid, grassroots volunteers had descended upon Iowa from all over the United States. Those who weren't Iowans could not vote in Iowa’s poll, but they were still effective at spreading the word about Paul’s stance on returning to the Constitution and restoring the rule of law.
This surely had an influence on the Iowan attendees, and even more found themselves in agreement with Paul’s speech, which went well in spite of the scathing, sarcastic introduction from emcee Laura Ingraham, who made no attempt to mention his strong points, as she did with the other candidates, but instead seemed so upset at being drowned out by the cheers of Paul’s supporters that she quipped, “The inmates have left the asylum”, demonstrated her lack of Constitutional and historical understanding when she mocked the letters of marque and reprisal Paul introduced to help catch Osama bin Laden, and showed her derision of the growing anti-war movement within the Republican party when she referred to their procession into the building as “the peace train.”
But despite all these high-fructose hijinx and the essential meaninglessness of this contest, a few lessons have emerged from yesterday’s events in Ames:
First of all, Romney’s relatively meager showing demonstrates that no matter how many megabucks the corporate-candidate media darlings throw at us, voters are dissatisfied with their empty promises and are looking increasingly toward the lesser-known candidates.
Secondly, the results of the voting make it more than clear that Paul’s oft-cited 1% standing in the “scientific” opinion polls is not in any way indicative of his actual performance in a real, boots-on-the-ground vote. For Paul, this was a breakout vote and a chance to show that his internet support does indeed translate into real votes.
And last, but certainly not least, an examination of how the candidates spent their money on this venture offers us perhaps the most telling lesson of all. While the Mitt Romneys of this campaign try to dazzle us with dollars, Ron Paul shows that he can turn out the vote and barely spend a dime.
Given a choice between Mitt Romney, who spent roughly $2,200 for each vote he received, and Ron Paul, who only spent about $200 for each of his votes, I’d look past the flashing lights and jumbotron TV screens and consider who gets the most bang for his buck.
Stripping away all the corny stuff and looking at what each of them got for their money in this straw poll, I know exactly which one I’d trust with my tax dollars. Sorry, Mitt. You lose.