Skip Nav
Women
Surprising Qualities of Your Zodiac Sign That You Don't Already Know
Relationships
How I Married the Best Man at My First Wedding — and Learned to Live With a Bachelor
Relationships
15 Unique Ways You and Your SO Can Celebrate Your Anniversary

Headline: Obama's Win vs. History

Headline: Obama's Win vs. History

While Iowa's been pretty accurate picking the winning horse (at least of the party nomination) lately, since 1972 it's only been about 50-50. In 1992, Bill Clinton finished a distant third, as did Michael Dukakis in 1988. And poor Jimmy Carter came in second place to "Uncommitted" in 1976 and worse, George McGovern placed third behind "Uncommitted" and Edmund Muskie in 1972.

What does this mean for the true heft of Obama's victory?

As the BBC points out:

"Very often it is not so much about winning in Iowa but doing better or at least as well as expected.
Democrat Howard Dean was leading his party's polls in 2004 but after his third place in Iowa his campaign stuttered and never recovered."

Obama certainly achieved that benchmark. With his sizable 38 percent of the vote, and the record turnout in Iowa a full 100,000 more than last year, it was clearly a victory for the political process as well — and that is something history won't soon forget.
Source

Join The Conversation
Cecil the Lion's Son Dead
Couple Re-creates Obama Photos For Engagement Shoot
Prince Philip Over the Years
Lottery Horror Stories
From Our Partners
Latest Love
All the Latest From Ryan Reynolds