The message coming out of tonight is that outsiders, non-establishment figures, shook up both parties. And that is no doubt true. But another point occurs to me about this result — comparing the two races.
This state was tailor-made for Mike Huckabee. It’s not the evangelical South. But Iowa’s Republican caucus constituency has a very evangelical tinge. It’s no accident that Pat Robertson came in second here back in 1988.
You can’t say the same thing about Obama. Iowa’s a very white state. And if I’m not mistaken it is, demographically, a relatively old state. Unlike Huckabee, there’s no reason (nothing about the state itself) to think that Obama shouldn’t do as well or better in New Hampshire than he did in Iowa. And if he comes off another win in New Hampshire I think it’s a good bet that African-Americans in South Carolina (who make up something like half the Democratic primary constituency) will break overwhelmingly in his favor.
None of this is to presuppose the outcome of the Democratic race. Hillary’s not going anywhere. She could have knocked Obama out of the race with two strong victories. But it will take a lot longer and a lot more wins for Obama to put this one away. What I’m talking about is the disparity between the night’s big winners — Huckabee and Obama. Huckabee was in many ways on his very best terrain. Perhaps the peculiarities of caucusing helped Obama. But his victory strikes me as much more portable outside the state than Huckabee’s.
