How important are the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary? Here's a quick look at the history since 1976...1976 Democratic: Jimmy Carter finishes behind "uncommitted," but ahead of all the other human candidates in Iowa. :) Carter also wins New Hampshire. Carter goes on to win the nomination and the Presidency.
1976 Republican: Gerald Ford defeats Ronald Reagan in Iowa and New Hampshire. Ford goes on to win the nomination.
1980 Democratic: Carter defeats Ted Kennedy in Iowa and New Hampshire, goes on to win the nomination.
1980 Republican: George HW Bush barely (32%-30%) defeats Ronald Reagan in Iowa, loses to Reagan in New Hampshire. The nomination ultimately goes to Reagan, with Bush as his running mate.
1984 Democratic: Walter Mondale defeats Gary Hart in Iowa. Hart defeats Mondale in New Hampshire. Mondale goes on to win the nomination after an extremely close race, one of the closest in decades.
1984 Republican: Reagan is unopposed.
1988 Democratic: Dick Gephardt (31%) defeats Paul Simon (27%) and Michael Dukakis (22%) in Iowa. Dukakis wins New Hampshire and ends up in a long battle (largely with Jesse Jackson), finally clinching the nomination on June 7.
1988 Republican: Bob Dole (37%) defeats Pat Robertson (25%) and George HW Bush (19%) in Iowa. Bush wins New Hampshire over Dole, Jack Kemp, Pete du Pont IV, and Robertson. Bush then pulls away on "Super Tuesday" and clinches the nomination.
1992 Democratic: Native son Tom Harkin easily wins Iowa; nobody else seriously contests the state. Paul Tsongas (from neighboring New Hampshire, thus a quasi-native son) defeats Bill Clinton, Bob Kerrey and Harkin in New Hampshire. Clinton goes on to win the nomination.
1992 Republican: George HW Bush defeats Pat Buchanan in New Hampshire, goes on to win the nomination.
1996 Democratic: Bill Clinton is unopposed.
1996 Republican: Bob Dole (26%) barely defeats Pat Buchanan (23%) in Iowa, followed by Lamar Alexander (18%) and Steve Forbes (10%). Buchanan defeats Dole and Alexander in New Hampshire. Dole eventually wins the nomination.
2000 Democratic: Al Gore defeats Bill Bradley by 63%-37% in Iowa. Gore beats Bradley in New Hampshire as well and goes on to win the nomination.
2000 Republican: George W. Bush defeats Steve Forbes by 11 points in Iowa. McCain beats Bush in New Hampshire (49%-30%), but then gets wiped out in South Carolina and loses the nomination to Bush.
2004 Democratic: John Kerry wins Iowa with 38% of the vote, followed by John Edwards (32%) and Howard Dean (18%). Kerry beats Dean, Wesley Clark and Edwards in New Hampshire, goes on to win the nomination, with Edwards as his running mate.
2004 Republican: Bush is unopposed.
What does this tell us? Well, definitely, if you win both Iowa and New Hampshire, you're pretty much going to be the nominee. If you win only one state, it's much more dicey. If you win neither of the first two states, you can still win the nomination (Bill Clinton), but perhaps only in a year where one or both state's importance is diminished for some reason -- e.g., because of the presence of a native son (Harkin in Iowa) or near-native son (Tsongas in NH).
This year, it looks wide open on the Republican side, maybe on the Democratic as well. Could we see a lengthy nominating process, with one or more parties even going to the convention to choose their nominee? At this point, it certainly looks possible, which would be fun for political junkies (like me). If one candidate for either party wins both Iowa and New Hampshire, it will be very difficult for someone else to win the nomination. I guess that must be Giuliani's hope, because right now he's way behind in Iowa and also trailing in New Hampshire. Perhaps the compressed schedule this year, the absence of incumbents or heir apparents in either party, and the crowded fields will make this year one of the wildest ever? Or not. What do you think?