Campaigns and Elections
09-21-07
Dr. Politics and a Healthy Dose of Political Chowder on New Radio Show
By - Beth LaMontagne
Iowa State University professor of politics Dr. Steffen W. Schmidt talks
politics with Arnie Arnesen every Wednesday.
New Hampshire voters pride themselves on their reputation for being politically
savvy on the ins and outs of the race to the White House. But when it comes to
its sister state in the premiere electoral contests, Iowa is a bit of a mystery. While
Granite Staters love their party-sponsored clambakes and Old Home Day
parades, Iowans flock to straw polls and steak fries. New Hampshire political
junkies are more than happy to explain the importance of retail-style politicking
on a primary, but ask them to explain how a caucus works and you're more than
likely to get a few head scratches and confused looks.
Long time talk show host and well-known figure on the New Hampshire political
scene, Arnie Arnesen, has teamed up with Iowa State University professor of
politics Dr. Steffen W. Schmidt, also known as Dr. Politics, to help bridge the gap
between the first caucus state and the first primary state. Although the two have
been doing radio shows together for a number of years, the east-meets-west
political conversation is now a regular feature on Arnesen's new morning drive
talk show on 1110 WCCM AM, which broadcasts throughout the southern tier of
the state.
The radio show, called Chowder in the Morning, is a spin-off of Arnesen's
weekly-televised chat fest, Political Chowder. Each Wednesday for the last hour
of the broadcast, Arnesen and Schmidt hash out the week's events in Iowa and
New Hampshire, comparing notes on how the power moves and campaign
gaffes played in each other's state.
In an interview with NHpols.com and sister site PoliticsIowa.com this week,
Schmidt and Arnesen discussed what they saw as some of the major differences,
and similarities, between Iowa and New Hampshire.
Schmidt said he sees Iowa and New Hampshire as both relatively small,
predominantly white states. Neither has a major city, with most people living in
the suburbs and rural areas.
"The candidates don't have to lie too much between one or the other because
they're talking about the same things," said Schmidt. He did note some minor
differences, like the strength of the religious right in Iowa and voters' focus on
agricultural issues, like the farm bill and ethanol.
"New Hampshire, again, is homogeneous, yes, small, yes, but I'd say very
different," said Arnesen, whose daughter went to college in Iowa. "It's very
independent, very high-tech, it's close to Boston. They're a little quirky [and] more
moderate Republican. It's even true of the Democrats, where there's a distrust of
government and a distrust of big church."
Schmidt has noticed that Iowa, much like New Hampshire, has been tending blue
in recent years. There's a Democratic governor, and a Democratic majority in the
legislature and a long serving Democrat in the U.S. Senate. Schmidt said he's
also noticed a growing dissatisfaction with the Republican Party with voters in
Iowa.
"The last few years the Republicans really undermined what was a trend toward
a Republican majority," he said. "I think the pendulum will continue to swing
[toward the Democrats]. ... People found Republicans were not for those things
that people elected them for."
Undeclared voters make up the majority of the electorate in Iowa, but unlike New
Hampshire, they play a small role in the caucuses, said Schmidt. Because the
caucuses are so influenced by the state parties, those who have no allegiance to
Democrats or Republicans are less drawn to participate.
Arnesen said she has noticed that a large number of voters in New Hampshire
are "not wedded to any one candidate yet." But Schmidt has seen in Iowa that
the Democratic race is very tight and voters are starting to shore up their support
with either U.S. Sens. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., Barack Obama, D-Ill., or former
U.S. Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C. An average of the most recent polls shows
Clinton has 26 percent support, Edwards 23 percent and Obama 21 percent,
much closer than recent polling in New Hampshire, which shows Clinton with a
sizeable lead.
"Those right now are the three horses who have gone around the track a couple
of times and are coming through to the finishing round," said Schmidt. "It just
seems as though things are kind of consolidating here."
When it comes to Republicans, it's more up in the air. Former Arkansas Gov.
Mike Huckabee seems to be gaining momentum and former U.S. Sen. Fred
Thompson, R-Tenn., is averaging second in the polls. Schmidt has observed that
former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, despite his perceived flip-flopping on
issues and evangelical's wariness of his Mormon faith, is playing well here, has
the respect of prominent business leaders and has largely won over the religious
right.
"I have talked to some pastors here ... [and] they think Romney kind of fits their
view of family guy and has good leadership skills," said Schmidt.
As far as former New York City Mayor Giuliani goes, his focus on the attacks of
Sept. 11, 2001 and his rocky family life haven't been winning over voters.
"We don't worry as much about terrorism here," said Schmidt. "[People think]
he's over the top."
The one thing New Hampshire and Iowa will always have in common, is the
strong belief that each state should keep it's initial spot in the presidential election
calendar.
"There is a political culture factor here, where people feel morally and social
responsible to participate," said Schmidt. "When you have a free-for-all, you lose
all the nice stories that New Hampshire and Iowa provide in the beginning of the
contest. ... What if Iowa and New Hampshire were not first or had not been first in
the past? Would the list of people presenting themselves be any different? No, it
would be a similar list but there would be less of chance for them to field their
message or recover from mistakes."
Beth LaMontagne can be reached at blamontagne@nhpols.com