Skip to main content Accessibility help

Comparing Caucus and Registered Voter Support for the 2008 Presidential Candidates in Iowa

  • David Redlawsk (a1), Daniel Bowen (a1) and Caroline Tolbert (a1)

As the 2008 presidential nominating process got underway, Iowa's coveted status as first-in-the-nation appeared increasingly in jeopardy, as states engaged in aggressive frontloading throughout 2006 and 2007. In the past, late March primaries in large states like Florida, New York, and California were irrelevant to the electoral outcome. To avoid a repeat in 2008, Florida moved its primary to January 29 and California moved to what is now being called “super duper Tuesday” on February 5 when nearly two dozen states will hold primaries. Under pressure from extra-early voting in Florida and other front-loading states, as we write this the Iowa caucuses are to be held on January 3, two days after New Year's. It seems possible that as a result of the nominating season becoming more condensed, there may be an increase in the importance of Iowa and New Hampshire, the opposite of what the states moving earlier wanted. If the first nominating events are now the starter's gun in a 50-meter dash rather than a mile run, who gets off the starting blocks first may well matter even more. As Hull (2007, 66) argues, Iowa's impact on New Hampshire and the national nomination process is a “wild, wired one.” In this rapid sea of a changing nomination process we take a close look at the Iowa electorate, both statewide registered voters and a subset of likely caucus attendees, to shed light on the underpinnings of support for the presidential candidates in the early stages of the 2008 campaign, using unique rolling cross-sectional data to track opinion change over time.The University of Iowa Hawkeye Poll is co-directed by David Redlawsk and Caroline Tolbert. It was administered with the support of the University of Iowa Social Science Research Center, Director Kevin Leicht, and funded by the University of Iowa Office of the Provost and the College of Liberal Arts and Science. We thank all these people along with the team of graduate and undergraduate students who worked with us on the survey project.

Hide All


Adkins, Randall, and Andrew Dowdle. 2001. “How Important are Iowa and New Hampshire to Winning Post-Reform Presidential Nominations?Political Research Quarterly 54 (2): 43144.
Democracy in Action. 2007. Iowa Caucuses Web Site.∼action/2008/chrniowa08.html (June 29, 2007).
Donovan, Todd, and Shaun Bowler. 2004. Reforming the Republic: Democratic Institutions for the New America. Upper Saddle River, N.J: Prentice Hall.
Donovan, Todd, Janine Parry, and Shaun Bowler. 2005. “O Other, Where Art Thou? Support for Multiparty Politics in the United States.” Social Science Quarterly 86: 14759.
Hull, Christopher C.2007. Grassroots Rules: How the Iowa Caucus Helps Elect American Presidents. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Fiorina, Morris P., Samuel J. Abrams, and Jeremy C. Pope. 2004. Culture War? The Myth of a Polarized America. New York: Longman.
Norrander, Barbara. 1989. “Ideological Representativeness of Presidential Primary Voters.” American Journal of Political Science 33 (3): 57087.
Norrander, Barbara. 1986. “Correlates of Vote Choice in the 1980 Presidential Primaries.” Journal of Politics 48 (1): 15666.
Squire, Peverill, ed. 1989. The Iowa Caucuses and the Presidential Nominating Process. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press.
Stone, Walter J., Ronald B. Rapoport, and Alan I. Abramowitz. 1992. “Candidate Support in Presidential Nomination Campaigns: The Case of Iowa in 1984.” The Journal of Politics 54 (4): 1,07497.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

PS: Political Science & Politics
  • ISSN: 1049-0965
  • EISSN: 1537-5935
  • URL: /core/journals/ps-political-science-and-politics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed