Why do iowa caucuses matter

The number of people in the room are counted, and any candidate who does not get a certain percentage a threshold set at the beginning of the night in the first round, is eliminated. Those who voted for losing candidates are then coaxed by the others to join their side and to vote for their candidate of choice. At the end, the results are collated across the state in all precincts. Despite the hoopla surrounding the Iowa caucuses, the real impact of this process happens further down the line, when results are eventually translated into votes for delegates, who represent their states at their respective party conventions.

These delegates are the ones who vote for a candidate to run in the national election. Iowans defend the caucus as an exercise in real grassroots democracy, given the extent of politicking and discussion that goes on.

However, some argue that the lengthy and complex caucus is archaic and should be changed. One of the problems with placing so much weight on Iowa is that it is not demographically representative of the US, with a population that is approximately 90 percent white versus 77 percent nationwide. If this state is small and unrepresentative, why does it have such an impact on the race? In a nutshell, it is because it is the first contest for people to get their party nomination.

If a candidate does not do well in those early states, like Iowa and New Hampshire, financial and electoral support eventually begins to dry up.

This gives Iowa the power to narrow down the playing field. NBA icon: Aaron Rodgers' vaccine lies destroy confidence. Tesla shares fall after Elon Musk's Twitter poll. See this new 70s-inspired electric Ford concept truck. But just what can a single state with a relatively small number of delegates up for grabs tell us about the rest of the primary season? If history is any guide, the Iowa caucuses really do matter.

The winner of the Iowa caucuses on the Democratic side has frequently gone on to be the Democratic nominee. Since , there have been nine primary seasons without a Democratic incumbent president running. One off these non-successes Tom Harkin in was from Iowa. The success rate of Iowa winners does decrease, if you expand it out to include Republican caucuses as well. Read More. Remember, there have been more than candidates who have participated in the caucuses since Close X.

Click to scroll back to top of the page Back to top. By Hannah Jackson Global News. Posted February 3, pm. Updated February 3, pm. Election: Primaries and caucuses, explained. Smaller font Descrease article font size - A. Share this item on Facebook facebook Share this item via WhatsApp whatsapp Share this item on Twitter twitter Send this page to someone via email email Share this item on Pinterest pinterest Share this item on LinkedIn linkedin Share this item on Reddit reddit Copy article link Copy link.

Story continues below advertisement. Leave a comment Comments. So Iowa just keeps on mattering. A version of this article was originally published in It has been updated for the caucuses. Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment: to empower through understanding. Financial contributions from our readers are a critical part of supporting our resource-intensive work and help us keep our journalism free for all. Please consider making a contribution to Vox today to help us keep our work free for all.

Cookie banner We use cookies and other tracking technologies to improve your browsing experience on our site, show personalized content and targeted ads, analyze site traffic, and understand where our audiences come from.

By choosing I Accept , you consent to our use of cookies and other tracking technologies. Democratic presidential campaign signs are displayed in a front yard in Des Moines, Iowa, on February 2, Reddit Pocket Flipboard Email. A poster with the likenesses of Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Sen. So why do we care so much about who wins? Every winner of a competitive major-party presidential nomination contest since except one started off by winning the Iowa caucuses, the New Hampshire primary, or both.

Two of our three most recent presidents — Barack Obama and George W. Bush — kicked off their primary season by winning Iowa and each survived a subsequent loss in New Hampshire. Trump did the reverse: He lost Iowa, but won New Hampshire and then the nomination. And this plays out in several interacting ways: The media hypes up the Iowa results, branding candidates as winners and losers based on how they performed there.

So the winners get tons of excited coverage, but the losers become afterthoughts. And, particularly in multi-candidate fields, winning media coverage is hugely important. A poor Iowa performance will likely mean fewer campaign donations and endorsements, which makes it more difficult for a candidate to stay in the race.

Voters in other states — especially those trying to make sense of complex, multi-candidate fields — can take the Iowa results and the media coverage of those results as cues about which contenders can actually win. Accordingly, poll results in other states can change quickly after the Iowa results sink in.