A Few Votes In Iowa Will Go A Long Way

Candidates Spend Millions In Hawkeye State To Win Over Just A Relative Handful of Voters

(CBS)  For all of the frenzy, for all the massive media crush, for all the ads - nearly 45,000 of them so far, causing John Edwards to ask, "I mean, really, when is it gonna stop?" - it's hard to remember that the results Thursday night will be determined by a tiny sliver of the electorate.

In a nation where more than 120 million went to the polls in November 2004, the Iowa caucus results will likely be shaped by what amounts to a handful of people, reports CBS News senior political correspondent Jeff Greenfield.

This year, estimates are the Democrats will draw perhaps 150,000 to their caucuses, while the Republicans expect about 85,000. That's the total of barely 10 percent of eligible voters here in Iowa.

With both contests appearing close, a change of heart of, say, 5,000 people could mean the difference between triumph and disaster.

By contrast, the 2000 New Hampshire primaries drew 44 percent of eligible voters in that state.

But because Iowa looms so large on the political landscape, the top three Democrats alone have spent some $17 million just on TV ads here.

Add in Republican spending, and money for the mailings that flood the mailboxes in Iowa, and we're likely looking at a $65 million investment to reach at most a quarter of a million caucus-goers.

That comes out to about $275 per vote. At that rate, it would be cheaper for a candidate to drive around the state and handing out $100 bills to every voter.

One more thing: If, in fact, only a handful of voters decide who wins and who loses, will the media have the restraint not to declare winners and losers based on so small a number of participants?

[jack3213]

I stil can''t believe anyone would still be considering a "Clinton" after all their coniving, manipulation, lies, and selfishness. Would you want your husband back in the same room he cheated on you for to make himself look good? Come on, how much self respect do you think you will get?

[apolloknowsa]

I seriously can not believe that Iowans would still be thinking about voting for Huck

We need a true executive. One who will actually think before speaking, especially after a serious international incident--what did the Huckster do? He apologized to the people of Pakistan for the assassination and then did not even know the actual facts on the ground before speaking. We can not have a commander in chief who will spout off with things that he thinks sounds nice, but are factual inaccuracies (lies to you and me)

Sure, I bet he is loads of laughs at picnics and barbecues, but we need a real leader, not this bass-playing court jester (who pardoned a dozen convicted murderers and tried to steal $70,000-worth of furniture when he left the governor''s mansion...and other ethical lapses that landed him on judicialwatch.org ''s top ten most corrupt politicians list) who does not think before he speaks--like when he apologized for the assassination in Pakistan!! Unbelievable!!

Hucka has been crying all over TV that he is under attack...no, sir, we are just finally realizing what you did as governor versus what you claim to have done (like how you claimed to graduate from seminary, which you did not do...but Mitt Romney did graduate with high honors with a dual graduate degree JD/MBA from Harvard--that is not an attack ad--that is comparing two people and their resumes as we are looking to hire someone for the job)

[jedi08]

Katie Curic is the worst of the Clinton Broadcast Station. I''m starting to question what your real motivation is for wanting Hillary back in the white house. Were you one of Bills Flings and just want him back in power. Now that it looks like Billary will lose, your trying to say Iowa doesn''t matter.

Can''t stand you puppets in the drive by media.
The Bush''s and Clintons have to be stopped

Go Obamma

[mediacreedia]

Katie Curic. What the heck. You traitor. I like NBC. I refuse to believe anything you say.