Deciphering Iowa

“Iowa’s just a random hick state.”

“Iowa’s caucuses don’t matter at all – it’s just one state.”

“Why do we let Iowa matter so much?”

Statements like these reappear every four years. Perhaps they’re just a reaction to the status quo - against a feeling of powerlessness in political processes. Maybe they're a product of coastal disdain toward any states between the Appalachians and the Rockies. In any case, every four years Iowa begins the candidate selection process, and that quirk isn’t likely to change soon. So, accepting the status quo, what can we learn from Santorum's amazing performance last night? What will it mean for the rest of the Republican primary?

One surprise candidate from four years back, Mike Huckabee, provides a starting point to analyze yesterday's events. Like Santorum, Huckabee emerged at the last second as a “true conservative” alternative to Mitt Romney. Interestingly, last time John McCain was the "moderate" voice, and many Romney supporters flocked to Huckabee at the last second. How is Romney the moderate voice this time around?

Both Huckabee and Santorum spent fractions of what Romney spent and emerged at the last second to beat him. While Romney’s campaign seems stronger than ever, this should worry him. Polls in the past few months show widespread grassroots discontent with Romney. New candidates emerged frequently as a “Romney alternative”: Bachmann, then Gingrich, then Paul, and in the past few days Santorum. Has Romney ridden the storm? Will he emerge successful? Probably. But why are people so determined to find anyone but Romney? Are people put off by the same “distance” they feel with Obama? Do people distrust his history of extreme privilege? Is it that he’s more moderate (at least during his tenure in Massachusetts - less so now in rhetoric), which doesn’t work well in primaries/caucuses? Could there be an anti-Mormon bias?

Four years ago, Huckabee’s campaign was easy to dismiss: he had the fleeting appeal of a populist. He wouldn’t last the election season. I mean, goodness, he told Chuck Norris jokes in his ads. Santorum hasn’t been quite that laughable, but his recent ads are hilarious because they use doublespeak to highlight his biggest fault: Santorum claims to be the only candidate who can beat President Obama, when in reality he has no chance of beating President Obama. He's too extreme.

Santorum isn’t as ridiculous as Huckabee was, but his appeal seems just as likely to fade. Santorum already spent quite a bit of time in New Hampshire, but he is still polling terribly there (10% to Romney's 47% this morning - even after his performance in Iowa). He comes across during interviews as a wide-eyed fundamentalist. But he won’t peter out as quickly as Huckabee did, and in a season when momentum matters, perhaps he shouldn’t be written off yet.

Santorum is the best alternative for Perry and Bachmann’s former supporters. (Let's assume that Perry drops out in the next few weeks - after even hinting at dropping out last night, his funds will dry up immediately.) Gingrich seems determined to take Romney down after his ugly fight with Romney’s Super PAC. Both of these points will help Santorum. Plus, who doesn’t love a folksy underdog? Maybe Santorum’s newfound media attention will bring undecided voters to his camp. ...but, if I had to make a prediction, I’d say Romney emerges victorious. Perry’s and Bachmann’s supporters were few, and Gingrich is easy to dismiss as angry and erratic. Furthermore, unless he suddenly performs amazingly (unlikely), Huntsman will probably drop out soon too and throw his support behind Romney (a la Giuliani supporting McCain in '08).

Most worryingly for Santorum, Romney’s Super PAC now will likely focus all its Gingrich-busting resources on Santorum. And let’s not forget that according to polls Romney is the only one that has a chance of competing with President Obama. Even bastions of the “liberal media” – the New York Times and the New Yorker – have run pieces in the past week praising Romney. Is this because he’s the most centrist? The most pragmatic? Or is he just running the most effective (and expensive) campaign?

What about Ron Paul? The former libertarian candidate – and arguably the only leading Republican candidate who is both coherent and immune from "flip-flopper" criticisms – did very well with younger voters last night. Overall he finished close behind Romney and Santorum. While his supporters have the zeal of recent converts, his populist appeal only seems to grow over time. Is Ron Paul a feasible candidate? My hunch says, "No." He’s too extreme in too many views to win the Republican ticket. While people may theoretically like his ideas, they will be scared of the drastic changes he proposes. My prediction is still Romney.

Last night highlights the extreme divisions within the Republican Party. Three hugely different candidates each received a quarter of the votes. Could we see a disgruntled candidate leave the race and run as a third-party candidate? Such a move would be amusing, mostly because it would ruin Romney’s chance of beating Obama. But Republicans are known for stepping in line after primary season, so this is unlikely. My prediction: Romney gets the Republican ticket, and after months of speculation about how he might possibly beat Obama, he won't. This prediction is, of course, hugely dependent on the economy. But for now, I vote Obama over Romney in the presidential election.

Election season is just beginning folks, and it’s going to be a good one. And yes, it felt great to write this entry and barely mention Michele Bachmann.

The Delta Project

Hey everyone -

Quick update: Morocco was grand, I took a little vacation in Italy on my way home, and now I'm in Jersey, living in what could aptly be described as "Hogwarts." Many thanks to Mom and Dad for driving me and all my stuff out. My sentiments are somewhere between anxious and excited for the semester to start.

I find myself thinking most days about the political transitions going on throughout the Arab world. Just under a year ago, I wrote several personal statements detailing that I wanted to study political transitions and reform in the Arab world. I had been living in Egypt and loving it, and I was ready to study the region and the language forever. Then the Arab Spring began. Now I find myself wondering if I shouldn't be back there studying the current transition on the ground instead of in a far off Ivory Tower. My current path is, of course, an amazing opportunity, and I don't regret enrolling in grad school. But I still wonder what I might be missing.

Excitingly, I can live vicariously through three of my former co-Fulbrighters who are traveling back to Egypt to document the current transition... except, unlike every major news outlet, they aren't doing it from Cairo or Alexandria. They're focusing on the region that claims a majority of the Egyptian population: the Nile Delta. They all lived in the Delta this past year, speak Egyptian Arabic, have good contacts in their respective cities, and will do a really fantastic job.

My friends are just looking for a little funding. Fortunately, the entire project shouldn't cost very much, and they're going to produce a book and DVD that will be available to funders at the end. They're also talking about setting up Skype interviews with schools or organizations that help fund the project. More details are here.

In less than a week they've achieved almost half their fundraising goal, and in the next two weeks they hope to raise about $3000 more. Let's make this happen! Also, just so you know, if you pledge money through this site but then they don't reach their goal by Sept 21, you will not be charged; the pledges will only turn into donations if the project moves forward.

Finally, if anyone knows of any organizations or grants that might fund projects like this, please e-mail me or leave the info in the comments section. Thanks!

Al-Akhawayn!

Part two of my summer Arabic extravaganza has started! Last week I moved to Morocco to enroll in Al-Akawayn University's summer Arabic program. Al-Akhawayn (click link to see wiki page of university and a picture) is a beautiful place. We will have class 5 hours a day, and apparently there will be about that much homework each evening. Hopefully it whips be back into shape before I head to grad school this fall - I fear I've gotten lazy in the past couple years. I will have a Moroccan roommate (don't know this person yet), and I don't have internet in my room, which should be great for studying but terrible for keeping in touch and staying afloat with world affairs. I promise to respond to e-mails, so please keep in touch!

Enshrining Bigotry

Minnesota’s recent push to vote on a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage is not a move to “let the people have a say,” it is bigotry in its most raw form. The best part of the debate is that the two sides are talking past each other when they don’t have to: attacking the Republican argument directly better highlights the contradiction therein.

Democrats have a host of familiar, and very valid, arguments. Voting on the rights of a minority is not appropriate. Lawmakers should be using the last weeks of the season to focus on the budget, not passing constitutional amendments targeting minorities (especially when there is already a state law banning gay marriage!). And when one Republican said, “People have indicated they would like the opportunity to define marriage. They don’t want to leave it up to the courts,” Democrats rightly retorted: That’s what courts are for - not allowing populist sentiments to target minorities. But if we dissect the Republican argument, we see it for what it is: an embarrassment to the great state of Minnesota, driven mostly by fear.

Republicans are coyly using populist rhetoric to get away with doing something very shameful. They know that the only time a state beat a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage was in 2006 in Arizona, where two years later a similar amendment passed. But such amendments won’t be possible forever, and the ones that do pass thankfully won't be around forever either. Public opinion is quickly swinging. That’s why there has been a mad-dash by Republicans nation-wide to stall the inevitable advent of marriage equality. Republicans know that the amendments aren’t passing by overwhelming majorities anymore, and that the number of people nation-wide who approve of same-sex marriage rises every year. CNN now reports that more than half of the population nation-wide approves, and this poll favored people with land-line phones - disproportionally older people who are more likely to vote against same-sex marriage. Republicans are running out of time to enshrine hatred. So they resort to constitutional amendments. Why? Constitutional amendments are more difficult to overturn than mere laws.

Republicans don’t just want people to vote on marriage equality (which is heinous in and of itself), they want people now to dictate morality to future generations. Republicans are arguing that people in 5 and 10 years don’t deserve the same “say” that they’re demanding now. In 5-10 years, the law would likely be overturned, either by popular vote or a court. Writing discrimination into the constitution will make it much more durable.

Most exciting of all, this amendment is a tacit admission that Republicans are on the wrong side of history. They see the momentum and know what's coming, and yet they're still choosing to stand on the side of hatred and intolerance, hoping to delay same-sex marriage for a couple extra years. They acknowledge that they've lost the war. Otherwise, they'd be more likely to trust people in 5-10 years to make up their own minds as to whether they'd like to repeal the anti-same-sex marriage laws.

Our nation’s courts – comprised of our country’s legal experts – are finally figuring out that LGBT people are an historically marginalized minority. People nation-wide are meeting LGBT friends and family members and seeing that they're totally normal people with the same motivations and life goals as anyone else. It's smashing our hetero-centric mindsets. And instead of welcoming this process – a process that recognizes that love is something to be celebrated, and that will inspire fewer teens to kill themselves every year – social conservatives are doing what they like doing most: subjecting their neighbors to their supposedly heightened sense of morality through legislation that will embarrass our grandchildren when they look back and wonder how we could have been so backward. Republicans in Minnesota aren’t motivated by "wanting the people to decide” – they’re driven by fear of the future, a rejection of loving families, and a distrust of legal experts. Minnesota, you deserve better. It’s time to say no to bigotry. It’s time to beat this amendment.

-----------------------

A couple links:

A nice editorial from Winona, MN - not a huge town by any means. I'm impressed.


A republican law school professor who does not support gay marriage talks about why this constitutional amendment is still a terrible idea.


A MN Senator: "How many more gay people does God have to create before we ask ourselves whether or not God actually wants them around?"


Another scathing piece from the Star Tribune


Great summary of articles written state-wide - turns out ZERO editorial boards have come out in favor of this amendment, which really makes one wonder which "people" are asking for this to be brought to a vote, as one state senator keeps claiming.

GaGa's latest hit

Let’s take a break from Egypt. I could bore readers with tales of life here; seriously, my life isn’t terribly exciting: I go to Arabic class, study Arabic, spend too much time online, exercise (but not enough), and squeeze in quick trips to Cairo or Zagazig on the weekends (much to the chagrin of my perpetual intentions to Study All Weekend). Instead, I'm going to talk about pop culture.

Since first heading to the Arab world almost three years ago, I’ve become something of a connoisseur of all things stereotypically American. Things I never really enjoyed when I lived in the USA – silly comedies, trashy pop music, French fries, soda – suddenly became remnants of a life I missed and desired, even though I didn’t partake when I was there.

Partway through Peace Corps, one such obsession emerged: Lady GaGa. Poker Face mystified me. I still laugh hysterically every time I watch the music video for Telephone. She was “the next Madonna” with only a few singles released. Her songs break records instantly. I’ve studied, memorized, and analyzed her lyrics and beats, and gotten giddy waiting for new songs to come out. But some critics are starting to wonder if GaGa has already peaked.

Born This Way was hyped to be the anthem for our generation. ...I wouldn’t go that far, but I wasn’t as disappointed or underwhelmed as some, either. I found it catchy. It lacked the intentionally vapid quality of her other songs that always hid something slightly sinister – an ability to convey a message and an attitude while ostensibly just writing about fame, fortune and individuality. This was a quality I liked and respected in her music. But she branched out. Born This Way is a nice, feel-good song. It was perhaps just overhyped.

Some felt Born This Way was a remake of Madonna’s Express Yourself. I’m not sure that's true, or if it matters. Madonna has always been one of GaGa’s biggest inspirations, and GaGa has not apologized for it. Born This Way was something new too: it was, unquestionably, the most LGBT-friendly song to ever hit mainstream pop culture. I can think of no other hit song’s chorus that includes the word “transgender.” GaGa is still pushing the envelope, and I love her for it. Who cares if she was merely pandering to her base?

There seem to be two mainstream interpretations of Mother Monster and her relationship with her fans: that she is an artistic and musical genius who is decades ahead of her time and that anyone who doesn’t like her is a simpleton who doesn’t understand her; or, that she is a great marketer with fans who will gobble up any garbage she produces, and who will convince themselves they should like it. I guess I’m somewhere between these two camps. While I haven’t been blown away in a little while, I am certainly still engaged and impressed. (I hope she makes an acoustic album sometime – that girl’s piano remake of Viva La Vida is my #1 most played song on iTunes.) She amuses like none other. She keeps coming up with new ideas for costumes, grand entrances, and even wackier explanations for what her actions really “mean.” Some don’t make sense, but they certainly make you wonder if she’s a genius or if she might just be insane.

Judas, in my opinion, shows some of GaGa’s best qualities, but it also highlights some of the concerns people have expressed about her. It is catchy and edgy, beyond a doubt. Many people are already up-in-arms with a variety of analyses: is it a love song for Jesus from a Mary Magdalene who relates well with Judas, or a praise song GaGa herself is singing to Judas, or, perhaps a love song Jesus (one could be forgiven for thinking she’s comparing herself to Jesus) sang to Judas? And by love, she doesn’t mean, “love as a brother or sister in Christ.” The language is fairly explicit and sexual. And if you’re offended, “wear an ear condom.” GaGa is going to f*** with your mind, whether you want it to happen or not. All you can choose is if you want to get infected.

References to a sexual Jesus often aren’t taken well. References to a sexual Jesus from a potential male lover who betrays Jesus – that’s straight-up scandalous. This is not the first time it’s been done, but it's certainly the first time a pop icon wrote a mainstream song about it. She says Judas is merely the next step from Bad Romance – a story of being in love with someone who’s terrible to you. But her refusal to analyze her own lyrics further when there is so much ambiguity is a return to intentional vapidity with dark undertones, taken to a new extreme.

GaGa’s confession that the song is influenced by Bad Romance raises concerns: she might not be a true creative genius – heck, her songs already sound the same. (Seriously, there are some chord progressions that I know I’ve heard before and that lyrics from Bad Romance fit too well over.) That said, given her recent appearance in an egg and her new protruding cheek bones, I don’t think we’ve seen the last of this woman’s creativity. The other fear is that the fame is already going to her head and, if she wasn’t a little wacky to begin with, that she might be going truly insane. Only time will tell on that. For now, I look forward to Just Dancing several nights away to Judas and several other songs that will be released on her new CD next month.

Until then,
A Little Monster

I'm baaaaack...

I'm back in Alexandria, not with Fulbright, but studying Arabic privately. Couldn't pass up this opportunity to be back in Egypt during the current political transition. Holla now, ya hear?

Egypt, I already miss you...

A week ago, Fulbright contacted us and told us that we aren't being invited back... at least not yet. Things apparently haven't stabilized sufficiently. Granted, I'd feel totally safe in Zagazig, and I'd even love to be in Egypt during the current political transition - seems like a fascinating period - but the majority of the other Fulbrighters are in Cairo, which Fulbright (or the people Fulbright takes orders from) feels is still unstable enough to preclude our return.

I'm sad about this. I adored my town, my classes, and the UNESCO English club. I will miss these things terribly if we do not return. Unfortunately, it seems like the things Fulbright is concerned about are "uncertainty" and "instability" - things that don't disappear in the short-term. So, it's probably time I start looking for some way to pass the time between now and this fall when I hope to enter graduate school. I was thinking about heading to Damascus to study Arabic, but I'm starting to feel like this might not be the greatest time to head to a country in the middle east known for violently repressing dissenting voices. Morocco might be a better choice for the summer. For now, I may just stay in Chicago. This city is fantastic, and with some luck I might even be able to find some sort of temping gig until the end of May, when I hope to head to Morocco.



Dear Morocco,

Please don't go the way of your North African neighbors.

Love,
Carl