>Then again, in the UK there are by-elections in obscure districts which seem to receive outsize attention as markers of the national mood. Not exactly apples and apples because those votes are between opposing parties, not interfraternal dustups.
>
>For you horse race fans out there, here's how the 17K Iowans spoke today --
>
>Michele Bachmann 28.55% (4823 votes)
>Ron Paul 37.65% (4671)
>Tim Pawlenty 13.57% (2293)
>Rick Santorum 9.81% (1657)
>Herman Cain (1456 votes)
>Rick Perry (718 votes) (write-in, announced candidacy today and not on ballot)
>Mitt Romney (567 votes) (stick a fork in him when he gets no love in a very red state)

If Ron Paul indeed got 37.65% as your typo suggests, I would consider Iowa to be actually oasis of political wisdom. :)
Even close second by someone like Ron Paul (150 votes diff) paints actually VERY GOOD picture about it's people. In many countries cheap populists candidates (aka Bachman/Palin) will very often lead in pools, but at real elections they fail to win majority. So I would say that reps will have very good chance at next elections - provided they choose Ron Paul to be front runner!
To bad is NOT going to happen. IMO Ron Paul is serious/honest person and politician, thus not very suitable for type of politics that are played nowadays in US. 'Firm' {g} will probably choose Bachman\Whoever (or Whoever/Bachman) as republican candidates in order to elect whoever they want on Dem side (probably again between Obama and Hillary). Palin was great help to Obama/Clinton ticket and so will be Bachman... {g}

Something tells me that Obama will NOT run in next elections (in return for lost dignity/self respect), so if that hunch of mine materializes, US is bound for 'yet another history making', by having first woman ever to be elected US president ;
There comes Hillary in 2012 :-[