We have our winners coming out of last night’s anti-climactic Iowa caucuses…but what does it really mean? Obama and Huckabee clearly wowed the uninvolved masses enough in the Hawkeye state for them to come out in droves and support these two non-traditional candidates in the face of mainstream heavyweights. Both Hillary and Romney dropped the ball on a host of issues related to voter turnout and campaigning, but they weren’t at fault for failing to realize how important young and first-time caucus-goers would be to Obama (HRC), or how the rock-solid the support from evangelicals would boost Huck to a wide margin of victory (Mitt). Did anyone put this scenario together? Having broad coalitions of non-traditional caucus-goers come streaming out for underdogs?

Despite such a monumental result in Iowa, it’s important not to look at it as the entire race. Anytime the frontrunner get batted down early it’s more than plausible for them to get right back up, get their mammoth campaign organizations in motion and storm back to the top. This is especially true in the case of Hillary. Where Romney based his entire winning strategy on an Iowa victory, HRC’s adviser were of the mind that even a disaster in IA could be mad right with more cash, campaign events with Bill, and the comfort of knowing that there are nearly 30 more states left to go (most of those showing Hillary leads) before the primary is deemed to be “over.” Of course the reality now that Hillary has actually lost Iowa and her great aura of inevitability is probably quite a bit different for the campaign. They always loved to trot that out against Obama…

In the big picture, where do Huckabee and Obama go from here? New Hampshire presents no easy task for either candidate - indeed, they both will most likely lose. Obama and his incredible momentum after relegating HRC to third in the caucuses has a better shot at only between 4-8-points back then does 10+-point underdog Huck. If they lose, it renders the Iowa result, while not meaningless, very much suspect in the long run.

Some notes…

• Obama won because of two things: 1.) He was seen as a fresh face in a field of old political hands; and “agent of change” when Iowans wanted that result most. He offered a better chance at that than a “tired” Hillary. 2.) Because of this, independents, moderates and young voters came out for him in droves. The support from these groups was noted in the last Register poll and other venues, bit no one expected them to turn out in the numbers that they did. The Democratic turnout was nearly double that from 2004- and it also was double that of the GOP turnout.
• Evangelicals finally took Huckabee’s message to heart and formed the backbone of his Iowa victory. 60% ofGOP caucus goers were self-described evangelicals- and close to 80% of Huckabee’s support came from either evangelicals or those describing themselves as “religious.” This is why he came alive in the final months after so long in the second-tier. The rank-and-file evangelicals stopped toying with the likes of Romney and Thompson and decided to listen to Huckabee. It worked great in Iowa, but the extreme reliance on religious voters may have a backlash in New Hampshire and other states. He’ll need to expand his support base even more in order to produce more victories.
• The beginning was the end for two veteran Democrats last night: Joe Biden and Chris dodd dropped out of the race. The moves were expected all evening…