Iowa upset offers state a bigger role on Feb. 5

Barack Obama is Kennedyesque. Mike Huckabee is Reaganesque. And those observations mean merely this: Both are upbeat candidates who radiate optimism and conviction.

They don’t reflect the dark side of politics. They exude hope.

These attributes have always had a special appeal for California voters, who -- because of what Iowans did Thursday -- are likely to be offered a bigger role in the presidential nominating process Feb. 5 than many pundits had predicted.

It’s looking like California will be more than just a rubber stamp ratifying the Iowa and New Hampshire winners. That probably would have been our role if Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton and Republican Mitt Romney had swept both pipsqueak states, as early polls had projected.

Now, even if Obama beats Clinton again in New Hampshire on Tuesday, it’s difficult to envision the New York senator throwing in the towel before Feb. 5 -- “Tsunami Tuesday” -- when 24 states, including her own, hold presidential contests.

“I have a firm conviction that nobody quits a presidential campaign. They just run out of money,” says veteran Democratic consultant Bill Carrick, who ran presidential races for Rep. Richard Gephardt of Missouri. “Sen. Clinton is going to have enough money to continue to compete.”

Likewise Romney, even if he loses in New Hampshire to Huckabee or Sen. John McCain of Arizona. The rich former Massachusetts governor can write his own checks. Former New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani also is loaded with enough cash to hang on until Feb. 5.

And Huckabee soon will be. The former Arkansas governor is certain to attract fresh money from political investors impressed by his upset triumph in Iowa.

It’s much too early to make anything but tentative comparisons between the new front-runners and political icons John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan. But there are some obvious similarities.

Like Kennedy -- and brothers Robert and Ted, both of whom won California presidential primaries -- Obama is a rare, compelling and inspirational orator.

And like the Kennedys, Obama represents change -- not just in policy, but in generational leadership, a “passing of the torch,” to quote JFK.

Then there’s the most obvious change: Kennedy was the first Catholic president. Obama could break through the Oval Office color barrier.

Both had to prove themselves in early tests: Kennedy in West Virginia, which was almost all Protestant; Obama in Iowa, which is 93% white.

There’s yet another similarity: Sen. Kennedy, like Sen. Obama, was attacked for his inexperience. Richard Nixon, like Clinton, billed himself as “ready on Day One.”

Huckabee is no Reagan. We’re unlikely ever to see another such blend of conviction, showmanship, pragmatism, grit, self-confidence and good looks in one package.

But Huckabee does appear to possess one Reagan characteristic: He can advocate an off-the-wall policy -- a national sales tax to replace the income tax? -- and get away with it because people like him.

They like his consistency and conviction.

They like his sense of humor: Sure he believes in resurrection, the Baptist preacher says. “Dead people vote in every election we have in Arkansas. Resurrection is real to us.”

The media -- Rush Limbaugh included -- may call him a political amateur and scoff at his campaign gaffes, but voters don’t care. He seems one of them.

Remember Reagan’s verbal flubs? “Trees pollute.” Probably not.

“We learned a long time ago from Ronnie Reagan that charm will go a long way in American politics,” Carrick says. Huckabee “is charming, funny and is expanding his message. And he’s got that great Reagan comic delivery.”

“The Democratic Party got lulled to sleep with Reagan.”

Huckabee is a conservative. But he offers a change from current knee-jerk conservatism. One example: As governor, he supported in-state college tuition for the children of illegal immigrants, declaring that kids shouldn’t be punished for the acts of their parents.

Californians frequently have sought dramatic change in policies and leaders.

Now will they turn from Clinton and Giuliani, the previous runaway leaders in California polls, to the charismatic Obama and charming Huckabee? Or, among Democrats, to populist former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, if he survives that long? Republicans also could switch to maverick McCain or Romney.

Because of Iowa, more scenarios are conceivable -- depending on successes or setbacks in New Hampshire and contests to follow in Michigan, Nevada, South Carolina and Florida.

Iowa and New Hampshire shouldn’t have exclusive dibs on always going first in choosing the White House finalists. And rather than states leapfrogging to get close to the front, creating chaos, there should be an orderly process starting no earlier than March.

“The primary system is deeply flawed,” says U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who is cosponsoring a bill to require regional primaries. “People seem to have the view that if we do away with Iowa and New Hampshire, skies are going to fall.”

She particularly objects to kicking off the nominating process with caucuses, noting that soldiers stationed overseas can’t participate.

Neither can people who work night shifts or are severely disabled.

“It’s a skewing of the process,” Feinstein says. “It’s for people who can get there and go through the arm-twisting. A lot of people would like to just very quietly and privately cast their vote.”

Agreed. Still, if you’re a California voter hoping for a meaningful role in the nominating process -- looking for a lively shootout on Feb. 5 -- you’ve got to thank Iowans for siding with Obama and Huckabee and shaking up the contests.

george.skelton@latimes.com