When I think about the Iowa Caucus, I can’t help but reminisce on Howard Dean. Not so much that he got slaughtered by the media with a single image, that was taken way out of context and repeated until everyone truly believed that Howard Dean was “angry”. What concerned me was the average age of the state, the number of volunteers Dean had between the age of 18-26, and the fact that he lost that particular bracket to John Kerry. This is a deep concern when you consider that whatever was moving behind the scenes in that event crossed party line support and surfaced in the media, like it was all planned. Dean could have been a serious threat to George Bush’s reelection bid, but we’ll never know will we.

 

This year isn’t really all that different for the Republicans. Last week, for a short few days, Ron Paul was leading the polls in Iowa by a small margin, yet most of the media was reporting that Mitt Romney was leading by the same amount, and that the new threat was Rick Santorum. What amazes me is this deadly accurate prediction, and something else. Reports on the ground in Iowa said this year had far less yard signs than usual, and, ironically, Iowa is claiming a record number of votes this year. And though it may seem like the same old thing, this year is going to be a little bit different. Not because the media will be different, and not because the election will seem more real than usual, but rather there is no telling what the occupiers will do next.

 

Frank Luntz and the Tea Party are so concerned, with this issue, that they worked out talking points to meet with this dangerous class war. In November the PR firm of Clark, Lytle, Geduldig and Cranford sent a memo to the American Bankers Association, titled, “Occupy Wall Street Response“. The concern, that sparked the proposal, was more about the Democratic Party co-opting the movement and converting it into a support vehicle vs. an Occupy wild card scenario. The irony here isn’t so much the idea that their candidate might possibly win, but rather that Occupy was even co-optable. They’ve obviously never tried to get consensus, on a less than interesting topic, in a General Assembly.

 

Personally I like the Wild Card scenario possibilities. In fact why not take it to a crescendo and announce the #OccupyParty, introduce a Horizontal Candidate. And if that’s too extreme for an anarchist movement, what about supporting a candidate who won’t send in the troops or coordinate with the states to suppress Freedom of Speech. Even asking people to vote “undecided” overlooks the realities behind what these caucuses really represent. The fact of the matter is that the caucuses and the elections that follow are so animated by the media and their controllers (the 1%) that believing in elections as the outcome of peoples, well informed, conscious choice, is just slightly naive.

 

Occupy has incredible political advantages in its grass roots. Obama won the last election with a similar infrastructure that had similar energies behind it. The biggest advantage it has is the existing national movement with groups in every city, that could easily put all their energies into campaigning and engaging the greater community. This is a powerful point and I think you’ll begin to see more creative energies and activities, coming out of Occupy, when the culture figures out the secret to building a new society is to build it. Purely resisting what is can’t possibly change anything. In fact, I believe it only succeeds to validate the issues we resist. As the Borg say, “resistance is futile” and if you think about it, their actually right. The fact is that if you plan on destroying something unfashionable to society it has to be replaced with something better. In this instance, better is the horizontal. Better is direct democracy.

 

The Wild Card factor of Occupy Wall Street, coming into play during this election, is almost more powerful than what’s really happening so far in Iowa. It’s a needle in the minds of everyone engaged in the process, on every level. Its potential is being realized in retrospect of the plans and agendas set in play by the 1%, and Occupy would do well to put together a strategic political analysis teams and consider activities that build political infrastructure, while at the same time fulfilling the fears of the Tea Party for them. At this point the act of disruption, which is a great tool for gaining exposure, has already succeeded. Now it’s time for the infrastructure, and the populace synergy behind it, to step up into the Presidential Election of 2012 and consider what’s to be gained by bridging the gap between the 99%.