This Saturday, most politicos are either looking forward to the New Hampshire primary or recovering from several nights of Obama victory-inspired sex. But the truly fanatical among us are watching today's Wyoming Republican caucuses--an event with rules more arcane than Iowa's, zero public polling, and even the possibility of an upset by Ron Paul or even (perish the thought!) vigorous Wyoming campaigner Duncan Hunter.
Wyoming will actually produce 12 RNC delegates, the same amount as New Hampshire. But they will be chosen by individuals that have already been elected or appointed over the past two years.
It's not clear what effect, if any, the Wyoming caucus will have. Most coverage of the event, even by "area" newspapers like the Billings Gazette (Montana), has focused on the fact that nobody is covering the Wyoming caucus. A win for Romney or McCain might give either a slight morale boost heading into next week, while a win by Ron Paul supporters could inspire riots in Second Life.
In any case, Wyoming will still remain a footnote largely because everyone--especially the media--thinks it's unimportant. Iowa and New Hampshire are also small states, important only because they know how to browbeat a calendar. But their contests are steeped in history and legend. Everyone knows what it means to win New Hampshire: publicity, momentary dominance, possible nomination.
Wyoming? It has no narrative. Maybe it will be important someday--I'd like to see candidates falling over themselves to rope cattle and eat bison burgers--but until then it will just be me, the livestock, and perhaps a bottle of Maker's Mark keeping an eye on the event.
--Barron YoungSmith