In 4 days the state of Iowa will hold their caucus events in 1784 precincts in 99 counties, where 1784 precinct delegates will be elected* to represent the precinct at the county convention.
From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa_caucuses
"In the Republican caucuses, each voter officially casts his or her vote by secret ballot. Voters are presented blank sheets of paper with no candidate names on them. After listening to some campaigning for each candidate by caucus participants, they write their choices down and the Republican Party of Iowa tabulates the results at each precinct and transmits them to the media." 
In 2008, some precincts used a show of hands  or preprinted ballots. The non-binding results are tabulated and reported to the state party, which releases the results to the media.
Delegates from the precinct caucuses go on to the county conventions, which choose delegates to the district conventions, which in turn selects delegates to the Iowa State Convention. Thus, it is the Republican Iowa State Convention, not the precinct caucuses, which selects the ultimate delegates from Iowa to the Republican National Convention.
All delegates are officially unbound from the results of the precinct caucus, although media organizations either estimate delegate numbers by estimating county convention results or simply divide them proportionally."
Those state delegates will determine who will represent the Iowa Republican party at the Republican National Convention.
So who will be the winner in Iowa?
In a perfect political activist world, it would be the candidate that was employing Coldwarrior to run the ground game for their campaign.
Clearly he would do his very best effort to ensure that of those 1784 precincts the vast majority of them would be loaded with conservative minded activists that show up and carry large influence with their neighbors/associates in their precinct come caucus time. (I do agree with him there was at best a logical weakness in both the Perry and Gingrich campaigns in qualifying for the ballots in VA -- but maybe that's more telling of process change in the way the Republican Primaries are now fought and won, where placing efforts and resources where they provide the most leverage before Super Tuesday is more desirable than allowing a state like VA to go without 15,000 signatures from the party faithful in the right locales.)
Iowa is certainly "different" than most states in how they run their primary process. But one thing remains a constant more than anything else regardless of campaign strategy, resource management, and working the ground game. The more involved you are, the greater influence you can have.
So if conservatives are serious about changing Iowa's influence, then they should be serious about becoming precinct committee members, and then they should be ready and able to win the favor of their precinct caucus voters... during the caucus event in order to be elected as the delegate of that precinct. SEE: http://iowagop.org/constitution.php
Polling is getting a little ridiculous don't you think?
At best they media has proven the ineffectiveness of polling to gauge the ground game in Iowa.
The media wants us to believe that the polls reflect the collective will of the people. This is a false representation. The polls often provide sampling that is skewed. The margin of error is often not accurate. The stratification effects of pre-poll samples also skew results. Somehow I have a hard time believing that 318 random likely GOP voters based on voter registration, represents 1784 elected precinct delegates and how they will vote come county convention time. I'm guessing there's too many standard deviations from the mean adjusted by the standard error to provide an accurate 95% confidence test. But hey... call me cynical.
So what's the point of paying so much attention to Iowa? So why does the Media emphasize it so much?
Are they attempting to discourage supporters of certain candidates by intimidating them into non-participation in the caucus events of Iowa, or the primaries in other early voting states?
Are they hoping to just stir the pot to see what settles, and what floats?
Are they hoping to provide credence for electability arguments made by pundits and the political class?
Is it they're just too lazy to report actual news?
Is it an attempt to make campaigns desperate so they'll leak the opposition research?
I don't know, neither to I really care.
So what really matters? The conservative mindset of the collective Iowa GOP Caucus voters.
What I *DO* care about is the fact that OUR COUNTRY is indeed on track for "fundamentally transforming" into a nation of statists that no longer search the rule of law to guide the principles, actions, and scope of our government, but rather arguments of fairness, class warfare, and progressive ideologies that weaken every individual's god-given right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Need proof? President Barack Obama's Inaugural Address It's full of rhetorical nuggets that if closely examined by context are arguments to justify Obama's progressive statism view. Preying on ignorance, progressive agendas wrapped in rhetoric and false logic, which are often sought after by 'any means necessary', will indeed cause divisions, contentions, and political and economic disparity leading to unrest, protest, and conflict and everything that is exceptional about America.
So here it is Iowa, prove to me your relevance, by showing the influence of conservatism in the GOP
If you're a conservative in Iowa, you have a responsibility to lead out on conservative principles when debating for your candidate at your designated precinct caucus meeting space, and in choosing your precinct delegate.
Iowa --- It's up to you to show elitists that pandering no longer works, but that people are looking for protectors of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness ("as God intended it", and "without subsidies").
Iowa --- It's up to you to show candidates that you're not persuaded by polls, focus group advertising, or negativity.
Iowa --- It's up to you to prove to the media that you don't require "electability" arguments from network pundits to establish the electability of a conservative candidate.
Iowa --- It is up to you to not waste your influence on candidates that haven't had executive leadership experience and will fail to appeal to the many in a general election.
Iowa --- It's up to you to not accept rhetoric over records when it comes to conservatism.
Iowa --- Do yourself a solid, and vote for Rick Perry the most conservative candidate in this race, that can win. (but hey, that's just like my opinion)
* Supposing that every precinct is actually organized by the counties.