Let’s make a few observations on the Iowa results, starting with the fact that two middle-aged Hispanics and a black man won 60 percent of the Republican vote.

Meanwhile, the Democratic field has been narrowed to two elderly people of pallor who are competing to see which one can run further to the extreme left of the political spectrum.

There’s been speculation about whether Hillary Clinton actually won the Democratic caucuses by a half-dozen random coin flips – hardly a genuine “win” – but media reports contradict each other, and the end result was she got four more state convention delegates than Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Speaking of the Party of the Rich, CNN reported Feb. 1 that a super PAC supporting Clinton just got a $6 million donation from progressive billionaire George Soros.

Soros, who made most of his fortune through currency manipulation, previously gave $5 million to support President Obama.

Clinton raised a total of $112 million in 2015, and continues to build on that.

Sanders raised $73 million last year and added $20 million in January alone, CNN reported.

Sanders boasts he has many more small donors than Clinton, but interestingly, as Investor’s Business Daily noted on Feb. 1, he is supported by the left-wing group Moveon.org, which also is a big beneficiary of George Soros’ contributions.

Some would say Soros is hedging his bets, but what socialist Sanders calls it is unknown, pretending as he does that big money is not part of his campaign.

Still, his money has bought him the best single commercial of the campaign so far. “We’ve All Come to Look for America” is stirring and upbeat, building to a crescendo of enthusiastic Sanders backers crowding his rallies while cheering heir heads off (even if it’s only for the free stuff he promises them at every opportunity).

I’m sure Clinton would have liked to show the same thing, if she could ever hold a rally that attracted that many people.

Sure, Republicans in total are spending similar amounts. But the party that’s proudly running “against Wall Street” doesn’t seem reluctant to pursue big-money moguls when it needs ready supplies of campaign cash or other outside assistance.

Yes, you could say that’s an argument for the public financing of campaigns.

But the Constitution prohibits making that mandatory, and the first one to volunteer for it at the national level will end up feeling as if he or she tried to stop a buffalo stampede by standing in front of it while waving a hankie.

Iowa’s turnout totals had some good news for Republicans, and less so for Democrats. Eight years ago, when their ticket was last contested, 220,000 Democrats turned out, twice the number of Republicans.

But this year, Democratic turnout declined to 170,000, while Republicans mustered 10,000 more than that, a record for the party.

Looking ahead, the 800-pound gorilla hiding behind the teleprompter is the continuing controversy over Clinton’s private-server emails as secretary of state.

The number with classified content runs to more than 1,200, the Politico website reported a month ago. And recently the State Department held back 22 of them, saying they were so secret that even revealing their titles was too much to risk.

According to former National Security Agency analyst John R. Schindler, writing on the Observer.com website Feb. 1, a number of emails contained the identities of U.S. agents abroad, including both Americans and foreigners.

If Iran, Russia or China got hold of Clinton’s emails – which both former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and former Deputy CIA Director Michael Morell said last month is almost certain – the content of such messages could destroy their effectiveness and possibly endanger their lives.

Clinton has said that the State Department needs to release the 22 emails, which, if they are as sensitive as is claimed, simply won’t happen. Schindler calls that demand “pure political theater.”

Clinton also claimed that none of the emails were “marked classified” when she got them. But, as Schindler notes, that’s no excuse under the law, because it was her legal responsibility to determine the classification of a document before retransmitting or storing it outside a secure system.

Clinton downplays the scandal, and much of the national media abets her by minimizing or even ignoring the story. But instead of going away, it keeps on building.

Now the questions are, will the FBI recommend an indictment? And if it does, is the Justice Department too partisan to accept it?

My guesses? Yes, and yes.

M.D. Harmon, a retired journalist and military officer, is a freelance writer and speaker. He can be contacted at:

mdharmoncol@yahoo.com