Tag: 2010 Elections

Democratic incumbent governors are facing some tough races in 2010, but fortunately the Democratic Governors Association will be in a position to help in key states.

Link:

The Democratic Governors Association raised $23.1 million in 2009, more than ever before in the organization’s history, and will start the 2010 election cycle with nearly 12 times as much cash on hand as 2006, the last equivalent election cycle, Chairman Gov. Jack Markell announced today. […]

The DGA’s 2009 fundraising marks the second year in a row and the first off-year in which the DGA raised more than $20 million. Fourth quarter fundraising was by far the strongest, with more than $7 million in contributions received during the period. December contributions alone totaled nearly $4 million.

The record-breaking fundraising means that the DGA begins 2010, the most critical gubernatorial cycle in a generation, with $17.5 million on hand. In the equivalent election cycle in 2006, the DGA carried over $1.5 million and spent less than $14 million on races that year.

The Republican Governors Association has historically outraised the DGA by wide margins. In spite of the fundraising gap, since 2007, the DGA has won twice as many targeted governors races as the RGA. The DGA’s strong cash-on-hand position means that it will be able to spend at a competitive level with the RGA in this critical cycle.

Losing the governor’s races in New Jersey and Virginia was painful enough, and I am glad to know that those campaigns didn’t deplete the DGA’s cash reserves.

Here in Iowa, Governor Chet Culver may need the DGA’s help to keep pace with Republican expenditures. Culver held lots of fundraisers during the fall, but he also spent money running a couple of television commercials statewide. The leading Republican challenger, Terry Branstad, probably pulled in big numbers during the fourth quarter, although he will have to spend a lot of cash before the Republican primary in June. The other strong Republican candidate, Bob Vander Plaats, has a lot of support from conservative activists and should have the resources to run a solid campaign.

An alert Bleeding Heartland reader got a recorded phone call around dinnertime Monday, featuring former Republican Governor Terry Branstad.

Apparently there were a couple of questions about how Governor Chet Culver is doing and his handling of spending and the budget. Branstad’s recorded voice touted his own record on economic policy.

The call also asked if the listener would support a constitutional amendment limiting marriage to between one man and one woman, and if the listener would vote for Branstad in the upcoming Republican primary.

According to my e-mail tipster, the call said it was paid for by the Branstad for Governor comittee, and gave a phone number as well as the address for Branstad’s campaign website.

This particular household has two registered Democrats and no registered Republicans, and the homeowner has had the same phone number for more than 15 years. So I figured either the calling firm was using a bad list, or Branstad’s campaign is reaching out to find Democrats who aren’t happy with Culver.

Since I posted about this robocall at Bleeding Heartland, a bunch of other Iowa Democrats in households with no Republicans have reported receiving the same call, including State Representative Tyler Olson of Cedar Rapids. It seems clear that the target universe for this call was active Democratic voters.

If Branstad’s campaign is trying to identify Democrats willing to cross over to vote for him in the Republican primary, it makes me wonder what his internal polling says about the GOP race. I’ve been assuming that Bob Vander Plaats has virtually no chance of overcoming Branstad’s financial and institutional advantages during the primary, but if Marco Rubio can catch up to Charlie Crist in Florida, maybe Vander Plaats can win by running to Branstad’s right.

Several polls have shown Branstad leading Culver by a substantial margin, although the latest Iowa poll for the Des Moines Register undercut Branstad’s electability argument somewhat by showing Vander Plaats leading Culver as well. Perhaps Republican voters will come to believe they can beat Culver with the man favored by social conservative activists as opposed to Branstad, who was drafted by elite Republican donors.

Just noticed this story in Politico (apologies if this was already diaried somewhere here):

The DCCC raised $3.65 million for the month, and ended November with $15.35 million cash-on-hand. It still holds $2.66 million in debt from last election cycle.

The NRCC only raised $2.34 million in November, and spent $2.16 million, hardly adding to their overall cash total. The committee now has $4.35 million in its account, while still owing $2 million in debt.

I am feeling rather pessimistic about next year’s House races, but if the NRCC can’t build up a decent war chest now, with unemployment high and support for health care reform sinking, I don’t see them putting together a huge wave. They’re talking about targeting dozens of seats, but they’re a long way from having the money to do that.

On the other hand, they do seem to have a more enthusiastic base.  

Since former Governor Terry Branstad started campaigning for governor again, I’ve been hoping that Bob Vander Plaats could capture the attention of national right-wingers looking to “take back” the GOP from establishment types. Democratic incumbent Chet Culver would be much better off facing Vander Plaats in the general election.

Vander Plaats is campaigning as a more reliable conservative than Branstad. Among other things, he promises to bypass Iowa’s constitutional amendment process, issuing an executive order on day one of his administration to halt same-sex marriage in Iowa until the public has had a chance to vote on the issue.

Self-styled constitutional expert David Barton is one of the few “scholars” who believes a governor can overturn a state Supreme Court ruling by executive order. This week he endorsed Vander Plaats.

From Barton’s statement:

“Bob Vander Plaats epitomizes the leadership our Founding Fathers envisioned when they stood up for our individual liberties,” Barton said in a prepared statement. “He knows that it’s the hard work and unfettered creative spirit of individuals made this country and states like Iowa great. He knows that more bureaucracies, more government employees, higher taxes and increased government spending will crush Iowa. And, he’ll articulate that message in winning fashion.”

Barton founded the socially conservative WallBuilders organization, based in Dallas. Here’s some background on his vision for America, chock full of Biblical interpretations supporting right-wing public policies. Barton gave the keynote address at the Iowa Christian Alliance fundraiser this fall (click that link to watch videos). His organization hosts a large annual “ProFamily Legislators Conference.”

Barton’s endorsement may help Vander Plaats raise money from around the country as well as recruit volunteers in Iowa. Vander Plaats will particularly need financial support from out of state in order to compete with Branstad, who built relationships with many major donors and local activists during his four terms as governor.

Vander Plaats already has the backing of former presidential candidate and current Fox TV host Mike Huckabee as well as pop culture icon Chuck Norris. Vander Plaats also was featured on the cover of Focus on the Family’s national magazine in November.

Could Vander Plaats become the darling of wingnuts nationwide? Branstad is not a social moderate, but he has flip-flopped on some tax and budget-related issues in a way that won’t impress the teabagger set.

Three conservative Republicans have already announced plans to run against Representative Leonard Boswell in Iowa’s third Congressional district, and today retired architect Mark Rees of West Des Moines threw his hat in the ring too.  

William Petroski reports for the Des Moines Register:

Rees said he isn’t criticizing Democratic President Barack Obama or individual members of Congress.

“It’s not that I support what is and has been happening in Washington because I don’t any more than my fellow candidates,” Rees said in prepared remarks. “But it serves no legitimate purpose to craft politically motivated, emotionally driven statements laced with selected statistics promoting and promising unrealistic, unachievable results.” […]

Rees said he supports a federal balanced budget amendment, expanded job creation tax credits, capital investment tax credits for new equipment and facilities expansion and developing market import loan programs. He favors stronger border security, but wants to provide immigrants with a path to citizenship.

In addition, Rees said he wants to protect marriage between a man and a woman, but also believes in civil unions. He also favors cost-effective efforts to cap carbon emissions, but he does not support programs to allow pollution credits to be traded or purchased by any entity other than the government.

He said he supports expanding alternative energy programs through investment tax credit programs and a progressive tax structure that includes a vanishing long-term capital gains tax, a tiered short-term capital gains tax, a specialized market trading surtax, and a targeted short-sales capital gains tax.

West Des Moines is the largest suburb of Des Moines and one of the larger cities in IA-03, but many of the newest and wealthiest neighborhoods in West Des Moines lie in Dallas County, which is part of IA-04.

I have no idea whether Rees can self-fund or raise enough money to run a credible campaign during the primary. Dave Funk, Jim Gibbons and Brad Zaun will be competing to see who’s the most conservative, so it’s conceivable that a moderate could sneak through next June with a strong showing in the Des Moines suburbs.

If any of the other candidates drop out before then, though, I would put extremely long odds on GOP primary voters selecting someone who believes in civil unions for same-sex couples or a path to citizenship for immigrants who came to this country illegally.

Zaun doesn’t have any issue information on his website yet. Funk covers all the wingnut bases here. Gibbons recently announced one of the more idiotic tax proposals I’ve heard in a long time.

TUESDAY UPDATE: According to The Iowa Republican blog, Pat Bertroche is campaigning for this seat but has not filed paperwork with the FEC yet. So that would make five candidates if Bertroche goes forward.

The Iowa blogger John Deeth brought this piece by Hotline’s Reid Wilson to my attention.

An informal list of 17 members the NRCC believes can be convinced to step down, privately called the “Dem Retirement Assault List,” makes clear the party needs Dem incumbents to step aside if they have hopes of taking back the majority. The NRCC has taken pains to attack those lawmakers in recent weeks.

The list includes 14 members whose districts voted for Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) in ’08. McCain won districts held by Reps. Ike Skelton (D-MO) and Bart Gordon (D-TN) with more than 60% of the vote, and districts held by Reps. Rick Boucher (D-VA), Alan Mollohan (D-WV), Marion Berry (D-AR), Nick Rahall (D-WV) and Mike Ross (D-AR) with more than 55%.

McCain narrowly won seats held by Reps. John Spratt (D-SC), Allen Boyd (D-FL), Vic Snyder (D-AR), Baron Hill (D-IN), Earl Pomeroy (D-ND), Tim Holden (D-PA) and Collin Peterson (D-MN).

The NRCC has also begun targeting Reps. Sanford Bishop (D-GA), Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) and Leonard Boswell (D-IA), three members who already have credible opponents but who occupy seats Pres. Obama won in ’08.

Here in IA-03, Boswell has three declared Republican opponents. Two of them are likely to be well-funded: Brad Zaun, who has a decent chunk of the Iowa GOP establishment backing him, and former Iowa State university wrestling coach Jim Gibbons. Gibbons has already launched a couple of misleading attacks on Boswell, claiming he’s not working hard enough and that the estate tax fix will hurt farmers and small business owners.

2008 would have been a perfect time for Boswell to retire. Tons of voters in IA-03 registered as Democrats in order to participate in the Iowa caucuses, and any number of candidates could have held this seat easily.

I don’t know anyone who expects Boswell to retire next year, but if he did, this might be a tough hold. A lot would depend on the Democratic nominee, and we might have a crowded primary. One possible candidate is former First Lady Christie Vilsack, who seemed to leave the door open for a future campaign when she ruled out running against Senator Chuck Grassley.

Final note: in that Hotline piece, Wilson writes that

members frequently use the Thanksgiving and Christmas breaks as the time to decide whether to retire, filling Dec. and Jan. with announcements about their future. Already, rumors are flying that various members have decided not to run again.

I hope we don’t hear about more than a few additional retirements this winter. Who do you think are the most likely suspects?

UPDATE: Brian Baird (WA-03) wasn’t on the NRCC list, but he is retiring next year. This district’s PVI is even.

Developing a line of attack he has used before, Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob Vander Plaats asserted yesterday that Terry Branstad’s past support for Democratic Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska makes Branstad partly responsible for any health care reform bill Congress passes this year.  

From the Vander Plaats campaign press release of November 23:

“Ben Nelson gave Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid the vote he needed to get the 60 votes to steamroll Republican opposition. It means the Democrats will be able to proceed with legislation that will effectively destroy our private health care system while saddling businesses and working families with hundreds of billions of dollars in new taxes and limiting our access to care,” said Vander Plaats, who is seeking the 2010 Iowa Republican gubernatorial nomination. “Whatever happens from here on out, Terry Branstad is going to have to accept some responsibility because he was a very active supporter of Ben Nelson in his first campaign for the Senate.”

Several Senate Democrats have said their vote for cloture over the weekend was merely in favor of allowing debate on the health care bill. However, their votes opened the process for a final vote that only requires 51 votes to win passage of any legislation.

“In other words, it’s more politics as usual where Ben Nelson will be able to vote against the bill later and insist he opposed the government takeover of health care. But the real vote was Saturday and the Democrat that Terry Branstad supported as a ‘conservative Democrat’ sided with Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi,” Vander Plaats said.

Branstad, who contributed $1,000 to Nelson’s general election campaign on May 31, 2000 and $250 to Nelson’s 2006 campaign on July 17, 2002,  stood beside Nelson on May 31, 2000 at a news conference and endorsed the former Nebraska governor, saying, “It’s all right to help your friends. If he were in Iowa, he probably would be a Republican.”

Vander Plaats said, “We’re all going to pay an extremely high price for that friendship and that’s especially true for thousands of Iowans who work in the insurance industry. If Ben Nelson really did think like an Iowa Republican he would’ve voted no this weekend – just like Chuck Grassley did. Once again, this proves that elections have consequences and ideologies have consequences. The Democrats want to control us with our own dollars by taxing us more to pay for their ridiculous health care plan and Terry Branstad helped give them the leverage to do it.”

To my knowledge, Branstad did not get involved in Nelson’s unsuccessful 1996 Senate campaign against Chuck Hagel. By 2000, Branstad was no longer governor and probably never imagined he’d run for office again.

Todd Dorman of the Cedar Rapids Gazette mocked the Vander Plaats attempt to blame Branstad for health care reform, but my hunch is that this argument will resonate with some Republican primary voters.

The conservative noise machine has and will continue to whip up intense opposition to the Obama administration’s so-called “socialist” agenda. If Democrats defeat another Republican filibuster with exactly 60 votes, the media will emphasize that every Democrat voted to let the bill proceed.

By itself, Branstad’s past support for Nelson might seem insignificant, but it could reinforce doubts some conservatives already have about Branstad’s loyalty. Vander Plaats has gone out of his way to remind audiences that his running mate will share his values. Branstad picked pro-choice Joy Corning for lieutenant governor during his last two terms. Many of the business leaders who helped recruit Branstad for this race supported Mitt Romney for president, and Romney’s not the current favorite among Iowa Republicans.

The Branstad campaign struck a dismissive tone in its response to yesterday’s attack:

“Governor Branstad does not favor the health care reform bill being considered by the Senate. It spends too much money we don’t have and does nothing to create the jobs we so desperately need,” Tim Albrecht, a spokesman for Branstad, said in a written statement.  “Bob would do well to keep the focus on that and not violate Ronald Reagan’s 11th commandment.”

They’ll have to do better than that as the campaign goes forward. There are plenty of vulnerable points in Branstad’s record, and Vander Plaats won’t be the only Republican attacker. Branstad is raising tons of money and rolling out endorsements, but Vander Plaats should have enough cash to get his message across statewide. He was featured on the cover of the November issue of Focus on the Family’s nationwide magazine, and last Friday, Chuck Norris hosted a $5,000 per couple fundraiser for Vander Plaats at his Texas ranch. If we’re lucky, national Teabaggers will get involved in this race too. They might be encouraged by the recent Des Moines Register poll showing Vander Plaats ahead of Governor Chet Culver.

I assume Branstad will have the resources to win the Republican primary next June. That said, I doubt he can spend the next six months asking his rivals to follow Reagan’s 11th commandment. Besides, Branstad has already broken his own rule by criticizing Vander Plaats’ proposal to halt same-sex marriage in Iowa by executive order. At some point Branstad will have to defend his past actions, and whatever he says probably won’t satisfy his detractors on the right wing.

Any thoughts on the Iowa governor’s race are welcome in this thread.

Most election forecasters put Iowa’s third Congressional district in the “safe Democratic” or “likely Democratic” category, but Republicans in this state have vowed to run hard against seven-term incumbent Leonard Boswell.

The mystery “top-rate” Republican recruit for this race emerged today.  

According to The Iowa Republican blog, former Iowa State University wrestling coach Jim Gibbons will file papers with the Federal Election Commission today to run in IA-03.

At Ames High School, he won three state titles. At Iowa State University, he was a three-time All-American and won a national championship during his junior year.

When his collegiate wrestling career was over, then-ISU coach Dr. Harold Nichols, offered Gibbons a job as an assistant coach. When Nichols retired in 1986, Gibbons was named head coach. He coached seven individual NCAA champions while compiling a 96-32-1 career coaching mark. After winning the NCAA Championships in 1987, Gibbons was named national coach of the year. He was named Big Eight Coach of the Year in 1991 and retired from coaching after the 1992 season.

Since leaving coaching, Gibbons has been a financial advisor, most recently with Wells Fargo Advisors in West Des Moines. He also serves as a television commentator, providing color commentary for ESPN, The Big Ten Network, and Iowa Public Television. In 2003, he was named broadcaster of the year by the National Wrestling Media Association.

Gibbons says he is retiring from Wells Fargo to run for Congress full-time. He opposed the federal stimulus package and Democratic bills on health care reform and climate change.

I’m guessing that this means State Senator Brad Zaun and former Iowa GOP chairman Mike Mahaffey will not seek the Republican nomination to challenge Boswell. Gibbons can probably raise a decent amount of money and may even be able to self-fund his campaign. The National Republican Congressional Committee is unlikely to invest a lot of money in this district in my opinion.

College wrestling is a popular sport in Iowa, but I still don’t see Boswell as a likely casualty next year. If unemployment keeps rising, though, who knows? Any comments about this or other House races are welcome in this thread.

UPDATE: Bleeding Heartland user mirage, who is a Republican, doesn’t think much of Gibbons and believes Zaun would be a much stronger candidate. Zaun was mayor of Urbandale, a heavily Republican suburb of Des Moines, before winning a seat in the Iowa Senate in 2004.

SECOND UPDATE: I was wrong about Zaun, who told CQ Politics today that he plans to run against Boswell. Zaun said he will formally announce his candidacy sometime after December 1.

Zaun was just re-elected to the Iowa Senate in 2008, so he won’t have to give up his seat in the upper chamber if he loses the GOP primary or the general election.

CQ Politics suggested that with Gibbons and Zaun in the race, it may change its rating on this district from “safe Democratic.” I tend to agree with the statement that Gabby Adler of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee sent to CQ Politics:

“Each year Republicans claim they have Congressman Boswell in their sights, and each year they never live up to their own hype – there is no reason to believe this time will be any different,” Adler said.

What puzzles me is why so many Republicans are seeking this position. Even if a Republican beats Boswell, he is likely to be thrown into a 2012 primary against Tom Latham in a redrawn IA-03. Few people would choose a freshman over a nine-term incumbent with a seat on the House Appropriations Committee.

THIRD UPDATE: CQ Politics changed its rating on IA-03 from “Safe Democratic” to “Democrat favored” because Gibbons and Zaun are joining this race.

NOVEMBER 25 UPDATE: Zaun has filed FEC paperwork for this race and revamped his website.

Public Policy Polling, 11/13-15, 769 voters

Carnahan (D) 43%

Blunt (R) 42%

Undecided 15%

Blunt 53%

Purgason 16%

Undecided 31%

Carnahan (D) 42%

Purgason (R) 35%

Undecided 23%

More info under the fold

Favorable/Unfavorables

Obama: 43/52

Carnahan: 40/36

Blunt: 30/38

Purgason: 7/14

Congressional Democrats: 27/58

Congressional Republicans: 21/62

“Next year do you think you will vote in the Democratic Primary, the Republican primary, or will you not vote in a primary?”

Democratic 41%, Republican 41%, Not Sure/Won’t Vote 18%

“Do you think that Congressional Democrats are too liberal, too conservative, or about right?”

“Do you think that Congressional Republicans are too liberal, too conservative, or about right?

59% say Dems are too liberal, 29% say Reps are too liberal. 12% say Dems are too conservative, 43% say Reps are too conservative. 29% say that Dems are about right, 28% say that Reps are about right.

During Roy Blunt’s 13 years in Congress do you think he has been part of the problem or part of the solution when it comes to huge deficits and too much government spending?

Problem: 65%

Solution: 35%

If you are a Democrat, press 1. If you are a Republican, press 2. If you are an independent or identify with another party, press 3.

Democrats: 36%

Republicans: 32%

Independent/Others: 33%

How about some internals?

82% of Dems approve of how Obama’s doing his job, 88% of Reps disapprove of Obama’s job performance, Indys split 59/32 unfavorable. Obama’s best demo is 18-29 (46/44) and his worst is 65+ (57/37). 816 (KC area) and 314 (STL) approve of Obama, the rest disapprove by 30 points or more.

53% of Republicans view Blunt favorably, 53% of Democrats view Blunt unfavorably, with 30%+ unsure on both sides. Indies split 44/23 unfavorable. Blunt doesn’t top 32% amongst any age demo. Amongst 417 (SW MO) respondents, Blunt has 38% favorability and 38% of people viewing him unfavorably. Yes, amongst his “base”, for every person who likes him, someone dislikes him.

67% of Republicans view Carnahan unfavorably, 74% of Democrats view Carnahan favorably. Indies split 40/33 unfavorable. Carnahan’s best Demo is 46-65. The least certain demo is 18-29 (37% unsure). Robin has a positive with 314 and 816, and is within 10 with 660 respondents.

82% of Republicans picked Blunt, 83% of Democrats picked Carnahan. Indies split 44/32 Blunt. Carnahan wins 18-29 and 46-65. Carnahan wins 314 and 816, Blunt wins 417, 573 and 636 by 15+. Blunt wins 660 by a 42/35 margin.

10% of McCain voters will vote in the Democratic primary, 5% of Obama voters will vote in the Republican primary. (originally I did McCain/Obama splits before getting to the DRIs and editing. But this is more interesting than the DRI split here)

Blunt beats Purgason, 61/10 amongst Republicans and loses Democrats who got lost and who’d vote in a Republican primary, while winning 37/24 amongst Independents.

60% of Democrats view Congressional Democrats favorably, 94% of Republicans view Congressional Democrats unfavorably. Indies split 66/17 unfavorable. 40% of 18-29 view them favorably, and every other Demo is baaad for the Congressional Democrats. Only 314 respondents view Congressional Dems favorably.

44% of Republicans view Congressional Republicans unfavorably, 38% of Republicans view Congressional Republicans favorably. 79% of Democrats view Congressional Republicans unfavorably. Indies split 68/14 unfavorable. 18-29% is 30% favorable, 65+ is 53% unfavorable, the best showings for the Grand Obstructionist Party. 417 respondents had a 20% net unfavorable, a high for the Republicans.

57% of Democrats think Congressional Democrats are just right. 21% say too conservative. 22% say too liberal. 91% of Republicans say Congressional Democrats are too liberal. 46-65 are the best demo for “just right”.

50% of Republicans think that Congressional Republicans are just right, and 38% think that Congressional Republicans are too liberal. 73% of Democrats say that Congressional Republicans are too conservative. 36% of 18-29s say that Congressional Republicans are too liberal, compared to 35% in that demo..

36% of Republicans think that Blunt’s part of the problem, to go along with 83% of Democrats. But 48% of McCain voters think that Blunt is part of the problem. 74% of Indies think that Blunt is part of the problem.. Around 73% of voters from 18 to 45 think Blunt is part of the problem.

And how about some maps?

Roy v. Robin

Obama’s job approval

Blunt, problem or solution?

Conclusions

1) Robin Carnahan has some room to expand amongst some favorable demographics (18-29).

2) Roy Blunt’s base likes him as much as base Republicans liked John McCain.

3) Nobody know who Chuck Purgason is, but his polling numbers exceed his name recognition.

4) People in the KC and STL areas still like Democrats.

5) Roy Blunt is a Washington Insider who is part of the reason for the problems we’re seeing today, and people at least see his time as a GOP leader as a problem.

6) Independent voters don’t like anybody.

7) Congress isn’t popular. Good luck to any current Congressmen who were Republican leaders on selling themselves as outsiders.

The Des Moines Register released more results from its latest Iowa poll by Selzer and Co., and Senator Chuck Grassley’s approval rating was 57 percent, the same as in the Register’s September poll. Only 32 percent of respondents said they disapproved of Grassley’s work.

Grassley’s 57 percent approval figure remains well short of the 75 percent he began the year with. […]

Political independents and Democrats have been responsible for much of Grassley’s slide since January. He made up little ground with them this fall. […]

More than half of Republicans say he did an excellent or good job on health care, while only about a quarter of Democrats and 39 percent of independents rate his work positively.

In a head to head matchup against Roxanne Conlin, Grassley led 57 percent to 30 percent. Last month’s Research 2000 poll of Iowans found Grassley leading Conlin by a much narrower margin, 51 percent to 39 percent. I’d like to see more polling of this race, but given Selzer’s track record in Iowa, I’m going to assume that the Register poll is close to the mark.

Since the media won’t be as focused on health care reform in the autumn of 2010, Democrats will need to build a case against Grassley that goes beyond his double-dealing on that issue. Even if Democrats run a near-perfect campaign against Grassley, he is very likely to be re-elected unless he makes some unforced errors.

On the other hand, it’s worth remembering that Grassley’s never been re-elected with less than 66 percent of the vote before. Holding him below 60 percent, or better yet below 55 percent, would greatly help down-ticket Democratic candidates next November.

Incidentally, Selzer’s poll for the Register found Senator Tom Harkin’s approve/disapprove numbers at 54/33, which is fairly strong but down from the 70 percent approval rating Harkin had in the Register’s January poll.