Tag: 2010 Elections

For those keeping track of House incumbents without declared challengers, it’s time to cross IA-01 and IA-05 off your list.

I learned from Sioux City Journal columnist Bret Hayworth that a Democrat has already filed Federal Election Commission paperwork to run against Representative Steve King in Iowa’s fifth Congressional district:

Mike Denklau has eyed the possibility of running in the strong Republican district since early 2009, and after traveling western Iowa recently he decided to go all-in.

On Oct. 15, Denklau will announce his candidacy 55 weeks out from the election in stops here in Sioux City, Council Bluffs and Des Moines. Denklau will turn 27 next month – he was raised in Blue Grass near Davenport and graduated from the University of Iowa with majors in political science and finance. He worked in New York for two banking firms through June 2009, including Lehman Brothers, until moving to Council Bluffs recently.

Hayworth notes that it’s not clear whether Rob Hubler, King’s 2008 opponent, will run again. Although Democrats cannot realistically hope to defeat King in a district with a partisan voter index of R+9, an energetic challenger may help drive up Democratic turnout across the district. There will be several competitive state legislative races in the 32 counties that make up IA-05.

Meanwhile, Craig Robinson reports at The Iowa Republican that Rod Blum of Dubuque is ready to challenge Representative Bruce Braley in the first Congressional district.

Blum has strong eastern Iowa roots. He graduated from Dubuque Senior High School in 1973, earned a bachelor’s degree from Loras College (Finance) in 1977, and received a Masters in Business Administration from Dubuque University in 1989. In 1989, Blum was one of the initial employees of Dubuque-based Eagle Point Software. In just five years, Eagle Point Software went public on NASDAQ and had 325 employees. In 2000, Digital Canal was created as a result of a leveraged buyout of Eagle Point Software. Digital Canal is a leading provider of home building and structural engineering software. Blum was also named the Iowa Entrepreneur of the Year in 1994.

While Blum has never run for elected office before, he has been making his political views known in eastern Iowa since 2001 as the Dubuque Telegraph Herald’s conservative columnist. Blum’s writings for the Telegraph Herald will be helpful for a couple of reasons. First, having a regular column in the local newspaper helps build credibility and name ID. Secondly, writing a political column means that he has well thought out positions on many of the issues facing our country today, something many first time candidates lack.

He’ll need more than conservative ideology and name ID in the Dubuque area to unseat Braley. Robinson notes that Republican Jim Nussle represented IA-01 before the 2006 election, but Nussle’s position as chairman of a House budget subcommittee helped him hang on in a Democratic-leaning district. That’s different from a Republican challenger trying to swim against the tide in a district with a partisan voting index of D+5. Republicans currently hold only two House disticts with that much of a Democratic lean: Delaware’s at-large seat, which the GOP will lose when Mike Castle runs for U.S. Senate next year, and Louisiana’s second district, which was a fluke in 2008 because of the Democratic incumbent’s apparent corruption.

Braley is a rising star and effective legislator with a spot on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. He won re-election with more than 64 percent of the vote in 2008. Even if 2010 turns out to be a Republican year, Braley’s not losing in a district with 35,000 more registered Democrats than Republicans.

To my knowledge, Republican Tom Latham (IA-04) is Iowa’s only incumbent in Congress with no likely challenger yet. Steve Rathje and probably Mariannette Miller-Meeks will run against Dave Loebsack in IA-02, while Dave Funk and Pat Bertroche are challenging Leonard Boswell in IA-03. I don’t expect either of those districts to be competitive in 2010.

Terry Branstad shook up the Iowa governor’s race yesterday when he formed an exploratory committee headed by Mary Andringa, the CEO of Pella’s Vermeer Corporation. (Republican power-brokers tried and failed to recruit Andringa to run for governor earlier this year.)

Election-watchers like the Swing State Project and Campaign Diaries bloggers immediately recognized that Branstad is the toughest potential challenger for Governor Chet Culver. But some Iowa Republicans have doubts about going back to the future:

Drew Ivers, a longtime social conservative Republican leader, said some party activists object to the growth in the state budget during Branstad’s tenure. The budget Branstad approved in 1983, his first year in office, included $2.05 billion in general fund spending. In 1998, his last year in office, he approved general fund spending of $4.5 billion.

“The party needs to get back to the Goldwater definition of conservative: that which governs least governs best,” said Ivers, of Webster City, who is uncommitted in the race. […]

Branstad brings many assets, but not a fresh face, noted Roger Hughes, a longtime Iowa Republican strategist.

“I would be hard-pressed to vote against my friend Terry Branstad, but I think we need some new folks,” said Hughes. “I’m not sure him running is good for the party.”

The Republican primary field will narrow if and when Branstad formally becomes a candidate, but no one dropped out in response to yesterday’s news. Updates on the other Republican gubernatorial candidates are after the jump.

State Representative Chris Rants confirmed what we all suspected: he’s staying in the race, and the Branstad recruitment talk has hurt his fundraising efforts. He also wasted no time in laying out one of the strongest arguments against Branstad: “I think it’s a mistake for Republicans to nominate somebody who ran up budget deficits, played all kinds of financial games and raised taxes.”

Bob Vander Plaats’ campaign spokesman, Eric Woolson, told Charlotte Eby that Vander Plaats is “in the race until the end, and this certainly doesn’t change anything from our perspective.”

State Senator Jerry Behn will wait and see before deciding whether to end his candidacy, which never looked all that credible to me.

State Representative Rod Roberts also is holding off on ending his gubernatorial bid for now. I can’t see a path to the nomination for Roberts even if Branstad decides not to run in the end, but I do agree with one thing Roberts said yesterday: “This is a very different political environment, and it’s a different state and a different country than it was during the years when governor Branstad served.”

Iowa Senate Minority Leader Paul McKinley confirmed that he will drop out if and when Branstad becomes a candidate. He noted that the Branstad speculation “put everything in limbo” for other candidates trying to raise money and early support. For what it’s worth, I haven’t seen evidence that McKinley even tried to launch a real campaign.

Branstad’s candidacy puts Christian Fong in an awkward position. He crafted a campaign narrative about restoring Iowa values, but Branstad is the ultimate “restoration” candidate. Fong has tried to make a virtue of his lack of political experience, but his resume looks even lighter when compared to a former governor. He raised some big money in July, but the draft Branstad effort must have hurt his campaign receipts, and his first radio ad may have drained his campaign account.

Speaking to Eby yesterday,

Fong, who has been on a 17-city campaign tour this week, said Republicans should have a choice of candidates.

“It’s not only good for Iowans to have a choice, but it makes for a healthier process to have a good dialogue about the ideas,” Fong said.

Vander Plaats and Rants will be taking the fight to Branstad, but for now Fong is keeping his powder dry. He could play nice in the hope of becoming Branstad’s running mate, but Branstad might already have someone else in mind for that job.

We never did learn who was behind that YouTube claiming there’s no difference between Branstad and Culver. In recent weeks the creator of that piece posted another video on Branstad, set to the “Time Warp” song from Rocky Horror Picture Show:

In addition, this short clip indicates that the Draft Branstad PAC sent a cease and desist letter to creator of the “Terry and Chet” videos:

Final note: if Branstad wins and serves a full term, he will be among the longest-serving governors in U.S. history. However, his 20 years as governor of Iowa would fall just short of George Clinton’s 21 years as governor of New York from 1777 to 1795 and 1801 to 1804.

With the 2010 election season starting to heat up a bit in the House, we thought we’d take a look back at all the incumbents who didn’t seek re-election to the 111th Congress, along with the date they officially announced they weren’t running again (and their reasons).

Note: Mark Udall planned to run for Senate long before the 2008 cycle began, so we’ve just slotted him in at the top. And if you’d like to take a look back at Republican retirements in the 2006 cycle, click here.

As you can see, things unfolded rather differently over the last two Congresses, especially compared to what we’ve seen so far this year. Last cycle, there were already a number of outright retirements at this point (including several shockers, like Deborah Pryce and Chip Pickering), while only three reps had announced campaigns for higher office. There were also many more retirements to come, especially on the GOP side; the most fertile months for announcements turned out to be October-November and January.

This time, we have zero retirements and a whopping eighteen members of Congress who are running for a different job. It’s easy to see why we have no retirements yet – Dems are in power, and the GOP is feeling better about its chances these days. I’m personally hoping that the combination of a real healthcare bill passing, plus some Dem victories in the three key races on Nov. 3 (NJ-Gov, VA-Gov & NY-23), will help re-demoralize the Republican Party and encourage some geezers to head for the exits. At the very least, barring some kind of crazy collapse on our side, we are extremely unlikely to see a repeat of 1994, when thirty Dems announced their retirements, and the GOP picked up twenty-two open seats. So far, there are just seven blue open seats this cycle, and only three are potentially competitive.

Senator Chuck Grassley is seeking a sixth term in 2010, and Iowa Democrats have never managed to give him a tough re-election race before. However, today Iowa Democratic Party chair Michael Kiernan spoke confidently about a “first-round draft pick” who is ready to run against Grassley, Kay Henderson reported for Radio Iowa.

“I’m going to tell you here today that Chuck Grassley is going to be in for the race of his life.” […]

“You’re just going to have to wait to find out,” Kiernan said this morning during taping of this weekend’s “Iowa Press” program.  “We want to wait ’til, obviously, after Terry Branstad announced his candidacy for governor.”

Kiernan isn’t revealing the characteristics this phantom candidate may have either. “I’ll just wait for the announcement,” Kiernan said.  “You will be impressed.” […]

“I’m here to tell you today that it will be the toughest race that Chuck Grassley has faced since John Culver,” Kiernan said.

Grassley defeated Senator John Culver (Governor Chet Culver’s father) in the 1980 Reagan landslide.

Speaking to reporters after today’s taping, Kiernan said the big-name challenger is “100 percent committed” to this race.

Your guess is as good as mine. A retired politician? Former first lady Christie Vilsack? A celebrity in a non-political field? Someone from the business world? (Retired Principal Financial Group CEO Barry Griswell has ruled out running, as has Fred Hubbell, the incoming interim director of the Iowa Department of Economic Development.)

Grassley’s approval rating has fallen this year, but it’ll take a lot to convince me that we can defeat him. He’s still got a strong brand name and 30 years of constituent service behind him.

The Republican polling firm Rasmussen Reports surveyed 500 “likely voters” in Iowa on September 22 and came up with bad numbers for Governor Chet Culver. Former Governor Terry Branstad leads Culver by 54 percent to 34 percent, and Bob Vander Plaats leads Culver by 43 percent to 39 percent. Culver’s approval rating is 43 percent, with 53 percent of respondents disapproving of the job he is doing.

Topline results and favorability ratings are here. Culver was viewed very or somewhat favorably by 43 percent of respondents and viewed very or somewhat unfavorably by 50 percent. Branstad’s favorability was 64 percent, and his unfavorable numbers were just 29 percent. Vander Plaats was viewed favorably by 45 percent and unfavorably by 30 percent.

These numbers will encourage Branstad, who appears likely to seek his old job again. He has said he’ll decide by October, and I’ve heard rumors that Branstad will announce his candidacy very soon (September 28 according to one person, October 3 according to someone else). I believe that the numbers we see for Branstad this month will be his high water mark, since no one has campaigned against him for 15 years.

Vander Plaats will surely cite the Rasmussen poll as proof that he can beat Culver. The whole “draft Branstad” movement grew out of fears that Vander Plaats could not win a general election.

As a rule, Rasmussen polls tend to come in with somewhat better numbers for Republican candidates and worse numbers for Democrats. Go to Pollster.com and click on almost any national or state-level race to compare recent results from different pollsters.

The recent Selzer Iowa poll for the Des Moines Register found much better numbers for Culver (50 percent approve, 39 percent disapprove). Selzer polled 803 Iowans over a three-day period (3.5 percent margin of error), while Rasmussen polled 500 “likely voters” on a single day (4.5 percent margin of error). Selzer did not poll Culver against Branstad or any other Republican.

I am seeking further information about the likely voter screen Rasmussen used, as well as the proportion of Democrats, Republicans and no-party voters in the sample. I will update this post if I receive more details. If any Rasmussen premium subscriber is reading, feel free to post a comment here or e-mail me at desmoinesdem AT yahoo.com.

The same Rasmussen poll shows Senator Chuck Grassley leading Democrat Bob Krause 56 percent to 30 percent. Chase Martyn looks at the trendlines and concludes that Grassley could become vulnerable next year. In my opinion, Grassley is still well outside the danger zone for an incumbent despite his falling approval numbers.

Click here for Rasmussen’s results on how Iowans view President Obama, the economy and health care reform proposals.

Next year’s campaign in Iowa Senate district 37 will be closely watched statewide and may draw some national attention. Republican State Representative Kent Sorenson has decided to challenge first-term Senator Staci Appel instead of seeking re-election to Iowa House district 74. The socially conservative Sorenson made a splash this summer with his open letter imploring Senator Chuck Grassley to provide “principled and bold leadership” to advance the Republican Party platform. Appel is assistant Senate majority leader and chairs the State Government Committee. Her husband is one of the seven Iowa Supreme Court justices who unanimously struck down our Defense of Marriage Act in April.

Republican blogger Craig Robinson is upbeat about Sorenson’s chances.

My opinion on this matchup hasn’t changed since Robinson first discussed the prospect in May: Bring it on.

Here’s Robinson’s case for Sorenson as a strong challenger:

In 2008, Sorenson defeated State Representative Mark Davitt by 163 votes. Sorenson’s victory surprised many Republican insiders that year. Since his campaign wasn’t on their radar as a potential pick-up, Sorenson was left to himself to orchestrate a winning campaign. With the help of a dedicated volunteer base, Sorenson pulled off the upset of the night when he sent Rep. Davitt home after serving three terms in the Iowa House.

Sorenson will not be flying under the radar in his race against Staci Appel. This time around, he finds himself as one of the top recruits for Senate Republicans. Making things more intriguing is that the Sorenson-Appel match-up will be ground-zero for the gay marriage debate in Iowa. Sorenson is an unabashed supporter of traditional marriage. Appel is one of the most liberal members of the Senate and is also married to one of the Iowa Supreme Court Justices who ran roughshod over Iowa’s marriage laws.

Despite raising huge amounts of money for her campaign in 2006, Appel only won her seat by 772 votes. Her opponent in 2006 was relatively unknown and underfunded. Sorenson brings a number of attributes to the race. First, Sorenson already represents half of the district. The part of the district that he already represents is the most difficult for a Republican candidate to win. Second, Sorenson has shown that he has the determination to do what’s necessary to win. While some candidates look for help from the day they are recruited, Sorenson and his crew of volunteers work tirelessly at the grassroots level.

Another factor to consider is that Sorenson and Steve Deace, the afternoon drive radio host on WHO Radio, are good friends and share a similar worldview. While many Republican candidates are hesitant to go on Deace in the Afternoon, Sorenson has embraced it. Deace will have to offer Sen. Appel air time as Election Day nears, but there is no chance she would walk into that studio and sit across the table from Deace. Sorenson’s access to WHO Radio’s listeners will help him counter the fundraising edge that many people expect Appel to have.

Appel faced a “relatively unknown and underfunded” opponent in 2006 because her strong fundraising and hard work on the ground scared Republican incumbent Doug Shull out of seeking re-election. She won by “only” 772 votes at a time when Iowa Democrats did not have the large voter registration advantage over Republicans that they now enjoy. Four years ago, Appel was a community volunteer seeking elective office for the first time. Now she chairs a Senate committee and has plenty of achievements under her belt.

I give credit to Sorenson for his narrow victory in House district 74 last November. It shocked and disappointed Iowa Democrats and prevented us from passing some important bills during this year’s legislative session. But as Robinson himself acknowledges, Sorenson is not going to be an under-the-radar challenger next year.

He now has a public record that he lacked as a first-time candidate in 2008. Sorenson was an early endorser of Bob Vander Plaats for governor. As the GOP primary unfolds, more and more Iowans will learn about Vander Plaats’ unworkable plan to halt gay marriage as well as his other wacky policy ideas. Sorenson appears to be ignorant about the separation of powers, as his clerk in the Iowa House erroneously told the Warren County recorder that she did not need to comply with the Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage.

This summer, Sorenson criticized Chuck Grassley for not being staunchly conservative enough and not flatly ruling out a compromise over health care reform. That will put him out of step with many moderates. Grassley’s approval rating has fallen this year, and the Des Moines Register’s recent statewide poll showed that “52 percent of Iowans would rather see Grassley compromise with Democrats than walk away from the [health care reform] negotiations. Thirty-nine percent would rather see him drop out of the talks than support proposals he disagrees with.”

Sorenson is willing to take his message to voters’ doorsteps, but Appel’s a hard worker with years of experience canvassing this district.

I’m not convinced that Sorenson will benefit much from WHO drive-time host Steve Deace’s assistance. Deace tends to go on the warpath against insufficiently right-wing Republicans (like John McCain), and next fall the GOP nominee for governor may be on his hit list. Deace has a big audience, but I think his blessing will only emphasize how far Sorenson is outside the Iowa mainstream.

Finally, I doubt Sorenson will get much traction against Appel on the same-sex marriage issue. The Varnum v Brien decision was unanimous; it’s not as if Justice Brent Appel cast the deciding vote on the Supreme Court. A barrage of television ads highlighting gay marriage didn’t win the day for the Republican candidate in the Iowa House district 90 special election. The Register’s recent statewide poll indicates that Iowans are not eager to vote for a constitutional amendment to overturn marriage equality. If public opinion trends in Vermont and Massachusetts are any guide, Iowans are likely to be more tolerant of same-sex marriage a year from now than they are today.

Appel will have to work hard against Sorenson, but I am confident that she will be able to bring this race home, with the help of a strong coordinated campaign by the Iowa Democratic Party.

Sorenson’s decision to run against Appel improves Democratic prospects in the Iowa House next year. Republicans have just about zero chance of taking back the majority in the Iowa Senate (where they hold only 18 of the 50 seats), but the GOP has more realistic pickup opportunities in the House (where they hold 44 seats out of 100). Sorenson has just given Democrats an excellent chance of winning back House district 74, which would make the hill steeper to climb for Republicans. Mark Davitt will decide this fall whether to run for his old House seat again. According to Bleeding Heartland user MrScarletW, Democrat Scott Ourth is running in House district 74. Here’s a short bio on Ourth.

Incidentally, State Representative Jodi Tymeson of House district 73 (the more Republican-leaning half of Senate district 37) has announced that she will not seek re-election next year either. That’s another open seat for the GOP to defend and another sign that Republicans are not confident about their chances to win back the Iowa House.

Final note for political trivia buffs: I’ll wager that Iowa Senate district 37 will be the country’s only state legislative race next year in which both major-party candidates have six children.

Share any relevant thoughts in this thread.

Jon Cooper said it was an eye-opening moment for him. He was watching the press conference announcing Governor David Paterson’s selection of Kirsten Gillibrand to serve as New York’s junior U.S. senator. His spouse Rob inquired out loud if that was former Senator Alfonse D’Amato standing on the platform with her.

Last week, I spoke with Cooper about his possible candidacy, his career and why he is interested in running for a seat that was once held by Hillary Clinton, Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Robert F. Kennedy.

At first, Cooper dismissed the notion that a former Republican U.S. senator from New York – the same man Senator Chuck Schumer beat in 1998 – would be at a ceremony for Republicans. But, much to his dismay, there D’Amato stood mere feet away from Gillibrand as she was introduced as New York’s newest senator.

Cooper makes it clear that he has ideas. He isn’t just going to run an anti-Gillibrand campaign, but he can’t help but point out her record. He mentions her past ties to Big Tobacco, the 100 percent rating she received from the National Rifle Association and her evolution on numerous issues that could be perceived as politically convenient.

“Her past position (on gun control) was of concern,” he said. “There are some people are distrustful of her evolution on this and other issues and are concerned about what they see as flip-flopping and see this as insincere or they question her character. I’m not saying I do. But there are those who do.”

For Cooper, however, it is different. He is not yet a declared candidate but he is touting his own record and why, if he were to run, he should be considered a serious contender to Gillibrand.

“I have, many times over the years, took stances that might not have been politically popular with my constituents but I believed it was the right thing to do,” he said.

As an openly gay and happily married man, Cooper is the father of five children he and his spouse Rob have adopted. He has served 10 years on the Suffolk County Legislature and currently is the majority leader for the legislature’s Democrats. He lists two key pieces of legislation as highlights of his career. He wrote the first law banning the use of hand-held cell phones while driving in the country. Since then, a number of states (including New York) have adopted such laws. In addition to that, Cooper also authored legislation that banned the sale of ephedra. That effort led to the federal government imposing a ban on the dietary supplement.

Jobs and the economy is an area that Cooper knows all too well. Cooper is running the family business, Spectronics Corporation, in Westbury. He said that while he is on the corporate side of things, he also is very much pro-labor and supports workers.

In the 2008 presidential primaries, Cooper backed an underdog named Barack Obama. Cooper was the first elected official from New York to endorse Obama and went on to be the Long Island chair of the Obama campaign. He said that, at the time, people asked him if he realized the political risk he was taking. Cooper said he had supported Hillary Clinton in the past but once he met Obama, he was sold. It was through the Obama campaign that Cooper met many grassroots organizers, some of whom are now aiding him in his exploratory efforts and organizing meet and greets throughout the state for people to meet him. Cooper was in upstate New York this weekend meeting voters in Buffalo and Rochester and will be back in upstate New York again, especially if he decides to run.

Cooper knows that he has a long way to go. He realizes that Gillibrand has millions in her bankroll. He realizes that she has received nearly every county chair’s endorsement to date. But one thing he references to is that Obama was counted out too. No one thought Hillary Clinton could be beaten. But with the greatest grassroots campaign ever, Obama pulled it out in the primary and won the general election.

A vast majority of Obama organizers and activists that Cooper worked with in 2008 are urging him to run and are supporting him. Democratic clubs have urged him to run. Progressives are supporting him. And while he says he isn’t comparing himself to Obama, the comparisons are glaring.

“The party establishment, for the most part, quite understandably is falling in line behind our Democratic incumbent senator regardless of how she got to that office,” he said. “But she’s the incumbent Democrat now and I expect most of the political establishment to back her. But a lot of the grassroots leaders that had been early supporters of Obama seem to be lining up behind me or at the very least, urging me to run so that we will have a choice, which is what this is all about: Offering Democrats in New York State a choice.”

While Cooper doesn’t have a full slate of issues on his platform yet (understandable at this stage), his platform stresses the importance of economic development, pushes for progressive values and support of the environment and the fight for health care, consumer protection, gun safety and middle class tax cuts.

So when will we know whether or not Cooper is running? He says by the end of the year he will have a decision. He is testing the waters right now to see just how much support he has and what the response is statewide. I spoke with him over the weekend and he seemed to be very pleased and excited by the response in Buffalo and Rochester. So we’ll see just how far he is willing to go and if he is going to make an upset bid for the U.S. Senate.

Marriage equality is here to stay in Iowa, if the latest statewide poll for the Des Moines Register is any guide:

Forty-one percent say they would vote for a [constitutional amendment to] ban [same-sex marriage], and 40 percent say they would vote to continue gay marriage. The rest either would not vote or say they are not sure. […]

The overwhelming majority of Iowans – 92 percent – say gay marriage has brought no real change to their lives. […]

The poll shows that 26 percent of Iowans favor April’s unanimous court ruling legalizing same-sex marriage, 43 percent oppose it and 31 percent don’t care much or are not sure.

Despite the 43 percent opposition to the ruling, 61 percent of Iowans say other issues will influence their decision on whether to vote to retain Iowa Supreme Court justices in the 2010 elections.

Selzer and Co. surveyed 803 Iowans between September 14 and 16, and the poll has a margin of error of 3.5 percent.

I recommend clicking through to view the chart showing the breakdown by party affiliation on this issue. Among independents, only 44 percent either oppose or strongly oppose the Iowa Supreme Court’s decision that cleared the way for marriage equality, while 32 percent “don’t care much” and 22 percent either favor or strongly favor it.

Many Iowa Republicans are convinced that they can gain traction in next year’s legislative elections by bashing statehouse Democrats who oppose a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. However, the Republican candidate fell just short in the recent special election in Iowa House district 90, even though the National Organization for Marriage poured nearly $90,000 into ads supporting the Republican because of the marriage issue. (The NOM plans to be involved in next year’s Iowa elections as well.)

A poll commissioned by The Iowa Republican blog in July indicated that two-thirds of Iowans wanted a public vote on same-sex marriage, but that poll framed the question as follows: “The Iowa Supreme Court has ruled gay marriages can legally be conducted in the state. Whether you agree or disagree with the decision, do you think Iowa voters should have the chance to vote on a traditional marriage amendment to the constitution or is the issue best decided by the Supreme Court?” Todd Dorman was right to point out that it would have been more enlightening to ask respondents how they would vote on a marriage amendment.

The Register’s poll could strengthen the hand of moderate Iowa Republicans like Doug Gross, who have been saying all year that the GOP should downplay divisive social issues and focus on the economy in next year’s elections. On the other hand, 51 percent of Republicans surveyed by Selzer and Co strongly oppose the Supreme Court decision, while 11 percent just oppose the decision, 27 percent don’t care much and only 10 percent either favor or strongly favor it. Gubernatorial candidate Bob Vander Plaats promises to issue an executive order on day one halting same-sex marriages if elected, and he will find plenty of support among the Republican rank and file.

I’ve been telling my friends, “Don’t worry, be happy,” since the Iowa Supreme Court announced its Varnum v Brien decision in April. I figured that with each passing year, more Iowans would understand that no one is harmed and thousands are helped by granting gays and lesbians civil marriage rights. I also felt that Republicans would not be able to win many races on this issue in 2010, let alone in subsequent years. Still, I wouldn’t have been surprised to see a poll this year showing majority support for overturning the Supreme Court ruling. Learning that a constitutional amendment on marriage lacks majority support even now makes me that much more optimistic. The constitutional amendment process is lengthy in Iowa.

Now it’s imperative to defeat Proposition 1 in Maine this November. Please help if you can.

The Sunday Des Moines Register published results from its latest Iowa poll. Selzer and Associates surveyed 803 Iowans between September 14 and 16 (click here and scroll down to read the questionnaire).  

50 percent of respondents approve of Democratic Governor Chet Culver’s performance, while 39 percent disapprove. The last Iowa poll for the Register, published in April, found Culver’s approval rating at 55 percent. Culver’s re-elect number continues to drop, which is a bit worrying. In this poll, only 28 percent of respondents said they would definitely vote to re-elect Culver, while 27 percent would consider an alternative and 21 percent would definitely vote for an alternative.

On the other hand, Culver’s approval numbers are still net positive, which isn’t bad given the state of the economy. The right direction/wrong track numbers in this poll are 48/41.

Survey USA has had Culver in net negative territory for most of the year, but it looks to me like that pollster has some kind of negative house effect. The only public polls showing Culver below 50 percent approval this year have been by Survey USA. The Register poll’s approval numbers for Senators Chuck Grassley and Tom Harkin are also more than 10 points above Survey USA’s comparable numbers.

The Register’s new poll may encourage former four-term Governor Terry Branstad to take the plunge, as it shows 70 percent of respondents approve of the job he did as governor. Branstad’s favorability rating is 59 percent, a bit higher than Culver’s 55 percent. Political columnist Kathie Obradovich suggested that these numbers should “incinerate” any doubts Branstad might have about getting back into politics.

I see the results somewhat differently. Today’s numbers are probably Branstad’s high water mark, since no one has campaigned against him for 15 years. Once he becomes a candidate, his real record, as opposed to the Draft Branstad PAC’s version, will get more scrutiny. Yet even today’s poll indicates that just 48 percent of all respondents think it would be a good idea for Branstad to run for governor again (36 percent thought it would be a bad idea).

Among Republicans, 60 percent thought Branstad should run. However, 26 percent of Republicans thought that would be a bad idea. Again, that’s before anyone seriously campaigns against him. I assume Branstad would win a GOP primary by a healthy margin, but he will have to fight for it, and a significant proportion of Republicans won’t welcome his return. Will he be able to count on disappointed party members to vote for him, or activists to volunteer for him next November? He’ll need help to overcome Iowa Democrats’ voter registration advantage, which Branstad never faced in any of his previous elections.

If I were Branstad, the most worrying sign in the Register’s poll would be something else Obradovich mentioned in her column on Sunday:

The former governor’s biggest problem comes from seniors, who are usually dependable voters. Among the 65-and-older set, nearly half think it’s a bad idea for Branstad to run again. Only about three in 10 said it’s a good idea.

It’s telling that Iowans who were adults during the entirety of Branstad’s tenure as governor, and are old enough to remember his predecessor Bob Ray, are the least likely to want Branstad back in politics. In contrast, various polls have indicated that Culver’s support is higher among over-50 Iowans than in the population as a whole. (I didn’t see the age breakdown for Culver’s numbers in this poll.)

Doubts about Branstad are likely to grow when the inevitable negative commercials hit the airwaves, focusing on the Mastercard governor’s two sets of books or his failure to deliver on some key promises made to Republicans.

No wonder longtime political observers like Des Moines Register columnist Marc Hansen and Civic Skinny’s unnamed source think it would be a mistake for Branstad to run for governor again.

Share any relevant thoughts in this thread.

Here are my SSP-style ratings for the California State Legislature in 2010. In the State Senate table, I listed all the districts, even-numbered, that are up, because there are only 20 of them, and as of now only 3 are somewhat competitive. In the State Assembly table, I listed only the districts that are or could be competitive since all 80 districts there are up. Open seats are in italics.

District details can be found at the 2010 California Race Tracker. Feel free to jump in and add any updates as you find them.

State Senate

Solid D	Likely D	Lean D	Toss-Up	Lean R	Likely R	Solid R
2 (Wiggins) 6 (Steinberg) 8 (Yee) 10 (Corbett) 20 (Yee) 22 (Cedillo) 24 (Romero) 26 (Price) 28 (Oropeza) 30 (R. Calderon) 32 (Negrete-McLeod) 40 (Ducheny)	16 (Florez)	34 (Correa)	12 (Denham)			4 (Aanestad) 14 (Cogdill) 18 (Ashburn) 36 (Hollingsworth) 38 (Wyland)

State Assembly

Likely D	Lean D	Toss-Up	Lean R	Likely R
31 (Arambula) 78 (Block)	15 (Buchanan) 80 (Perez)	5 (Niello) 10 (Huber) 30 (Gilmore) 36 (Knight)	26 (Berryhill) 33 (Blakeslee) 37 (A. Strickland) 63 (Emmerson) 65 (Cook) 68 (Tran) 72 (DuVall)	3 (Logue) 38 (Smyth) 59 (Adams) 64 (Nestande) 70 (DeVore) 74 (Garrick) 75 (Fletcher)

Below the flip are the Senate and Assembly districts’ Cook PVI’s, with the Board of Equalization and counties thrown in, just in case anyone is curious.

State Senate

District	Incumbent	PVI
SD-01	Cox	R+8.0
SD-02	Wiggins	D+15.4
SD-03	Leno	D+29.1
SD-04	Aanestad	R+10.1
SD-05	Wolk	D+7.4
SD-06	Steinberg	D+9.4
SD-07	DeSaulnier	D+13.2
SD-08	Yee	D+24.3
SD-09	Hancock	D+32.0
SD-10	Corbett	D+18.8
SD-11	Simitian	D+20.2
SD-12	Denham	D+2.3
SD-13	Alquist	D+19.2
SD-14	Cogdill	R+11.8
SD-15	Maldonado	D+5.2
SD-16	Florez	D+3.6
SD-17	Runner	R+6.0
SD-18	Ashburn	R+16.5
SD-19	T. Strickland	D+1.5
SD-20	Padilla	D+18.4
SD-21	Liu	D+15.6
SD-22	Cedillo	D+25.6
SD-23	Pavley	D+16.9
SD-24	Romero	D+16.4
SD-25	Wright	D+24.9
SD-26	Price	D+33.1
SD-27	A. Lowenthal	D+12.2
SD-28	Oropeza	D+13.8
SD-29	Huff	R+4.9
SD-30	R. Calderon	D+14.9
SD-31	Dutton	R+4.9
SD-32	Negrete-McLeod	D+13.1
SD-33	Walters	R+9.4
SD-34	Correa	D+1.5
SD-35	Harman	R+5.9
SD-36	Hollingsworth	R+12.4
SD-37	Benoit	R+4.9
SD-38	Wyland	R+6.2
SD-39	Kehoe	D+10.6
SD-40	Ducheny	D+6.9

State Assembly

District	Incumbent	PVI
AD-01	Chesbro	D+12.2
AD-02	Nielsen	R+14.9
AD-03	Logue	R+4.9
AD-04	Gaines	R+8.6
AD-05	Niello	R+4.0
AD-06	Huffman	D+23.0
AD-07	Evans	D+17.3
AD-08	Yamada	D+8.9
AD-09	Jones	D+19.1
AD-10	Huber	R+3.8
AD-11	Torlakson	D+16.4
AD-12	Ma	D+28.5
AD-13	Ammiano	D+36.0
AD-14	Skinner	D+31.6
AD-15	Buchanan	D+3.0
AD-16	Swanson	D+36.2
AD-17	Galgiani	D+4.0
AD-18	Hayashi	D+21.2
AD-19	Hill	D+20.5
AD-20	Torrico	D+17.5
AD-21	Ruskin	D+18.7
AD-22	Fong	D+19.1
AD-23	Coto	D+18.3
AD-24	Beall	D+14.5
AD-25	T. Berryhill	R+8.6
AD-26	B. Berryhill	R+4.5
AD-27	Monning	D+18.7
AD-28	Caballero	D+13.5
AD-29	Villines	R+10.2
AD-30	Gilmore	R+4.0
AD-31	Arambula	D+6.9
AD-32	Fuller	R+18.3
AD-33	Blakeslee	R+4.1
AD-34	Conway	R+13.7
AD-35	Nava	D+12.7
AD-36	Knight	R+6.6
AD-37	A. Strickland	R+3.1
AD-38	Smyth	R+3.0
AD-39	Fuentes	D+22.6
AD-40	Blumenfield	D+13.0
AD-41	Brownley	D+14.5
AD-42	Feuer	D+23.2
AD-43	Krekorian	D+16.5
AD-44	Portantino	D+13.4
AD-45	de León	D+29.0
AD-46	J. Pérez	D+31.7
AD-47	Bass	D+32.4
AD-48	Davis	D+37.0
AD-49	Eng	D+12.7
AD-50	De La Torre	D+23.2
AD-51	Bradford	D+27.9
AD-52	Hall	D+37.9
AD-53	Lieu	D+9.1
AD-54	B. Lowenthal	D+8.7
AD-55	Furutani	D+15.6
AD-56	Mendoza	D+8.0
AD-57	Hernandez	D+11.9
AD-58	C. Calderon	D+13.0
AD-59	Adams	R+7.1
AD-60	Hagman	R+8.3
AD-61	Torres	D+8.2
AD-62	Carter	D+16.0
AD-63	Emmerson	R+3.7
AD-64	Nestande	R+5.0
AD-65	Cook	R+7.4
AD-66	Jeffries	R+11.4
AD-67	Silva	R+7.2
AD-68	Tran	R+7.1
AD-69	Solorio	D+8.0
AD-70	DeVore	R+4.0
AD-71	Miller	R+10.9
AD-72	Vacant	R+7.2
AD-73	Harkey	R+7.8
AD-74	Garrick	R+4.3
AD-75	Fletcher	R+3.4
AD-76	Saldaña	D+12.3
AD-77	Anderson	R+11.4
AD-78	Block	D+5.1
AD-79	Salas	D+9.9
AD-80	M. Perez	D+5.1

Board of Equalization

District	Incumbent	PVI
BOE-01	Yee	D+19.1
BOE-02	Leonard	R+3.8
BOE-03	Steel	R+4.1
BOE-04	Shea	D+18.0

County	1996-2000	2000-2004	2004-2008
Alameda	D+18.8	D+24.0	D+26.3
Alpine	R+1.2	D+2.4	D+6.4
Amador	R+7.8	R+10.1	R+10.9
Butte	R+7.4	R+4.8	R+3.1
Calaveras	R+7.9	R+9.3	R+9.7
Colusa	R+15.3	R+16.8	R+14.4
Contra Costa	D+8.5	D+12.2	D+14.4
Del Norte	R+3.7	R+6.5	R+6.4
El Dorado	R+10.8	R+10.5	R+9.5
Fresno	R+6.0	R+6.0	R+4.8
Glenn	R+17.4	R+17.3	R+15.1
Humboldt	R+4.5	D+2.7	D+9.3
Imperial	D+5.6	D+4.6	D+6.7
Inyo	R+11.8	R+10.4	R+7.9
Kern	R+13.0	R+14.3	R+14.1
Kings	R+8.6	R+12.3	R+12.6
Lake	D+1.3	D+3.9	D+5.0
Lassen	R+2.8	R+7.0	R+20.1
Los Angeles	D+12.6	D+15.0	D+15.6
Madera	R+13.0	R+13.1	R+11.6
Marin	D+12.4	D+20.4	D+24.9
Mariposa	R+10.0	R+10.1	R+9.3
Mendocino	R+1.8	D+7.6	D+15.8
Merced	R+3.4	R+4.9	R+2.8
Modoc	R+18.4	R+23.1	R+21.8
Mono	R+5.0	R+1.9	D+1.8
Monterey	D+6.6	D+10.6	D+13.7
Napa	D+3.8	D+8.6	D+11.7
Nevada	R+2.9	R+4.8	R+2.1
Orange	R+9.5	R+8.5	R+6.8
Placer	R+11.7	R+11.7	R+10.4
Plumas	R+11.4	R+12.1	R+10.1
Riverside	R+4.2	R+5.3	R+4.9
Sacramento	D+0.7	D+1.1	D+3.3
San Benito	D+3.7	D+5.1	D+5.8
San Bernardino	R+2.8	R+2.7	R+2.7
San Diego	R+3.3	R+1.8	R+0.3
San Francisco	D+25.1	D+30.9	D+32.9
San Joaquin	R+2.0	R+1.8	R+0.6
San Luis Obispo	R+5.1	R+3.2	R+1.9
San Mateo	D+13.7	D+18.6	D+20.9
Santa Barbara	R+1.7	D+2.0	D+6.1
Santa Clara	D+10.0	D+14.0	D+16.1
Santa Cruz	D+10.2	D+18.9	D+24.6
Shasta	R+15.8	R+16.8	R+16.3
Sierra	R+13.2	R+14.5	R+13.0
Siskiyou	R+10.1	R+11.8	R+4.7
Solano	D+7.3	D+8.8	D+9.6
Sonoma	D+8.8	D+15.0	D+19.8
Stanislaus	R+3.9	R+6.2	R+5.6
Sutter	R+17.2	R+17.0	R+14.1
Tehama	R+12.7	R+15.7	R+15.3
Trinity	R+6.0	R+6.9	R+3.3
Tulare	R+12.8	R+13.9	R+13.3
Tuolumne	R+7.1	R+8.5	R+9.3
Ventura	R+2.7	R+0.4	D+0.8
Yolo	D+7.1	D+8.8	D+12.6
Yuba	R+12.0	R+14.7	R+13.4