NBC News has confirmed that former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack will be named Agriculture secretary. The appointment will be announced at the news conference tomorrow, along with Obama’s choice for Interior, Colorado Sen. Ken Salazar.
I guess we’ll just have to hope that GOP Sen. Chuck Grassley hangs up his spurs as opposed to goading him into retirement with the specter of a ‘Sack Attack.
Research 2000 for Daily Kos (12/8-10, likely voters):
Tom Vilsack (D): 44
Chuck Grassley (R-inc): 48
(MoE: ±4%)
The Great Orange Satan continues to test the temperature of 2010’s Senate races, and it gives us a pretty surprising result out of Iowa: Chuck Grassley, the longtime and popular GOP Senator, is surprisingly vulnerable to a challenge from ex-Gov. Tom Vilsack.
In the diaries recently, desmoinesdem nicely laid out the contours of this race, and identified the basic conundrum facing Democrats here:
And that brings me to the paradox in the title of this post. Clearly Grassley’s retirement would give Democrats the best chance (some might say only chance) to win this seat. However, Grassley is more likely to retire if Tom Vilsack or another major-league Democrat jumps in now, instead of waiting a year or longer to see whether the incumbent will decide to step down for some other reason.
Challenging Grassley means embarking on long and exhausting uphill battle. But putting Grassley on notice soon that Democrats will not give him a pass is one of the few things we could do to improve the odds that he will retire.
Polls like this one may give the ‘Sack some encouragement to actually pull the trigger — and possibly precipitate a retirement from Grassley, who will be 77 years old on election day.
I love reading nonpartisan Marc Ambinder’s blog, as he’s very often good for insider tidbits on my favorite hobby of campaigns and elections.
But one little thing he passed off as merely incidental today is anything but……
Intro
You must enter an Intro for your Diary Entry between 300 and 1150 characters long.
I love reading nonpartisan Marc Ambinder’s blog, as he’s very often good for insider tidbits on my favorite hobby of campaigns and elections.
But one little thing he passed off as merely incidental today is anything but……
Ambinder posted a lengthy scribe today about the “meaning” of Chambliss’ victory over Jim Martin in the 2008 GA-Sen runoff.
Key text, at the very very very end:
“But… more Republican retirements are expected, including at least two in blue states (Chuck Grassley of Iowa and George Voinovich of Ohio.)”
WOAH! Don’t you dare try to pass that off as an aside, Marc! 🙂
Seriously, I don’t think Ambinder realizes this is not any kind of “common knowledge” or “open secret” in the world of political junkies, and I speak as one in Greater D.C. even though I’m far from an “insider.”
If a bunch of insiders “expect” Voinovich and Grassley to hang it up, that’s news to me and to almost every blog I read. In Grassley’s case, yes, the 77-year old 5-term Senator is the speculation of retirement, but naked speculation is all I’ve read or heard. And I’d read or heard nothing about Voinovich retiring.
If these seats are open, then my home state of Iowa is a “should” win for us, with Dems having the much deeper bench these days, but Ohio could be much more competitive. Iowa is a state where I’d love to see Vilsack vs. Latham, in which case we very easily could pick up both the Senate seat and IA-04. Ohio is just a more ideologically conservative state than Iowa, and one that I think still has a very slight red tilt. Ultimately recruitment in Ohio is much more wide open on both sides.
But make no mistake, in either state a retirement only helps us pick up the Senate seat.
Nate Silver is handicapping the 2010 U.S. Senate races at Fivethirtyeight.com and had this to say about Iowa’s seat, held by five-term incumbent Chuck Grassley:
Grassley will be 77 in 2010 and could retire, in which case the race probably leans Democrat. Absent a retirement, a kamikaze mission by someone like Tom Vilsack against the popular incumbent is unlikely to succeed.
Over at Iowa Independent, Chase Martyn begs to differ:
Grassley has not had a truly difficult race in some time. […]
In 2004, Art Small […] received no institutional support from the Democratic party, which essentially conceded the race before it began.
In 2010, the picture is very different. While Grassley’s approval rating remains high, almost everything else has changed.
Democrats have begun to truly dominate Iowa’s political scene. […]
What happens if former Gov. Tom Vilsack jumps into the race for Senate?
Fending off Vilsack’s challenge, Grassley could face deficits in both fundraising and name identification for the first time in decades. […]
Far from a ‘kamikaze mission,’ as Silver calls it, the emerging conventional wisdom around here is that Vilsack would have a real chance against Grassley in 2010.
Perhaps “kamikaze mission” is too strong a phrase, but we need to acknowledge that Tom Vilsack or any other Democrat would be a serious underdog against Grassley. Yes, Iowa now has far more registered Democrats than Republicans (about 106,000 more, last I heard), but Grassley has always benefited from a strong crossover vote.
Grassley will face substantial pressure not to retire in 2010, in part because several other Republican-held Senate seats are likely to be vulnerable. Furthermore, Iowa Republicans hoping to unseat Governor Chet Culver would love to be able to focus their spending on that campaign, rather than divide their resources between the gubernatorial race and defending an open Senate seat.
As I see it, four factors could push Grassley toward retirement:
1. A health problem (God forbid).
2. An unpleasant 2009 in the Senate minority. Grassley loves his job and has gotten along well with Montana Senator Max Baucus, who chairs the Senate Finance Committee. But what if the enlarged and emboldened Democratic majority doesn’t need to cut as many deals with Grassley as Baucus has done in the past?
3. Deteriorating relations between Grassley and the social conservatives who dominate the Republican Party of Iowa. For background on this tension, click here or click here.
4. A top-tier Democratic challenger who can raise a lot of money and has free time to campaign.
And that brings me to the paradox in the title of this post. Clearly Grassley’s retirement would give Democrats the best chance (some might say only chance) to win this seat. However, Grassley is more likely to retire if Tom Vilsack or another major-league Democrat jumps in now, instead of waiting a year or longer to see whether the incumbent will decide to step down for some other reason.
Challenging Grassley means embarking on long and exhausting uphill battle. But putting Grassley on notice soon that Democrats will not give him a pass is one of the few things we could do to improve the odds that he will retire.
GOP Sen. Chuck Grassley, who will turn 77 in 2010, is getting a bit long in the tooth. It wouldn’t be surprising to see him retire rather than seek another term. If he does, who do you like to run for his seat? Despite Iowa’s bright shade of blue in recent years, I’m not sure that we’d be able to recruit anyone of note without a vacancy here.
And while were at it, are there any Republicans with a deathwish who want to take on Governor Chet Culver? 5th CD Rep. Steve King, perhaps?
Rasmussen (7/14, likely voters) (6/11 in parentheses):
Jim Slattery (D): 30 (39)
Pat Roberts (R-inc.): 57 (48)
(MoE: ±4.5%)
Rasmussen (7/9, likely voters) (6/10 in parentheses):
Tim Johnson (D-inc.): 60 (60)
Joel Dykstra (R): 35 (34)
(MoE: ±4%)
Rasmussen (7/10, likely voters) (6/10 in parentheses):
Tom Harkin (D-inc.): 52 (53)
Christopher Reed (R): 36 (37)
(MoE: ±4%)
Rasmussen unleashed a torrent of midwest Senate polls yesterday and today. Kansas is the only eye-opener here. After their previous poll showed ex-Rep. Jim Slattery showing surprising strength against three-term Sen. Pat Roberts (and Roberts in the danger zone below 50%), things gravitated back toward more typical second-tier numbers this month.
Democratic Senators Johnson and Harkin both seem entirely safe. In fact, the big surprise is that Johnson, who, until New Jersey became interesting, was usually slotted in as the GOP’s second-best pickup opportunity after Landrieu (more a statement on their paltry chances than on actual likelihood of flipping the seat), is safer than Harkin. (Although I’m not sure Harkin has ever broken 60% in a Senate race, so maybe it’s not that surprising.)
(From the diaries. – promoted by James L.)
[Cross-posted at my blog Senate 2008 Guru: Following the Races.]
A little over two months ago, I took a look at the state of NRSC recruiting in the one open seat (Colorado) and the twelve states with Democratic incumbents, concluding, up to that point in time, that the NRSC was 0-for-13 in recruiting so far. Keep in mind that we’re approaching the dog days of summer, not a heavy recruitment period. (Note that during June-August of 2005, only five Senate candidates announced, all five of whom were Republican losers.) So where does the state of NRSC recruitment stand, and what has changed in the last two months?
(Much more below the fold.)
Colorado: New CO-GOP chief Dick Wadhams muscled the more moderate Scott McInnis out to make room for his good pal conservative “Backwards” Bob Schaffer, who will, barring any unforeseen events, be the Republican nominee for Senate. Schaffer then proceeded to have a stammering start to his campaign, embarrassing himself right from the start, before hiring a bunch of electoral losers to staff his campaign. Never mind that Democratic Congressman Mark Udall has a significant advantage in fundraising and a big head start in reaching out to voters. I suppose we could credit the GOP with an accomplishment for finding a living, breathing human being who has held office before and ostensibly has a base of support to run. But, with Colorado’s trending blue over the last few years, muscling out the more moderate choice for the more conservative one might not have been the best play.
Arkansas: Since Republican former Governor and current Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, arguably the only Republican to give Senator Mark Pryor a real challenge, ruled out a Senate bid, it also came out that Pryor saw better Q1 fundraising for his Senate re-election than Huckabee saw for his Presidential bid. So no Arkansas Republicans seem to be stepping up to the plate at present. Meanwhile, the new Chair of the AR-GOP, who should be out looking for challengers to Pryor, is instead getting himself in trouble with comments like “I think all we need is some attacks on American soil.” In a nutshell, as it stands now in Arkansas, the Green Party is doing better than the Republican Party when it comes to Senate recruitment.
Delaware: Nothing new then; nothing new now. Still zip from the DE-GOP.
Illinois: The NRSC met with wealthy businessman Steve Greenberg. He however turned down their entreaties and is considering a House bid, leaving political unknown Steve Sauerberg as the sole announced Republican candidate. Having lost one potential self-funder in Greenberg, expect the GOP to seek out another potential self-funder before writing off the seat and settling for token opposition.
Iowa: While Senator Harkin had a strong Q1, GOP Rep. Tom Latham barely raised a solid amount by House standards, much less Senate standards; and GOP Rep. Steve King raised next to nothing, with a scant amount for cash-on-hand. It’s getting safer to assume that Harkin won’t have a strong opponent. The Iowa Republican Senate primary could wind up being between businessman Steve Rathje, businessman Troy Cook, and part-time tae kwon do instructor Bob McDowell. Um, yeah.
Louisiana: Here’s the summary that I penned for Daily Kingfish a little less than a month ago:
Bobby Jindal is running for Governor. GOP Congressmen Charles Boustany and Jim McCrery have both taken their names out of the running. GOP Congressman Richard Baker has a whopping $66,000 cash-on-hand. And Jay Dardenne, who is already polling significantly behind the “vulnerable” [Senator Mary] Landrieu, is embarrassing himself. In fact, the only Republicans who have demonstrated any interest are Woody Jenkins and Suzanne Haik Terrell, the two Republicans Landrieu has already defeated.
Since this summary, the only development has been Karl Rove trying to get the Democratic state Treasurer to switch Parties to run against Landrieu. I suppose that even Rove doubts there are any strong Republican challengers. The LA-GOP and NRSC really don’t have much to show for all of Landrieu’s supposed vulnerability.
Massachusetts: A token opponent has stepped forward:
Jeff Beatty, who took less than 30% of the vote in a 2006 Congressional race and raised less than $50,000. The Congressional district Beatty ran in was the most favorable to Bush and least favorable to Kerry in 2004 of any of Massachusetts’ ten Congressional districts; so, if Beatty couldn’t crack 30% or manage any significant fundraising in that district, it’s unlikely that he’d be able to accomplish anything further statewide.
It’s not like the MA-GOP doesn’t have access to some known quantities: Paul Cellucci, Jane Swift, Kerry Healey, Andrew Card, Curt Schilling. But they’ll settle, for now, for Jeff Beatty.
Michigan: To plagiarize from the Delaware entry above: “Nothing new then; nothing new now.”
Montana: Only two Republicans have been suggested as having the capability to give popular Senator Max Baucus a challenge: former Governor Mark Racicot, who has been silent; and, GOP Rep. Denny Rehberg, who CQPolitics characterized as “resisting GOP efforts to draft him into the race.” The CQPolitics article also notes that former Montana House Republican leader Michael Lange was considered a possibility until his obscene tirade against Governor Brian Schweitzer. For now, it’s all quiet on the Western front.
New Jersey: With known quantities like Christie Todd Whitman, Chris Christie, and members of the Kean family sitting out, it looks like there is an NJ-GOP Senate primary brewing between conservative assemblyman Michael Doherty and less-conservative real estate developer Anne Evans Estabrook. Estabrook has the support of GOP Rep. Mike Ferguson, Kean family ties, and sizable personal wealth. Doherty also has the support of several notable New Jersey Republicans, as well as the apparent backing of NJ’s conservative mouthpieces. While Senator Frank Lautenberg should handily dispatch either, Estabrook’s personal wealth and more moderate positions (at least compared with Doherty) would likely make her the less easily-beatable opponent.
Rhode Island: To plagiarize from the Michigan and Delaware entries above: “Nothing new then; nothing new now.”
South Dakota: With Senator Tim Johnson’s recovery moving along steadily, South Dakota Republicans are beginning to step up to the plate. Two have indicated interest in a run: state representative Joel Dykstra and businessman Sam Kephart. With Tim Johnson’s existing popularity coupled with sympathy from his impressive recovery, it is doubtful that either of these challengers would be formidable, while far-right conservative Gov. Mike Rounds remains mum on possible Senate plans.
West Virginia: About a month ago, I summed up the situation in West Virginia:
With Shelley Moore Capito taking a pass on a Senate bid, Republicans are now looking to GOP Secretary of State Betty Ireland and multiple-time-loser John Raese to take on popular Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller. In 2004, Ireland squeaked to a 52-48 victory; and, in 2006, Raese lost to Senator Robert Byrd by a 64-34 thrashing. Not exactly rainmakers on the WV-GOP bench.
Nothing has changed since that point.
So, among the thirteen seats discussed here, ten states (Arkansas, Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Rhode Island, and West Virginia) currently offer no Republican opposition or only token opposition. Two states (New Jersey and South Dakota) see Republican opposition in the more-than-token but less-than-strong range. And one state (open seat Colorado) sees a Republican contender, though the race still favors the Democrat and is the likeliest of seats up for election in 2008 to switch control (from GOP to Democrat). With the dog days of summer ahead, the NRSC just doesn’t seem too concerned with candidate recruitment.