Iowa Politics and Its Changes Detailed (Iowa Trending Republican?)

The Associated Press ^ | 2/14/03

[LdSentinal]

A look at Iowa since Democrat Dick Gephardt won the state's precinct caucuses in 1988:

VOTERS

In 1988, Iowa had 597,122 registered Democrats and 510,833 registered Republicans, according to state election officials. Another 530,404 voters registered without declaring a preference. Today, Republicans outnumber Democrats, 589,387 to 537,881. The number of voters who did not list a party preference has grown to 679,627. Independent voters have little history of participating in caucuses sponsored by the parties.

POLITICS

The state had five members of the U.S. House in 1988, three Republicans and two Democrats. The census has not changed the overall number in the congressional delegation, but the electorate has. Of the five members, there are four Republicans and one Democrat. The senators remain the same: Democrat Tom Harkin and Republican Charles Grassley. In 1988, Republican Gov. Terry Branstad was halfway through his second term. Current Democratic Gov. Tom Vilsack is starting his second term. Vilsack has pledged to remain neutral in the presidential race, as Branstad did in hopes of maintaining Iowa's leadoff status.

[LdSentinal]

Voters under 45 gave Bush a 52%-45% margin of victory over Gore in 2000.

[JohnnyZ]

That's good stuff -- kind of makes the Veelsack and Harkonen reelections that much more bitter, but oh well. Neither was really that vulnerable to start off with. If only we had a better voter turnout of Pubs in some of these places!

[Free Vulcan]

OK everyone, understand that but for Iowa City, Iowa is conservative. That's conservative, not Republican. Most Democrats here are blue dog, and if you put one side-to-side with a Republican you probably couldn't guess which was which. The problem you got is legacy Dems, Dems that vote Dem because everyone in their family 4 generations back voted Dem. That however does not mean they are liberal. Like I said, outside of Iowa City and smatterings in Des Moines, Cedar Rapids, and Davenport you aren't going to find alot of liberals.

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

Iowa politics can drive you crazy. These registrations are correct and Rs are trending upward. Yet Iowans have a habit of voting for incumbents.

We have both House and Senate controlled by Rs. Yet Ds cleaned up with statehouse offices. They were all Dems except auditor, which was open which we won.

I think it will be hard for Dems to get the House and Senate back. Governor race should be interesting with Vilsack not running again.

Predict Grassley will be a shoo-in. Curious as to who the Dems will run.

[Irene Adler]

"...Iowans have a habit of voting for incumbents.

This is very, very true regarding incumbents of either party. I have lived in Iowa since 1974.

[fieldmarshaldj]

"Governor race should be interesting with Vilsack not running again."

Are you sure ? I thought IA still had no term limits on their Governorship (Robert Ray, 14 years; Terry Branstad, 16 years, declined to run for an unprecedented 5th 4-yr. term). Did Vilsack actually say he wasn't running ?

[LdSentinal]

Vilsack

Why such an ambitious, dramatic list? Vilsack has a unique political window of opportunity. He isn't running again, so Republicans don't have to trash his program.

[LdSentinal]

Predict Grassley will be a shoo-in. Curious as to who the Dems will run.

I finally found this article.

Democrats 2004 election chances are gloomy

Then there's the U.S. Senate race against Republican Chuck Grassley. Dare we even call this a "race"? Who do the Democrats have for this suicide mission? One top Democrat said privately the party shouldn't field a candidate against Grassley because that would make it harder for the senator to raise a bunch of money and rally the GOP base.

But if Democrats fail to field a credible candidate, then some non-credible (spelled K-O-O-K) candidate will file papers and become the Democratic nominee. The only thing worse than no candidate against Grassley is a loon against Grassley. Remember, too, the Senate Finance Committee chairman never has trouble raising all the money he needs - and then some. Grassley always has extra to give to friends running for the Legislature.

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

Yup!! He's going to have a tough time going back on his word.

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

Thanks. Hadn't seen this article. I've asked as to who the sacrificial lamb will be and can't find anyone who knows.

[Iowa Granny]

Cgg, don't you remember when Vilsack was a Senator and announced he would not run again?????? When he had a change of heart he sent out the troops to get petitions signed urging him to reconsider and stand for reelection.

I know this because he was Senator of a district near me. I may have a copy of the petition which appeared in the newspaper in the County Seat.

If he can't find a higher perch to land on, I predict Vilsack will pull the same petition trick when it comes time to gather nomination signatures. In addition, we aren't hearing anything about anybody positioning to run for Governor from the D side,,,, which makes me think others are remembering the petition trick, as well.

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

IG. I'm getting old. I don't remember that. With a Dem, nothing would surprise me but it's been repeated over and over that he isn't running. However, I've never heard why.

Who do you think the Ds will run against Grassley?

[fieldmarshaldj]

Well, pledges of term limits is often meaningless regardless of which party is saying them. A few well-placed "I'm sorry's and 'There's more work to be done'" and all will be forgiven. Although I'm not entirely sold on term limits, I definitely think the max for a Governor probably should be 8 years. Branstad should've been forced out in 1991 and then would've run against and perhaps beaten Harkin.

[fieldmarshaldj]

"Who do you think the Ds will run against Grassley?"

Personally, I'm hoping they'll run Congressman Len Boswell. Not being from the extra-chromosome (read: Harkin) wing of the 'Rats, he'll run a respectable race, promptly lose by probably 10% or so, and it'll pave the way to get back his Congressional seat (Ganske could make a comeback, since Boswell sits in his reconfigured seat, and though he isn't as Conservative as I would like, he'll do).

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

Wow!! I'm hoping they run Culver, although it's too much to hope for. It would be one way of getting rid of a real Dem up and comer.

I hope it's not Boz. He's getting up there and won't be around forever anyway. I also hope we're rid of RINO Ganske forever. We can do better than that.

[fieldmarshaldj]

"Wow!! I'm hoping they run Culver, although it's too much to hope for. It would be one way of getting rid of a real Dem up and comer. I hope it's not Boz. He's getting up there and won't be around forever anyway. I also hope we're rid of RINO Ganske forever. We can do better than that."

Hmm, I'd be careful what you wish for. A lot of sons have managed to avenge their father's losses. Depending on how bad Chet wants it, I believe he has the potential to upset Grassley, as the latter did with John back in 1980. Boswell would be the better bet for us. Ganske, as I said I'm not entirely thrilled with, is probably the only Republican who could hold a Des Moines-based district. Yes, we can do better, but can we elect better ? I'd take Ganske's 68 lifetime ACU rating to Boswell's 32 or ultraliberal Jim Leach (who scored a 25 this year -- 11 pts. lower than my 'Rat ex-Congressman Boob Clement scored in his last year !). As for Leach, he did only one good thing in his entire political career, and that was defeating the now-incarcerated Congressman Ed Mezvinsky back in 1976. I at least give Ganske credit for taking down that cretin Neal Smith in '94...

[Iowegian]

I also hope we're rid of RINO Ganske forever. We can do better than that.

If you actually believe that Salier would have beat Harkin I've got some property (in Des Moines) I'd like to sell you.

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

Never said that but since you mentioned it, I think he would have had a better chance. Ganske's negatives were too high going into this thing.

Don't confuse me with those who refused to vote for Ganske. I voted for him but I'll have to admit that when we lost, I looked for the bright side of the situation and decided we did get the consolation prize. At least there was something good about it.

I don't want Ganske brought back.

[Iowegian]

OK fine. BTW Ganske won't be back, for Senate anyway.

But as far as the article I think that as the old "takers" die off in the coming years we will become more solidly GOP. But what about all those baby boomers near retirement. Will they change their voting patterns to supply the milk for their supper from the government's udder?

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

Yea, I know it has risks but I'd be willing to do it. The only good thing about RINOS is they have Rs after their name and help us keep our committee chairs.