I had forgotten how old Latham and King were, too, until I went to review their bios. I thought they were at least 10-15 years younger. Latham does seem like a safer bet of the two men, but between his age and the fact he’d be trading off 20 years of seniority in the majority to become a Senate freshman (and undetermined which party will be the majority in 2015, as we’d still have to win 6 seats), I can understand why he’d take a pass. King will have had 12 years, but he’d seem more game for such a run.
Looking at some of the other statewide officeholders, aside from Branstad, you have his Lieutenant Governor, Kim Reynolds, who is in her early 50s. Running a woman in a state that has had few females in federal office is a possibility. The downside is that she’s a recovering alcoholic and that might be used against her. I also don’t know how she is ideologically.
State Auditor David Vaudt is another. He’s in his 3rd term, but he’ll also be 61 in 2014. I don’t know much about him.
Secretary of Agriculture Bill Northey is around 50, and in his second term. Noteworthy is that he managed to win the office in 2006 in a disastrous election cycle (the seat was open, but hadn’t been won by a Republican in 24 years). He was the top vote-getter statewide in 2010, winning by a commanding 26%.
Getting back to Schultz, he did beat a Dem incumbent in 2010 (I’m guessing one of the Soros-backed Dem Secs of State that won their jobs in 2006). The comparison to Josh Mandel can only relate to one of youth. Where it stops is that Mandel had to run against a well-funded incumbent Senator. This is an open seat. If Mandel hadn’t had to face Brown, it’s very possible he would’ve won. Since Harkin will be out of the way, it’s likely better for us.
Of course, it’s the open seats that we must target aggressively. We still have that appalling impediment that has not been broken since 1980... that of taking down more than 2 incumbent Dem Senators in a cycle.
None of those are the ones being talked about at this point, at least among the folks I know across the state.
Latham had a tough time winning the new district against Boswell, and it doesn’t look like he’s up for another tough fight.
King won, but his campaign sputtered a bit, and he got bloodied up by Vilsack. His margin wasn’t exactly what they hoped for, in terms of the prospect of a future Senate run.
It doesn’t appear to me that either of them wants to risk their safe seats in the House. Historically, they both have a strong tendency to play it safe, and I doubt they’re going to change much now.
Who knows, though? I’ve been wrong about such things before.
Let me say this, though:
Steve King is one of the most capable legislators I’ve ever known. His personal gifts and capacities are substantial.
He’s also a great campaigner, when he has his heart in it.
If he decides to get in, I seriously doubt anyone can challenge him.
And he would be likely to do far better in the state at large than many imagine.
Again, because I think his heart WOULD be in it.
King has too much of a Bachmann kinda reputation, risky. He was never gonna lose to Lady Vilsack but his margin wasn’t great he pretty much matched Romney’s % in the district.
Latham. I also didn’t know he was that old. Not really a problem just means he won’t be there as long, and his House seat would be at risk (King’s would be much lower risk).
The statewide downballot office Republicans interest me. There are 4 of them. Surely at least 1 must be interested?