In an interview with Hotline today, Nick Ryan, campaign manager for Jim Nussle’s losing gubernatorial bid, said:
“Looking at central and eastern Iowa — I think Republicans can be encouraged that the right candidates CAN win there. Absent the 2006 wave, both congressional seats in eastern Iowa were held by Republicans — by two very good, effective congressmen (Nussle and Leach).”
I think Ryan meant to say that the right candidates COULD HAVE won there (note: the word “can” was capitalized by Hotline). Nussle and Leach had been congressmen for 15 and 30 years, respectively. They had built up a high enough level of trust that people could overlook their Republican flaws. Now that Democrats are in control, the GOP won’t be able to build up a sense of loyalty, which was really the only thing keeping them alive in these solidly blue districts. The first and second CDs went for both Gore and Kerry (and perhaps Clinton but I can’t navigate that darn Secretary of State’s website very well). Unless Braley or Loebsack make a huge mistake, I think it will be a very long time before any Republican can retake either of those seats.
But Ryan’s not dumb — you should check out the whole thing, in which he discusses, among other things, whether Harkin can be beat and who are the rising IA stars from both parties.
There has been a lot of talk over the past few weeks about who is going to win Iowa in 2008. I’ve been resisting the temptation to join, because it’s pretty unlikely that the picture we see now will look anything like the picture we see a year from now.
Think of how much has changed from four months ago: Warner, who has since dropped out and now might be un-dropping out, was attracting a lot of Iowa support. Obama, whose candidacy I have been predicting for a year, was written off as too green and inexperienced to run in 2008. Bayh looked like he had too much money not to play in at least the first four primary states. John Kerry was not a favorite, but he was in as good a position as any of the candidates. And John Edwards was probably getting the most buzz around here. (Incidentally, Hillary’s position as the elephant in the room everyone either loves or loves to hate has remained relatively consistent this whole time.)
Since then, Warner and Bayh dropped out, and a lot of people started talking about what that might mean, often concluding that it was because the caucuses were close to being decided — already. (Kyle’s post here is actually what provoked me to write this.) Here are five reasons why it’s still wide open:
The caucuses are an expectations game above all else. Given two candidates with equal money, talent, charisma, etc., the candidate who is favored more heavily is actually in a weaker position right now than the candidate nobody is talking about. To “win” the caucuses, you have to beat expectations, not just the other candidates, and the job gets harder and harder as expectations get higher and higher.
Nobody knows what to expect from Tom Vilsack. Before he announced, I didn’t know very many people who took his candidacy seriously. But his campaign has assembled an excellent staff, and he keeps on impressing me. He isn’t expected to do all that well nationally (his strategy is clearly to paint himself as the underdog of the race), but nobody really knows how well he’ll end up doing in Iowa. (Drew has some thoughts on how well he has to do to stay in, but even he’ll admit that it’s guesswork at this point.) Again, though, I think it’s clear a fair number of candidates have to play in Iowa (particularly Edwards and probably Obama), and, if Vilsack can even hold his own against them, he isn’t out of the picture.
The majority of the field hasn’t even declared yet. Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and John Kerry are all staying above the fray by not making themselves candidates yet. As soon as they do, expect a lot of rhetoric to change. Even if attacking Obama will hurt the attacker more than it will hurt Obama, somebody will start doing it as soon as he declares in hopes of shaking the tree a little bit. Expect a wave of attack dog pundits and surrogates as soon as Obama and Clinton declare. We don’t know how that will turn out.
Nobody is talking about John Edwards right now. Even though Edwards is a fundraising force with name recognition, a strong biography, charisma that rivals Obama’s, and a reputable staff, he has avoided high expectations. Polling in Iowa has consistently put him on top, and it looks like he’s going to declare pretty soon, so it isn’t clear how he will end up.
In the end, staff quality and political strategy make a much bigger difference in the caucuses than buzz and media coverage. John Kerry was not a frontrunner in November of 2003; he was closer to a longshot. But his staff put together a better field program than Dean’s staff, and he ended up winning. (And because Dean was the frontrunner before losing, it pretty much knocked him out.) Field work is huge in Iowa, and we probably won’t know who has the best field program until the caucuses are over.
Of course, keep checking here for more news and analysis as the field of candidates continues to narrow.
I saw it on CNN (cable), so I don’t know whether it’s only running in Iowa or what, but it’s an ad for Operation Home Front, and for all I know it’s being run as a PSA. Regardless, it definitely helps McCain more than it helps Operation Home Front, and it’s alarming to see him up on TV in Iowa already.
