Skip to comments.Steve King for Senate in 2008 (Iowa editorial)
Posted on 06/23/2007 11:26:31 AM PDT by Clintonfatigued
David Yepsen's column this weekend suggests that Republicans do not have a credible challenger to Harkin for 2008. Yepsen points out:
Yet so far, no big-name Republicans seem to be making the moves needed to challenge him. Only obscure names are heard. Could the ghosts of Bill Scherle (1974), Roger Jepsen (1984), Tom Tauke (1990), Jim Lightfoot (1996) and Greg Ganske (2002) be scaring off credible GOP challengers? Could 2008 be the year that Harkin, finally, gets the same sort of free ride from Republicans that Democrats have been giving Chuck Grassley for 20 years?
Of course in Republican circles the buzz has been that Congressman Steve King was preparing to run against Harkin in '08. Yepsen suggests that since King has a safe house seat (in western Iowa were Dems are as rare as buffalo) that he would be content to hold the seat indefinitely.
I agree with Krusty! I am one who believes, or maybe it is simply hope, that King will take up the challenge. Unlike Grassley, Harkin has had close races. Conservatives in Iowa are itching for this fight. King vs Harkin would rally the base like never before. King is no lightweight (I mean Lightfoot). He is charismatic and controversial but he would mobilize conservative Republicans across the state.
(Excerpt) Read more at hawkeyegop.com ...
Harkin has never won by a considerable majority in Iowa; many times it has been down well below 5%, whereas Charles Grassley has won most of his races by almost getting 75% of the vote in Iowa. It would take a conservative with enough balls and personal strength and faith to face the overwhelming onslaught of venom that will be unleashed by the Harkin campaign. If Iowa (r)epublicans put up another RINO like Ganske, get ready for 6 more years of "Senator Mailbox". (Ask an Iowan what "Senator Mailbox" means about Harkin.)
I don't see Brad as being enough of a Pit Bull to pull it off, but he'd be in the middle of his own Senate term, so would actually not be risking very much, except his personal time and energy.
Allow me to venture an educated guess that he uses quite liberally the franking privilege.
Well, Ganske wasn’t a pit bull, and he was successful in taking down the similarly over-the-hill Neal Smith. But the question is how active does Boswell appear to be publicly ? The contrast between the youthful Zaun and Boswell should certainly help the former (and as you said, even if he doesn’t win, it might help to position himself to succeed Boswell when he retires or leaves office feet-first).
Loebsack represents a Democratic district that was used to RINO Jim Leach. I caught Braley on a C-SPAN debate last year. Admittedly, his opponent was pathetic, but Braley was also very, very smooth.
Conceivably we could take Boswell’s seat if he retires. But it’s hard to see anyone beating Harkin. If King ran, he would definitely excite conservatives, but he’d also lose — and the House would lose one of its gutsiest conservatives. Is it completely certain that Harkin is running again, however?
Ganske was definitely lame, but Harkin does have the Iowa electorate’s number. As you say, welfare-dependent seniors.
That’s about it.
Loebsack is a moonbat of the highest order, a PoliSci college prof. All of the districts in the state are designed to be competitive. The last time a Democrat won that district was Ed Mezvinsky, who won in 1972, and was carried by Watergate to a 2nd term (over Leach, in his first run). The district is not likely to send this guy for the long haul over more centrist opponents. He just screams the type of 1936/1958/1964/1974 one-termer victor flukes in bad GOP years.
I’m not one who believes Harkin is invincible. His margins have never been remarkable (unlike Grassley, who wins in landslides and hasn’t faced a credible challenger since he knocked off incumbent John Culver (the current Gov’s father) in 1980). It’s just a matter of finding, and giving full support to, a credible opponent. Harkin (as well as Grassley) have been in Congress since ‘74, and he will have spent half his life in the House and Senate. Is it certain he will run again ? I wouldn’t bet against it. I don’t think Harkin or many of the other long-termer Congressbots would know what to do with themselves if they retired. No, he’ll stay until he is retired by the electorate or leaves feet-first. Either way, it can’t come soon enough.
I’d be surprised if he retired.
Harkin is scum, but if he doesn’t quit,
he’ll go out feet-first.
About Loebsack, I’m not surprised he’s far-left. Most Rat congressmen (and senators) from Iowa have been far-left for decades. But I’d be astounded if he lost his seat. Freshmen tend to work hard to keep their seats, and, by the way, nearly all of the Rat freshmen elected in ‘74 kept theirs. Iowans are used to having people more liberal than they are in office. They tend to accept it.
Yeah, it’s an economic basket case. It’s also antiwar.
Those are major reasons why I think Harkin is unbeatable. It’s a shame, because he’s bad even by Rat standards.
There was one, Michael Blouin, that I know of that was pro-life. But like Mezvinsky, he lasted just two terms and was defeated by Tom Tauke in 1978. Blouin ran against Chet Culver for Governor in the Dem primary last year (interestingly, Blouin succeeded Chet’s dad when he moved up from the House to the Senate in ‘74). But still, I think this class is almost exactly like the 1964 class.
In fact, the defeat of Leach by Loebsack was identical to what happened in ‘64, when liberal Democrat (and PoliSci college prof) John Schmidhauser won the 1st in 1964 over liberal RINO incumbent Fred Schwengel. Schwengel came back and took his seat back from Schmidhauser in 1966 (but Schwengel was vulnerable in the GOP primary to Conservative challengers, like David Stanley). Schwengel was eventually beaten 6 years later by Mezvinsky.
The big question is, will 2008 be like 1966 — or 1976 ? Iowans, like the Coloradoans, were already tiring of their flirtation with the liberal Democrats, and started moving back to the GOP again in the late ‘70s.
Despite the downturn in the farming economy, it was really just the Presidential candidates that suffered. The GOP still did well in the other offices at the federal level. After the rash of Democrats that swept the state in the ‘70s, aside from Harkin, only 1 new Democrat was elected to federal office in the ‘80s (Dave Nagle in 1986), and 1 in the ‘90s (Boswell). The defeat of Leach and the seizure of Nussle’s seat was the greatest Dem success in the state since 1974.
That’s true. Iowa Republicans did OK for quite a while — until ‘04 and ‘06. They’ve now lost the entire legislature, and I don’t think they’ll win it back for several years. You already know my gloomy assessment of the U.S. House and Senate races.
I was referring to the general results across the country. The class of ‘74 were almost all re-elected.
I think we’ll get back the IA legislature sooner rather than later. The current Governor is a moron (with some ethics problems), and rode the ‘06 anti-GOP disaster to victory. They never can seem to reign in their liberal excesses or predilections towards corruption (and especially with no GOP majority to blame or stop them). The state got fed up with John Culver statewide after a single term in the Senate, and I expect Chet will meet a similar fate in 2010.
Never assume the voters are intelligent. I’m sure it’s true that the Iowa Rats, like most Rats nationally, have a hard time controlling themselves. But since they control the media, they may not have to.
Leach was no big loss, since he basically was a Dem anyway.
I went to look up what you said, and you were correct. I don’t know why for some reason I keep assuming the bulk of the freshman class in ‘74 were defeated (whereas the ‘64 class suffered numerous casualties) shortly. I tend to focus on those 36 (listed below) that defeated sitting GOP incumbents:
John Krebs over Bob Mathias (lost 1978)
Jim Lloyd over Victor Veysey (lost 1980)
Tim Wirth over Don Brotzman (GOP never recovered seat to date)
Elliott Levitas over Ben Blackburn (lost 1984)
Marty Russo over Bob Hanrahan (seat never recovered)
Abner Mikva over Samuel Young (resigned 1979, seat won by GOP special election)
Floyd Fithian over Earl Landgrebe (seat recovered 1994)
David Evans over Bill Bray (defeated 1980)
Phil Hayes over Roger Zion (defeated for renomination 1976)
Phil Sharp over David Dennis (seat eventually merged with Fithian seat, recovered 1994)
Andrew Jacobs, Jr. over Bill Hudnut (seat never recovered)
Tom Harkin over Bill Scherle (seat recovered 1984)
Berkley Bedell over Wiley Mayne (seat recovered 1986)
Paul Tsongas over Paul Cronin (seat never recovered)
Jim Blanchard over Bob Huber (seat eliminated 1982)
Max Baucus over Dick Shoup (seat not recovered until at-large, 1996)
Jim Santini over David Towell (at-large, divided in 1982, northern area recovered that year, Las Vegas seat, 1994)
Jim Florio over John Hunt (seat never recovered)
Bill Hughes over Charles Sandman (seat recovered 1994)
Andrew Maguire over Bill Widnall (defeated in 1980)
Helen Meyner over John Maraziti (defeated in 1978)
Tom Downey over James Grover (defeated in 1992)
Jerome Ambro over Angelo Roncallo (defeated in 1980)
Ed Pattison over Carleton King (defeated in 1978)
Stephen Neal over Vinegar Bend Mizell (seat recovered 1994)
Bill Hefner over Earl Ruth (seat recovered 1996)
Glenn English over John Happy Camp (seat recovered 1994)
James Weaver over John Dallenback (seat never recovered)
John Jenrette over Edward Young (defeated in 1980)
Marilyn Lloyd over LaMar Baker (seat recovered 1994)
Harold Ford, Sr. over Dan Kuykendall (seat never recovered)
Jack Hightower over Bob Price (defeated in 1984)
Herbert Harris over Stan Parris (defeated in 1980)
Joseph Fisher over Joel Broyhill (defeated in 1980)
Al Baldus over Vernon Thomson (defeated in 1980)
Fr. Bob Cornell over Harold Froelich (defeated in 1978)
—only 1 was defeated for renomination in 1976 (Hayes) (and none in the 1976 general election)
—4 were defeated in 1978 (Krebs, Meyner, Pattison, Cornell)
—8 were defeated in 1980 (Lloyd, Evans, Maguire, Ambro, Jenrette, Harris, Fisher, Baldus)
—2 were defeated in 1984 (Levitas, Hightower)
—1 was defeated in 1992 (Downey)
—2 were defeated later for renomination (Russo, Evans)
—2 resigned (and seats picked up by GOP in special) (Mikva, English)
—10 retired later (Sharp, Jacobs, Bedell, Santini, Hughes, Neal, Hefner, Weaver, Lloyd, Ford)
—2 retired and elected Governor (Blanchard, Florio)
—1 retired and defeated in run for Senate (Fithian)
—4 retired and elected to Senate (Wirth, Harkin, Tsongas, Baucus)
—7 have never been recovered (Wirth, Russo, Jacobs, Tsongas, Florio, Weaver, Ford)
—2 were eliminated by redistricting after the 1980 census (Fithian, Blanchard)
Unfortunately, Loebsack makes Leach look like Tancredo.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.