I'm getting really sick of people dumping on Iowa and saying, "they shouldn't go first, they don't look anything like America, they're stupid and irrelevant to Democratic efforts to take back the House."
It's not true and it's also politically dumb to say out loud.
It's not true and it's also politically dumb to say out loud.
First of all, Iowa is a bit whiter than the country as a whole, but it's sociodemographically very similar in other categories like education and economics — which are categories Democrats very much need to get strong numbers in to win. thecentersquare.com/iowa/study-iow…
Second, IT IS NOT A FOREGONE CONCLUSION IOWA WILL VOTE FOR TRUMP.
Trump's approval has fallen farther in Iowa than any other state, due to the trade war. Polls have Trump only slightly ahead there, barely better than AZ, which we're all chomping at the bit to make a blue state.
Trump's approval has fallen farther in Iowa than any other state, due to the trade war. Polls have Trump only slightly ahead there, barely better than AZ, which we're all chomping at the bit to make a blue state.
And let's not forget: Iowa has a critical Senate seat. If we can force Ernst into a tossup race, we have considerably more paths to win the Senate.
If we win the presidency without Iowa, but lose the Senate by one vote, and Mitch blocks all our SCOTUS picks, how will that feel?
If we win the presidency without Iowa, but lose the Senate by one vote, and Mitch blocks all our SCOTUS picks, how will that feel?
Look, I think it's fair to complain that Iowa's caucus system is a nightmare that makes no sense and disenfranchises minorities and the disabled. I've said it a million times.
But that doesn't mean we should dump on Iowans and write their state off our general election plans.
But that doesn't mean we should dump on Iowans and write their state off our general election plans.
