What’s on your mind this weekend, Bleeding Heartland readers? This is an open thread: all topics welcome.
According to Gallup’s latest well-being survey of people in the 100 largest U.S. metro areas, residents of the Des Moines metro area “are the most likely to say they are proud of their community,” with some 76.5 percent of central Iowa respondents agreeing or strongly agreeing with a statement about community pride. Gallup’s write-up noted a correlation between that sentiment and feeling “safe and secure.” A remarkable 85.7 percent of Des Moines area respondents said they “always feel safe and secure,” a higher level than in any other metro area Gallup surveyed.
Washington Post reporter Philip Bump speculated, “The two proudest cities are in Iowa and S.C., because people love being fawned over by politicians.” I really don’t think so.
In the past few years, at least three dozen lists measuring quality of life or economic factors have put the Des Moines area in the top five or ten communities nationwide. Former Talking Heads frontman David Byrne has raved about some of the amenities our metro has to offer. Having lived in a couple of great American cities and a couple of great European cities, I moved back to the Des Moines area for the long haul. Although I am way more politically engaged than the average person, I wouldn’t factor presidential candidate visits into a decision on where to raise my children.
Speaking of being fawned over by politicians, eleven declared or potential contenders for the presidency spoke at the Iowa GOP’s Lincoln Dinner last night. Three declared candidates missed the event (former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and Senators Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz), as did at least a couple of others who are considering the presidential race (Ohio Governor John Kasich and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie). A dozen or more candidates will likely crowd the stage at GOP primary debates. My thoughts about the Lincoln Dinner speakers are coming in a future post. Philip Rucker and Jenna Johnson wrote a good piece for the Washington Post on Republican insiders’ growing anxiety about their large presidential field. Their sources included a heavyweight hated by many Iowa conservatives:
We’re in a danger zone,” said Doug Gross, a top Republican establishment figure in Iowa. “When the party poobahs put this process together, they thought they could telescope this to get us a nominee who could appeal to a broad cross-section of people. What we’ve got instead is a confederation of a lot of candidates who aren’t standing out – and in order to stand out, you need to scream the loudest.”
Speaking of people who stand out by screaming loudly, Representative Steve King posted a picture of himself yesterday with Dick and Betty Odgaard, who (in his words) were “targeted by LGBT activists/litigated out of 1man/1woman wedding business.” False. Here’s what really happened after the Odgaards refused to let a gay couple rent the Görtz Haus in Grimes for a wedding.
5 Comments
your smart car
I always enjoy reading desmoinesdem yukking it up about the Republicans’ “clown car,” referencing all the icky conservative candidates for president and their icky, conservative opinions. Those you describe as clowns disagree with one another on bunches of issues, have the audacity to mix it up in public and participate in what appears to some to be a very messy process. You can believe it or not, but I can tell you Republicans are having fun and like their choices.
Democrats have a “Smart Car.” One smart candidate, one smart, acceptable opinion, no disagreements and heaven help anybody who suggests an alternative position on anything – let alone support another candidate. You have a very clean process underway in your very teeny car, the one with room for one person only.
I remember all the years when the Democrats had, gee, several candidates early in the election process. It created energy and enthusiasm and resulted in some darned good candidates. So please stick with your coronation-in-waiting this year. Hide your candidate from rude media questions and continue guffawing at Republicans filling debate stages with candidates who argue in public. So far at least, I like the way things are working out.
ontheright Sun 17 May 12:57 PM
First paragraph fair commentary
Too quickly tho the irritation took over and degenerated into common deflection.
conservative-demo Sun 17 May 2:54 PM
a competitive primary would be all to the good
I couldn’t agree more. Four to six candidates covering different niches would be plenty. 10 to 14 candidates is unmanageable–especially when most of them are clearly unelectable.
desmoinesdem Sun 17 May 7:51 PM
one
Deflection? I thought it was precisely on point. Then again you may be right sticking with one candidate. It’s much safer in the exchange of ideas, especially when it’s important, as desmoinesdem suggests, to manage the discussion and those who participate. We’ll find out next year who is electable. It’s mid-May 2015, and at this point, what difference does it make? Right?
ontheright Sun 17 May 8:35 PM
apparently you weren't reading this blog
in 2007. It was great to have a genuinely competitive presidential primary, with a lot of serious candidates. I’m not a big Clinton fan either–never have been. The reality is that she is a much stronger candidate than anyone else in the real or hypothetical Democratic field. I’m not going to waste my time pretending that someone else has a real chance of taking the nomination from her.
The most electable candidates in your potential field have little to no chance of winning the primary. Exhibit A: Ohio Governor John Kasich. Also, you are going to see tens of millions of dollars spent by GOP super-PACs during the next year tearing down Walker, Rubio, Bush, Perry, or whoever seems to be rising to the top. The eventual nominee will be battle-tested but will also have some big negatives no one knows about yet. HRC’s negatives are all out in the open.
desmoinesdem Sun 17 May 9:12 PM