Public Policy Polling’s new Iowa survey indicates a wide-open race among Republican presidential candidates with Mike Huckabee out of the running. PPP surveyed 481 Iowa Republicans from May 27 through May 30. Given a choice between Representative Michele Bachmann, former Godfather’s Pizza CEO Herman Cain, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman, former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, Representative Ron Paul, former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, 21 percent of respondents expressed a preference for Romney as the GOP presidential nominee. Cain and Palin tied for second with 15 percent, followed by Gingrich (12 percent), Bachmann (11 percent), Pawlenty (10 percent), Paul and “someone else/undecided” (8 percent), and Huntsman (0 percent).

Asked to choose a candidate if Palin did not run for president, respondents favored Romney (26 percent), Cain (16 percent), Gingrich (15 percent), Bachmann (14 percent), Paul (11 percent), Pawlenty (10 percent) and Huntsman (1 percent).

I don’t know why PPP didn’t include former Senator Rick Santorum on these lists, since Santorum has hired staff and made several Iowa visits during the past year. The full polling memo (pdf) includes favorability numbers for Santorum and a bunch of other Republicans who have been mentioned as possible presidential candidates.

I wouldn’t put too much stock in a poll taken seven or eight months before the Iowa caucuses, especially a survey over Memorial Day weekend, when many potential respondents would not be at home. Still, Cain has to be thrilled to be making inroads with Iowa Republicans. This poll will make it difficult for Romney to avoid participating in the Iowa GOP’s August straw poll fundraiser. The results must be disappointing for Pawlenty and Gingrich, who have spent time and energy in Iowa recently and have high-profile Republican endorsers here. Tom Jensen of PPP saw a silver lining for Pawlenty, though:

Romney’s leading in Iowa based on his strength with centrist and center right Republican voters. With moderates he’s at 34% to 16% for Palin, 13% for Paul, and 11% for Gingrich. With ‘somewhat conservative’ voters he’s at 24% to 15% for Pawlenty, 13% for Palin, and 12% for Gingrich and Cain. His strength with those two groups outweighs his continuing weakness with the furthest right group of voters in the state, which constitute the largest segment of the Republican electorate at 41%. With those ‘very conservative’ folks Romney can muster only a fourth place finish at 13%. Cain and Palin tie for the lead with that group of voters at 19% followed by Bachmann at 15%. […]

Pawlenty doesn’t poll the strongest head to head among Romney among ‘very conservative’ voters- he leads by 17 compared to a 21 point lead for Palin and a 24 point advantage for Bachmann with that group. But with center right voters- those calling themselves ‘somewhat conservative’- Romney leads Pawlenty by just a single point while he has a 19 point advantage over Palin and a 22 point lead over Bachmann with that group. What that says to me is that many Republicans are looking for someone more conservative than Romney but someone who isn’t bound to get creamed in the general election the way Palin, Bachmann, and Cain probably would. That’s very good news for Pawlenty if it ever plays itself out in real life.

Jensen also noted that non-candidates Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, or Paul Ryan posted better favorability numbers in this poll than any of the declared Republican presidential candidates.

Share any thoughts about the GOP presidential race in this thread.

UPDATE: PPP replied to my question about not including Santorum in this survey. A maximum of eight candidates can be tested in this automated poll; adding Santorum would have meant removing Huntsman, about whom “there’s much more national interest.” Since Huntsman hasn’t been in Iowa while Santorum has spent time here and hired staff, I would have liked to see whether Santorum is gaining ground like Cain.

Donald Trump’s decision not to run for president put the Republican Party of Iowa in an awkward position, because he was supposed to keynote the party’s June 10 Lincoln dinner fundraiser. While Iowa GOP officials waited to hear whether Trump would keep his promise, even WHO television reporter Dave Price (a favorite among conservatives) couldn’t get a call back seeking comment. The state party finally got the bad news today and released this statement:

Earlier today the Iowa GOP was informed that Mr. Trump will not attend and keynote the June 10 Lincoln Dinner. Citing Mr. Trump’s unique appeal and the close proximity to the event, the Iowa GOP has decided to cancel the 2011 Lincoln Dinner.

Iowa GOP Chairman Matt Strawn issued the comment below following Mr. Trump’s decision to cancel his appearance at the Lincoln Dinner.

“In Iowa, your word is your bond. We are disappointed that Mr. Trump has chosen not to honor his commitment to Iowa Republicans.”

I know three weeks isn’t a lot of time, but I’m surprised party leaders couldn’t find some other well-known Republican to step up at the last minute. The Iowa GOP probably has already incurred printing and other expenses related to renting the Polk County Convention Complex for the event. Now money collected for record ticket sales will have to be refunded.

Maybe Iowa Republicans are better off not hitching their wagon to that horse, though. People with an unfavorable view of Trump greatly outnumber those who view him favorably, according to several recent national polls.

UPDATE: How bizarre.

On Friday, apparently stung by criticism from the spurned Iowans, Trump offered to travel to Iowa and speak if the Republicans would change their minds and hold the dinner.

“I promise you that my speech will be fantastic. My word is my bond,” he wrote to Matt Strawn, chairman of the Iowa Republican Party. […]

The state party’s response was essentially thanks, but no thanks. […]

“Iowa Republicans have moved on,” is all party spokesman Casey Mills had to say Friday afternoon.

A Trump aide released a copy of the letter, in which the tycoon said he had thought it would be inappropriate for him to give the speech once he decided not to run for president.

“I truly believe that this honor should be given to one of the other candidates or potential candidates, who could use this invaluable opportunity to get their word out,” he wrote. “I was very surprised and saddened to read that you canceled the event, and hence, called you immediately to let you know that if you wanted me to be there, I would be ready, willing and able.”

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was poised to capitalize on Mike Huckabee’s decision not to run for president. Gingrich announced his Iowa leadership team last week. Chaired by House Majority Leader Linda Upmeyer, who endorsed Gingrich months ago, the high-powered crew includes activist and attorney Craig Schoenfeld as executive director, Iowa House Speaker Pro Tempore Jeff Kaufmann as senior policy advisor, Katie Koberg (former vice-president of Iowans for Tax Relief) as deputy director and Will Rogers as grassroots director.

Huckabee’s announcement sparked a wave of “Iowa is wide open” news coverage, just as Gingrich was set to kick off a five-day Iowa tour. In 2010 Gingrich quietly helped raise $200,000 for the campaign against retaining three Iowa Supreme Court judges, which might have helped him with the social conservatives who were Huckabee’s base supporters.

It all started to go wrong Sunday…

I could never understand why anyone thought Donald Trump was serious about running for president. A notorious germaphobe is not going to give up a show on network television in order to work the Iowa Republican house party and county fair circuit. Even if he did, his donations to various Democrats and assorted socially liberal statements would sink him in a Republican primary.

Anyway, Trump confirmed today that his recent speeches and press conferences were just a massive publicity stunt he is not running for president in 2012. President Barack Obama’s team will be disappointed; Trump replaced former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as the candidate they would most like to run against.

Dave Weigel sees the Republican Party of Iowa as the second-biggest loser from Trump’s aborted presidential campaign. Trump is scheduled to headline the Iowa GOP’s Lincoln dinner on June 10. (Weigel says the Regnery publishing house is the biggest loser, because they have a Trump policy book scheduled to come out this summer.)

Iowa Republicans are desperate to get serious candidates out here campaigning. Presidential hopefuls and their PACs bring money to county Republican party committees and GOP statehouse candidates. Governor Terry Branstad’s big message at his weekly press conference this morning was that the race is wide open and everyone has a shot in Iowa, not just social conservatives. Branstad has said he won’t endorse a presidential candidate before the caucuses.

Any thoughts about the Republican race for the presidency are welcome in this thread. After the jump I’ve posted excerpts from a guest editorial in the Sunday Des Moines Register by the former chair of the New Hampshire Republican Party. He claims Iowa Republicans “have marginalized themselves.”

P.S. I’ve never been a fan of Lawrence O’Donnell, but he was right to say that NBC executives should have revealed earlier this spring whether the network had renewed Trump’s “Celebrity Apprentice” for another season.

P.P.S. Seth Meyers got in some good Trump jokes at the White House Correspondents Dinner last month.

On Friday, Fergus Cullen, a former chairman of the New Hampshire Republican Party wrote an article in the Union Leader which basically said what we've all been thinking: Iowa Republicans are currently driving their party off a cliff and are hurting our entire state by marginializing our caucus system.

This article, "So long Iowa, it was nice knowing ya," is a must read for everyone who has been watching with dred as social conservatives pushed out fiscal conservatives, and presidential candidates began to "reevaluate" their early state strategy.

Here are some of the important excerpts:

Two conditions make the early states in the presidential nominating process work. First, all candidates must believe they have an equal opportunity to succeed. They might not be happy with the outcome — most of them lose, after all — but they all have to feel like they had their shot and were given a fair hearing by voters. Second, the electorates have to be broadly representative of the party as a whole. This gives a win meaning and legitimacy.

The Iowa caucus may once have met those conditions for Republicans, but today it does not. Iowa Republicans have marginalized themselves to the point where competing in Iowa has become optional.

… This week came another troubling sign that Iowa Republicans are outside the party mainstream: a birther epidemic. A Public Policy Polling survey found that 48 percent of Iowa Republicans don’t believe President Obama was born in the United States, and another 26 percent said they weren’t sure if he was or if he wasn’t. It’s hard to talk about real issues when three quarters of the audience wears tin foil hats.

…Iowa Republicans didn’t set out to marginalize themselves, but it’s happened — to New Hampshire’s benefit. With several major candidates likely to bypass Iowa, and the odds rising that Iowa’s skewed caucus electorate could support candidates with limited general election appeal, the likelihood of New Hampshire being called upon to make a correction grow.

Currently, reporters in Iowa continue to ignore the harm that far-right Republicans are doing to our state with their social litmus tests. We’ve seen a few bold Republicans like Doug Gross and Kevin Hall speak out publicly, but they are few and far between.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich plans to announce by March 1 whether he will run for president in 2012, and he’s already got one endorsement in hand: Iowa House Majority Leader Linda Upmeyer.

Background and first thoughts about Upmeyer’s support and Gingrich’s presidential prospects are after the jump.

Two polls released this week suggest that former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee would be the front-runner in Iowa if he runs for president in 2012. Poll details and some speculation are after the jump.

Longtime Iowa political operative Gentry Collins has ended his bid to become chairman of the Republican National Committee, he told RNC members in a January 2 letter. Collins made the news in November by resigning as RNC political director and sending RNC members a devastating critique of current chairman Michael Steele’s leadership. Dropping out of the race to succeed Steele, Collins wrote that

part of his mission in campaigning for chairman was to shed light on the party’s financial condition, which he said, “has been a game-changer for Chairman Steele’s re-election prospects.” […]

“I entered this race to make sure there was a credible alternative to Michael Steele and have said from day one I will not get in the way of electing new leadership at the RNC,” Collins wrote.

Collins continued: “It is after much consideration and thought that I announce my withdrawal from the race for Chairman of the RNC. I believe that there are several qualified candidates in the race for Chairman, each of whom would do a fine job leading the committee through the 2012 Election cycle.”

I figured Collins was a long-shot to take his former boss’s job for various reasons. It didn’t look good for him to establish a committee to support his bid for RNC chairman while he was still working at the committee. Craig Robinson’s critique of Collins’ “ego,” “vengeful style” and “heavy-handed” tactics may have put off some Republican insiders too.

Various “whip counts” published by Washington-based journalists showed Collins with only three firm commitments from voting RNC members, far behind the front-runner, Wisconsin Republican Party chairman Reince Priebus. (That’s pronounced “ryns pree-buhs.”) Iowa GOP Chairman Matt Strawn had publicly backed Collins, but committeeman Steve Scheffler was an early Priebus endorser. Iowa’s committeewoman Kim Lehman is supporting Priebus too; she and Scheffler backed the main alternative to Steele in 2009.

Four previous leaders of the national GOP have been from Iowa. The most recent was pro-choice moderate Mary Louise Smith in the mid-1970s. Smith is still the only woman to have headed the RNC. Two women have entered the race to replace Steele, but a rule requiring the party chair and co-chair to be different genders puts them at a disadvantage.

Longtime Iowa political operative Gentry Collins officially announced yesterday that he will run for chairman of the Republican National Committee this January. Collins filed paperwork for the race last month shortly before he resigned as the RNC’s political director. One of the three Iowa RNC members, state party chairman Matt Strawn, has already endorsed Collins.

However, RNC member Steve Scheffler told The Iowa Republican blog that he will back Wisconsin GOP chairman Reince Priebus for RNC chairman.

Not only is Scheffler supporting Priebus, but he has agreed to serve in Priebus’ “kitchen cabinet.” […]

Preibus won Scheffler’s support by being a strong defender of Iowa’s first-in-the-nation status, having a strong stance on social issues, and pledging to run a tight ship if elected to lead the RNC.

Scheffler’s support of Priebus is also a blow to Gentry Collins’ bid to be RNC chairman. Collins, an Iowan, has spent years working in Iowa politics. His inability to secure the support of all three Iowa RNC members will likely be a red flag to other members of the committee.

Scheffler would have come into contact with Collins when Collins was running Mitt Romney’s Iowa campaign in 2007. Scheffler heads the Iowa Christian Alliance, which organized house parties featuring Romney and several other Republican presidential candidates before the caucuses. (Neither Scheffler nor the Iowa Christian Alliance endorsed a candidate in that GOP field.) Scheffler was elected to represent Iowa at the RNC in July 2008, and Collins worked for John McCain’s campaign in Iowa during that year’s general election.

I haven’t seen any public comment from Iowa’s third RNC representative, Kim Lehman, regarding the upcoming race for chairman. She and Scheffler are ideologically similar, having been elected by the same faction of socially conservative delegates to the Iowa GOP state convention in 2008. In January 2009, Scheffler and Lehman publicly supported Katon Dawson for RNC chairman. He lost to current chairman Michael Steele on the sixth round of balloting.  

Matt Strawn announced yesterday that he will seek another two-year term as chairman of the Republican Party of Iowa. The party’s State Central Committee will formally elect a chair in January, but no serious opposition to Strawn will emerge. He has the support of Governor-elect Terry Branstad, incoming Iowa House Speaker Kraig Paulsen, and Senator Chuck Grassley.

Strawn earned another term by guiding Iowa Republicans to major gains in the state. The political climate was generally favorable to the GOP, of course, especially in the Midwest, and the huge campaign war chests of Branstad and Senator Chuck Grassley gave Republicans a financial advantage. Still, Strawn helped lay the groundwork. Iowa Republicans had never focused on GOTV outside of their famed 72-hour operation just before election day. This year early voting among Republicans in the state was up 83 percent compared to 2006. According to Strawn, that success made it possible for the Republicans’ election-day GOTV to focus on state legislative races. Republicans exceeded expectations by winning six Democratic-held state Senate seats and racking up a net gain of 16 in the Iowa House.

Another reason for Republicans to stick with Strawn is that he can be a neutral figure in the run-up to the Iowa caucuses. To my knowledge, Strawn didn’t publicly support any of the 2008 presidential candidates who might run again next year. He and his wife Erin have donated to various Republican candidates, including members of Congress outside Iowa during the last few cycles, but I couldn’t find any record of contributions from them to presidential candidates. CLARIFICATION: Strawn was previously Iowa caucus director for John McCain, but he wasn’t associated with any Republicans who might challenge Barack Obama in the upcoming election cycle.

The state GOP can’t afford to have many candidates copy McCain’s strategy of mostly skipping Iowa, because the “straw poll” event set for August before each presidential caucus year is a major fundraiser for the party.

Speaking of which, I was intrigued to see Bob Vander Plaats say this recently:

Advisers differ on how late [Mike Huckabee] could jump in, but Vander Plaats said he’d advise Huckabee to wait until extremely late – after the August Iowa GOP straw poll – to survey the lay of the land and make up his mind.

“He could come in as an energized, fire in the belly, Fred Thompson,” he said, referring to the former Tennessee senator’s much-anticipated run in 2008 – a late entry that fizzled when Thompson seemed to have little stomach for the rigors of the trail.

Strange advice, since the 2007 Iowa GOP straw poll was Huckabee’s breakout event, thanks in large part to a helping hand from Americans for Fair Taxation. I’m struggling to think of any example of a presidential candidate doing well in the Iowa caucuses thanks to a late start on organizing. It sounds like Vander Plaats is trying to undermine the state party’s premiere fundraising event. Perhaps he thinks downgrading the straw poll will help elevate the significance of whatever his new organization (The Family Leader) has planned. Or, maybe he believes state party leaders were involved in helping recruit Terry Branstad back into politics at a time when Vander Plaats seemed to have the GOP gubernatorial nomination locked up. I’ve always wondered how much Strawn encouraged the business leaders who lobbied Branstad to run for governor in the summer of 2009.

Share any relevant thoughts in this thread.

Longtime Iowa GOP political operative Gentry Collins has formed a campaign organization to back his likely bid for Republican National Committee chairman this January. If elected, he would be the fifth leader of the national GOP from Iowa and the first since pro-choice moderate Mary Louise Smith chaired the RNC in the mid-1970s.

Collins’ resignation letter as RNC political director probably buried Michael Steele’s already faint hope of being re-elected for another two-year term as party leader. Several factors are likely to count against Collins when the 168 RNC members consider the possible successors to Steele, though.

Time with extended family means less time for blogging, so I’m posting the weekend open thread early. Here are some links to get the conversation going.

Rural voters were a crucial factor helping Republicans retake the U.S. House. Of the 125 most rural Congressional districts, Republicans held all 64 seats they had going into the election and flipped 39 Democratic districts (that alone would have been enough to give them a majority). Going into the election, Democrats held 61 of the 125 most rural Congressional districts. Now they hold only 22 of those districts, including IA-01 (Bruce Braley) and IA-02 (Dave Loebsack).

Smart Politics looked at what it calls “Iowa’s Schizophrenic 2010 Electorate” and observed, “Never before in the history of Iowa elections have Republicans won a majority of seats in the Iowa House while Democrats won a majority of the Hawkeye State’s U.S. House seats.”

I listed the Iowa House and Senate Democrats before and after the election, grouped by Congressional district. Bleeding Heartland user American007 created red and blue Iowa maps showing which parties held state House and Senate districts before the election and after.

Fred Karger, a Republican political strategist and gay activist who’s exploring a presidential bid, has been running this commercial on the Fox network this week in Des Moines, Cedar Rapids, Quad Cities, Mason City, Ames, Burlington and Fort Dodge. Have you seen it? Hard to imagine a strong base of support for Karger in Iowa, but I’m glad a moderate may be running for president on the Republican side.

If Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels runs for president in 2012, some Iowa Republicans will not forgive him for supporting merit-based judicial selection in his state.

Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee said all the “right” things about Iowa judges during his recent Des Moines visit. But this week Huckabee described the controversial searches of airline passengers as a “humiliating and degrading, totally unconstitutional, intrusion of their privacy.” Uh oh! Social conservatives don’t typically acknowledge that there is a constitutional right to privacy. That dreaded “penumbra” underlies U.S. Supreme Court rulings affirming reproductive rights.

I learned this week that New Hampshire has some elected Republican officias who support marriage equality. It’s not clear whether there are enough of them to stop large GOP majorities from repealing same-sex marriage rights in that state. I wonder when (if ever) a current Republican office-holder in Iowa will defend equality.

Iowa First Lady Mari Culver says she accomplished what she set out to do during her husband’s term as governor, and her kids are excited to be moving back to their West Des Moines home full-time.

What’s on your mind this holiday weekend?  

Representative Steve King’s never had trouble calling attention to himself, even as a not very powerful member of the House minority. With Republicans in charge of the House beginning in January, King’s national profile will rise further as chairman of the House Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee on immigration. One of his top priorities will be moving a bill to restrict birthright citizenship.  

Michael Steele’s term as chairman of the Republican National Committee expires in January. Although staffing and fundraising problems have marked his tenure in the job, Steele hasn’t ruled out seeking another two years in the position.

That won’t happen if the departing RNC political director Gentry Collins has anything to say about it. Jonathan Martin got hold of the resignation letter Collins sent to Steele and the RNC’s executive committee. Rarely have I heard of an employee denouncing the boss in such a devastating way. Excerpts and background on Collins are after the jump.

UPDATE: Scroll to the bottom for some reactions to Collins’ letter.

From time to time I enjoy pondering counterfactual history questions like “Should the Republicans have nominated Romney in 2008?” or “Could Clinton or Edwards have beaten Obama in Iowa?”

Since establishment Republicans suffered shocking losses last month in the Delaware and Alaska U.S. Senate primaries, another question has been on my mind. Could a primary challenger have taken out or seriously threatened Senator Chuck Grassley in Iowa?

I’m putting up this thread early because of the Jewish holiday Yom Kippur, which starts at sundown Friday evening. While I’m in services, a large crowd will attend the Republican Party of Iowa’s Reagan Dinner in Des Moines. Representatives Steve “10 Worst” King, Tom Latham, gubernatorial nominee Terry Branstad, Senator Chuck Grassley, and Iowa GOP Chairman Matt Strawn will speak before the keynote address by former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.

C-SPAN will televise the event. Political junkies will watch to see how Palin addresses the activists whose support she’ll need if she runs for president in 2012, as expected. An early poll commissioned by The Iowa Republican blog found Palin in fourth place among Iowa Republicans this summer, behind Mike Hucakbee, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich. Some supporters of Bob Vander Plaats for governor have hard feelings about her substance-free endorsement of Branstad shortly before the June primary. Will she placate them tonight by enthusiastically backing the effort to remove Iowa Supreme Court judges from office this November?

I encourage Bleeding Heartland readers who watch the Reagan Dinner to post your impressions here. Please refrain from sexist insults when talking about Palin.

My only prediction is that no speaker will acknowledge how much Ronald Reagan raised taxes as president and as governor of California.

This is an open thread, so share anything on your mind this weekend.

UPDATE: Apparently Palin praised Terry Branstad’s record on supporting special education. The Iowa Democratic Party set the record straight in a statement I’ve posted after the jump.

Ben Smith summarized Palin’s message as defending the Republican insurgency. She still hasn’t explained why Iowa is one of the few places where she backed the establishment candidate (Branstad) over the more conservative alternative.

Jonathan Martin wondered why Grassley talked about Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi so much. He’s been doing that for a while–for example, during his joint appearance with Roxanne Conlin on Iowa Public Television.

What’s on your mind this weekend? We’re already looking forward to the Iowa State Fair, which runs from August 12-22. We may catch the state fair parade on August 11 if it’s not too hot.

Iowa’s first-in-the-nation status is secure under the presidential nominating calendar Republican National Committee members approved yesterday.

The vote passed by a two-thirds majority, a requirement for the measure drafters included to lend to its acceptance from RNC members. The measure received 104 votes of the 144 members voting.

The caucuses would likely be held Feb. 6, under the schedule, followed in February by the New Hampshire primary, caucuses in Nevada and the South Carolina primary.

All other states would be allowed to hold their primaries and caucuses in March or April. States going in March would be required to apportion their nominating delegates proportional to the vote a candidate received in that state. April states could award their delegates on a winner-take-all basis, an incentive for states hoping to be seen as delivering the nomination.

Any state that violates the proposed calendar would lose half its RNC delegates. What do you think, Bleeding Heartland readers? Is that a big enough penalty to deter a large state from trying to jump ahead of Iowa?

I hope the calendar sticks so staffers and volunteers aren’t forced to do canvassing and phone-banking between Christmas and New Year’s Day, like we did before the January 3, 2008 caucuses.

At least two potential Republican presidential candidates are coming to Iowa in the next couple of weeks. Former Senator Rick Santorum is headlining a fundraiser for attorney general candidate Brenna Findley in Sioux Center on August 17, and Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty is coming to the Iowa State Fair. I can’t believe Santorum would think about running for president after losing re-election in a purple state by double digits. I’m still shaking my head over the warm reception Iowa Republicans give Pawlenty despite his record on fiscal issues and state borrowing. Several of Pawlenty’s other ideas strike me as proposals only the hard-core GOP base could love, like cutting entitlement spending to pay for extending George W. Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.

This is an open thread.

UPDATE: I forgot that Newt Gingrich is coming to Des Moines next weekend to raise money for a Republican women’s group. Continuing his habit of being wrong about everything, Newt recently condemned Shirley Sherrod as a racist and a week later denounced the Obama administration for rushing to judgment about Sherrod. He also offered an “egregious and purposeful misreading of medieval history” as an argument against allowing a mosque to be built at the “Ground Zero” site in New York City.

What is the idea of the GOP regarding “the threat that Sharia law will take over our country.”  WT??  The fear mongering the GOP is amazing.  Do they hope that all of the unquestioning Republicans will vote for them,  out of fear that the Muslims will take over our country and institute Sharia Law?  I am more in fear of the Fundamentalist Evangelical Dominionists (Taliban is another name for it) than I ever was about the Muslims. 

They know we have the First Amendment.  They know that we are never going to vote into law any Sharia law in this country.  What is their reasoning for this?  It just seems to me they are going farther and farther to the right,  about ready to fall off the scale.  I think the liberals and the progressives need to pull this country to a little bit more centrist place,  just pick it up and pull it over.  Because when Newt gingrich can talk about we should just bomb the hell out of Iran and N Korea,  they're bringing up Sharia law, etc.  can they get any crazier? 

Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty was in Iowa this weekend to headline an event organized by Iowans for Tax Relief. The crowd cheered the future presidential candidate after Pawlenty blasted the Obama administration and proposed one bad idea after another.

Pawlenty’s “economic bill of rights” includes requiring Congress to balance the budget every year. Freezing or reducing federal spending every time revenue drops is great if you like turning recessions into depressions, but basic economic facts won’t stop Pawlenty from pandering to the “Party of Hoover” set. I wonder whether Pawlenty’s proposed balanced budget amendment still includes “exceptions for war, natural disasters and other emergencies.”

Pawlenty also wants line-item veto powers for the president. The U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that unconstitutional at the federal level, and it’s unlikely Congress would ever approve a constitutional amendment on this matter.

In addition, Pawlenty favors extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. Those tax cuts didn’t prevent the most severe economic recession since World War II, but they did manage to massively increase our national debt and deficit while delivering most of the benefits to the top few percent of the population.

But wait, there’s more to Pawlenty’s wish list: “He also called for requiring a supermajority of Congress to raise taxes or the debt ceiling.” Unfortunately, that would exacerbate our budget problems. When the Pew Center on the States examined state fiscal problems last year, a common feature of the states deemed “most like California” was a supermajority requirement for tax increases or budget decisions.

By the way, Iowa received higher overall marks than Minnesota in that Pew Center on the States report, which looked at six indicators to determine each state’s fiscal health.

Speaking to the Iowans for Tax Relief crowd, Pawlenty bragged about getting Minnesota out of the top 10 states for taxes but glossed over other aspects of his record as governor. Iowa Republicans have hammered Democrats for supposedly “overspending,” even though our state leaders have kept our budget balanced without depleting our state’s reserve accounts. What would they say if they knew about Pawlenty’s record?

During Pawlenty’s first year as governor, the state drew down its reserves and relied too heavily on one-time revenue to address its budget problem.  As a result, the state lost its Aaa bond rating from Moody’s Investors Service; the state has yet to regain its Aaa rating from Moody’s.

The 2009 report of the bi-partisan Minnesota Budget Trends Study Commission has recommended that the state build up its budget reserves and cash flow account in response to an increasingly unstable revenue outlook.  All members of the Commission, including the five appointed by Governor Pawlenty, endorsed this recommendation.

Pawlenty and state legislators couldn’t agree on an approach to balance the Minnesota budget. As a result, last year “Minnesota’s [projected] budget gap was the largest in the nation on a per capita basis.” Pawlenty can bash President Obama, but his state desperately needed the roughly $2.6 billion it received through the federal stimulus bill to help cover the shortfall. Even with the stimulus money, Minnesota was still billions of dollars short. So, in addition to some spending cuts, Pawlenty proposed “a bond issue that would be paid for by existing and forecast revenues from the tobacco settlement-a one-time fix disliked by some because it aimed to use long-term borrowing to pay for current state operations.”

To be clear: Pawlenty wanted the state of Minnesota to borrow money to pay its bills. In contrast, Iowa’s state borrowing program (I-JOBS) is funding capital investments in infrastructure. Last summer, Iowans for Tax Relief in effect ran the Republican campaign for a special election in Iowa House district 90. During that campaign, the Republican candidate made false and misleading claims about Iowa’s state budget and borrowing. How ironic that the Iowans for Tax Relief crowd gave a standing ovation to a panderer with a much worse record of fiscal management.

Not only did Pawlenty want Minnesota to borrow money to pay its bills, he also decided that underfunding local governments and forcing them to draw down their own reserves was a good way to control spending for the 2010-2011 budget period. Yes, Pawlenty decided in 2009 that cutting aid to local governments by hundreds of millions of dollars was a good way to balance the state budget:

“Many [cities], if not all, have reserve funds, or rainy day funds, and they should use them,” Pawlenty said.

He also talked of the option cities have of raising property taxes to make up for any LGA [local government aid] cuts.

One of the Republican talking points against Iowa Governor Chet Culver is that his midyear budget cuts supposedly forced local governments to raise property taxes. Yet Pawlenty gets a free pass from his Iowa Republican friends. Culver’s across-the-board budget cut last October wasn’t popular, but it did keep state government from overspending. In contrast, late last year Minnesota’s cash flow was so poor that state officials considered short-term borrowing to meet budget obligations.

“It’s a bad sign,” said former state Finance Commissioner Peggy Ingison, now chief financial officer with Minneapolis public schools. “It signals you didn’t have good fiscal discipline.”

Minnesota has muddled through without borrowing money to pay bills so far, but prospects for later this year are dicey:

State budget officials updated lawmakers [April 12] on Minnesota’s precarious cash-flow situation. They all but ruled out short-term borrowing for the 2010 budget year that ends June 30.

Budget director Jim Schowalter says “deep cash problems” loom for the 2011 fiscal year. Barring law changes, spending cuts and upticks in revenue, he says the state might have to take out short-term loans to meet its obligations.

The Minnesota Budget Bites blog takes a more detailed look at the state’s “troublesome” picture for fiscal year 2011. BulliedPulpit posted a good rebuttal of “TPawnomics” at MN Progressive Project.

The last thing our country needs is budget advice from Tim Pawlenty.  

Not content to push for a balanced-budget constitutional amendment in his own state, Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty has endorsed the idea of a federal constitutional amendment to require Congress to pass balanced budgets every year. The Wall Street Journal’s Amy Merrick observes,

Previous efforts to pass a national balanced-budget amendment have foundered in Congress. Many lawmakers believe deficit spending can help boost the U.S. economy during downturns, and calls to balance the budget sometimes fade as other priorities surface.

It would be insane to restrict the federal government’s ability to run deficits during a recession. That’s not just something many members of Congress “believe,” it’s a consensus view among economists. But don’t worry, Pawlenty isn’t entirely rigid on the subject of deficit spending:

Mr. Pawlenty’s proposal for a federal amendment would include exceptions for war, natural disasters and other emergencies. The U.S. has been at war for most of the past decade.

No self-respecting Republican ever let spending worries stand in the way of a blank check for war.

Although it’s tempting to laugh at Pawlenty’s proposal, I think highlighting the budget amendment could boost his standing in the 2012 presidential race. His idea isn’t outside the GOP mainstream; leading Republicans proposed a federal spending freeze instead of the stimulus bill Congress passed in February. Republican politicians in Iowa have also embraced Hoovernomics.

The idea could prove popular with the GOP rank and file too. Mike Huckabee gained a lot of traction in Iowa during the summer of 2007 by being the only Republican to endorse the so-called “fair tax.” That idea is even wackier than a federal spending freeze during a recession, but many caucus-goers embraced it.

Any comments about Pawlenty’s prospects or the Republican presidential field are welcome in this thread.

The only Republican gubernatorial candidate from eastern Iowa suspended his campaign today. Iowa Politics has the full press release. Here’s the statement from Christian Fong’s campaign website:

“The message was right, and the vision remains unclouded. Commitment to the Iowa Dream means that while practical financial hurdles may prevent a run for Governor in 2010, I will continue to campaign for the Iowa’s future.”

– Christian Fong

Ed Failor, Jr. of Iowans for Tax Relief reportedly promised to help Fong raise enough money for a serious campaign, and Fong raised $100,000 in three weeks after entering the gubernatorial race this summer. However, it sounds like Terry Branstad’s return to politics dried up the money Fong was counting on.

Branstad was quick to release a statement today:

“I want to thank Christian for bringing his youth, energy and unique perspective to the Iowa governor’s race. Christian Fong epitomizes the Iowa dream, and I look forward to working with him on the critical need for Republicans to be a relevant voice for young people. We must provide a thriving business climate in Iowa that entices young professionals to remain in Iowa and raise their families here. Christian Fong is an exciting, energetic Republican and we’re fortunate to have him in our party.”

Does anyone think Fong might become the GOP nominee for lieutenant governor next year? Lots of people in Polk County expect Branstad to choose Doug Reichardt for a running mate.

I am disappointed that we won’t have a chance to find out whether an Iowa Republican could get serious traction using Barack Obama’s playbook.

The Iowa Christian Alliance, headed by Republican National Committeeman Steve Scheffler, is facing a Federal Election Commission complaint over contributions allegedly run through West Hill United Methodist Church of Burlington. Morris Hurd is pastor of that church and also serves as board president and treasurer of the Iowa Christian Alliance.

The Iowa Christian Alliance is a 501(c)4 non-profit organization, meaning that it can engage in political advocacy on issues, but donations to the group are not tax-deductible. Many houses of worship, including West Hill United Methodist Church, are 501(c)3 non-profits, to which donations are tax-deductible. However, 501(c)3 groups may not engage in political advocacy.

The AP’s Mike Glover summarized the FEC complaint filed last week by Stacey Cargill of West Des Moines:

The complaint charges that Iowa Christian Alliance officials solicited money from potential donors, instructing them to send the money to Hurd’s church, making it tax-deductible. Donations were made with the understanding they would be forwarded to the alliance, the complaint said. […]

In a phone interview, Des Moines lawyer and GOP activist Ted Sporer described a similar process to The Associated Press. He said he wrote two checks to the church.

“The facts are, I was told that if I were to write a check to this church, I would get credit for being a sponsor at Christian Alliance events,” said Sporer. “I was advised that if I wrote the check to the church I would be credited.”

Hurd did not dispute that churches offered financial support to Iowa Christian Alliance.

“There are churches and ministries in Iowa that have supported the ICA and have occasionally contributed to our nonpartisan voter education effort, including voter registration and nonpartisan voter guides,” said Hurd. “They are fully within their right to do so under both the Internal Revenue code and the First Amendment.”

Scheffler told Glover that Cargill “is not dealing with a full deck of cards […] The woman is a troublemaker. She attacks everybody and anybody.”

Cargill filed a previous FEC complaint against the Iowa Christian Alliance, alleging the group allowed a woman to use its office space and database to support presidential candidate Mitt Romney. The FEC rejected that charge in February of this year.

I haven’t written about Sarah Palin for a couple of months, because her political relevance pretty much evaporated when she failed to complete the job Alaska voters elected her to do. She and her entourage seem not to have clued in yet, however.

Now that we’re done with the Joe “You Lie” Wilson sideshow, I want to talk about a different kind of Republican disrespect for normal political disagreement.

Having been raised by a Republican of the now-extinct Rockefeller variety, I am often struck by how extreme the GOP has become. Chuck Grassley and Terry Branstad were on the far right in the early 1980s, but many Iowa conservatives now consider them “moderate” or even “liberal.”

Mainstream extremism in the Republican Party is depressing on many levels. It fosters ignorance, as when Iowa Republicans are led to believe that the judiciary is not supposed to interpret the constitution. It encourages politicians to put their theology ahead of civil laws.

Most troubling is when prominent conservatives use language that condones physical violence or “revolution” to resist Democratic policy proposals. I fear that people will get hurt or killed if some mentally unstable person takes these appeals too literally.

More thoughts on this subject are after the jump.

If the townhall screamers weren’t enough these days, a former GOP senator from Pennsylvania is coming to Des Moines for a visit on October 1.

The Politico reports that Rick Santorum will be “speaking to a luncheon and workshop of Iowa’s Right to Life group before heading east to Dubuque, where he’ll headline a fundraiser for the conservative America’s Future Fund PAC and then speak about the future of the GOP to a public audience in the Mississippi River city. ”  He will also be on a radio talk show.

More after the jump.

The Iowa Republican blog continues to release results from the poll it commissioned on the 2010 governor’s race. Last week we learned about Governor Chet Culver’s approval, favorability and re-elect numbers. This week we’ve seen some numbers about same-sex marriage and a hypothetical rerun of the 2006 race. I’ll have more to say about the wording of this poll’s questions in a future post. (Todd Dorman identified a glaring problem with the marriage question here.)

In today’s installment, Craig Robinson highlights results from a straightforward question:

Question: If the Republican primary for Governor was held today, who would you vote for between Chris Rants, Bob Vander Plaats, Paul McKinley, Rod Roberts, Jerry Behn, and Christian Fong?

   Republican Primary Voters

   Bob Vander Plaats: 46%

   Don’t Know: 27%

   Chris Rants: 14%

   Neither/Other: 5%

   Paul McKinley: 3%

   Christian Fong: 3%

   Rod Roberts: 1%

   Refused: 1%

   Jerry Behn: 0.2%

   (Republican Primary Voters N=394 – Margin of Error ±5.0%)

Join me after the jump for some early thoughts about Bob Vander Plaats’ front-runner status.

If you had asked me to guess which Republican governor would resign on the Friday before 4th of July weekend, I would have put money on Mark “I met my soul mate” Sanford of South Carolina.

But surprisingly, it’s Alaska Governor Sarah Palin who announced plans to resign without giving a coherent explanation.

I haven’t been right about everything, but I always knew John McCain did Democrats a favor by elevating Palin to superstardom.

This is an open thread.

UPDATE: Talking Points Memo has the full transcript of Palin’s resignation speech.

In this clip, Palin explains that she doesn’t want to “put Alaskans through” the horror of having a lame-duck governor. She’s transferring power to the lieutenant governor because she’s “not wired to operate under the same old politics as usual”:

Indictment? Family situation? Your guess is as good as mine.

I think we can all agree that someone who didn’t even stick it out for one whole term as governor has no future in electoral politics.

SECOND UPDATE: So much unintentional comedy in Palin’s speech today. I like this part:

Life is too short to compromise time and resources… it may be tempting and more comfortable to just keep your head down, plod along, and appease those who demand: “Sit down and shut up”, but that’s the worthless, easy path; that’s a quitter’s way out. And a problem in our country today is apathy. It would be apathetic to just hunker down and “go with the flow”.

Nah, only dead fish “go with the flow”.

So, she’s resigning after less than one term because she doesn’t want to take “a quitter’s way out.”

THIRD UPDATE: Steve Benen lays out seven possible reasons for Palin’s resignation. He thinks she is running for president. That makes no sense to me–she could have served out her term and not run for re-election in 2010, leaving plenty of time to campaign for president.

Chris Bowers thinks Palin mainly wants to cash in on her celebrity before running for president, but I lean toward Josh Marshall’s view. There may be a major scandal or criminal indictment coming down the pike.

Somebody is paying to do some polling in advance of the 2012 caucus season.  Neither my husband nor I have ever been registered as Republicans in Iowa, but I just got an automated phone survey that was definitely trolling for Republican opinions.  Unfortunately, the name of the survey company and the phone number they gave was at the beginning of the call before I had time to grab a pencil and paper, so I wasn't able to get it jotted down before my feeble mind forgot it.

I'm curious as to whether anyone else has received this call, so I'll post as much as I can remember from the questions after the jump. 

The Republican Party of Iowa is celebrating its “rising stars” tonight at an event featuring Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour. Judging by what we’ve heard lately from Iowa GOP leaders, they’re gonna party like it’s 1929.

Case in point: Iowa Senate Minority leader Paul McKinley. The possible gubernatorial candidate’s weekly memos continue to whine about spending and borrowing by Democrats (see also here). Republicans would rather slash government programs and provide “targeted” one-year tax credits.

The lessons of Herbert Hoover’s presidency are still lost on these people. I apologize for repeating myself, but excessive government spending cuts can turn an economic recession into a depression. Since state governments cannot run budget deficits, it makes sense for the federal government to help the states “backfill” their budgets. That was the express purpose of the state transfer funds in the stimulus package.

In addition, it is prudent to spend federal funds on projects with long-term benefits. Energy Secretary Steven Chu was in Des Moines on June 23 to highlight the first installment of what will be $41 million in stimulus funds for renewable energy and energy-efficiency projects in Iowa. Energy efficiency programs in particular will have huge collateral benefits, saving consumers money while helping the environment.

No matter how many times Republicans repeat their misleading talking points about the I-JOBS state bonding initiative Democrats passed this year, it is prudent to borrow money for worthwhile projects when interest rates are low. I don’t hear McKinley or other Republican leaders telling businesses not to borrow money to make capital improvements.

Share any thoughts about Republican ideas, rhetoric, or career lobbyist Haley Barbour in this thread.

Senator John Ensign of Nevada is coming to northwest Iowa today for stops at Trans Ova Genetics in Sioux Center and the famous ice cream shop in Le Mars before he delivers a speech in Sioux City.

The American Future Fund invited Ensign as part of a lecture series, and American Future Fund spokesman Tim Albrecht spoke to Radio Iowa about him:

Albrecht describes the 51-year-old Ensign as a “strong” conservative.

“I think that Senator Ensign will be able to introduce himself to a group of active conservatives who are thirsty for a new voice, a new person, to really pick up the banner and carry it on their behalf,” Albrecht says.

Are conservatives “thirsty for a new voice,” as in someone who hasn’t already run for president? The Republican Party has a history of nominating presidential candidates on their second or third try: Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bob Dole, John McCain.

Ensign looks like a fairly generic Republican to me. He would need to do something to distinguish himself in the next few years to avoid becoming the Sam Brownback or Tommy Thompson of 2012.

UPDATE: Ensign gave Iowa Politics an interview:

“I’m not running for president,” said Ensign, who’s chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. “What I’m doing is raising my profile. I believe we need new voices and fresh voices in the Republican Party who can articulate a message of our core Republican principles.”

More thoughts on likely Republican presidential candidates are after the jump.

Conservative blogger Craig Robinson argued last week that “Iowa Republicans Have Plenty of Opportunity in the State Senate” in 2010. The GOP has almost nowhere to go but up. Republicans currently hold 18 of the 50 seats in the Iowa Senate, fewer than at any previous time in this state’s history. After making gains in the last four general elections, Democrats now hold 19 of the 25 Iowa Senate seats that will be on the ballot in 2010. Also, several Democratic incumbents are in their first term, having won their seats during the wave election of 2006.

To win back the upper chamber, Republicans would need a net gain of seven seats in 2010, and Robinson lists the seven districts where he sees the best chances for the GOP.

I generally agree with John Deeth’s view that only a few Senate districts are strong pickup opportunities for Republicans next year. Winning back the upper chamber will take the GOP at least two cycles, with redistricting likely to create who knows how many open or winnable seats in 2012.

After the jump I’ll examine the seven Iowa Senate districts Robinson views as worthwhile targets as well as one Republican-held district that Democrats should be able to pick up. Here is a map (pdf file) of the current Iowa Senate districts.

I’m still waiting for some Republican, any Republican, to explain the concept of judicial review to religious conservatives who refuse to accept the Iowa Supreme Court’s ruling in Varnum v Brien.

GOP moderates led by Doug Gross have been warning that Republican candidates won’t win in 2010 if gay marriage is their only campaign issue. But I haven’t heard anyone challenge the assertion by many conservatives that the Supreme Court’s decision is just an opinion with no legal force.

Since no Republican has stepped up to the plate, I’m offering a brief lesson on judicial review after the jump.

UPDATE: I had no idea while I was writing this post that Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania had decided to switch to the Democratic Party–yet another sign that moderates have no place in the GOP.

The day the Iowa Supreme Court announced its unanimous decision in Varnum v Brien, noneed4thneed wrote on his Twitter feed,

All chances for moderate Republicans to get elected in Iowa were dashed today. Social conservatives run Republican Party of Iowa now.

Now that the 2009 legislative session has ended with no action to overturn the Iowa Supreme Court, and same-sex marriages are a reality, I am even more convinced that noneed4thneed is right.

A few thoughts on the Republican Party’s internal conflicts are after the jump.

Is there any way to arrange a remedial civics class for prominent Iowa Republicans? Here’s Bob Vander Plaats on Monday:

“If I have the opportunity to serve as your next governor,” Bob Vander Plaats told a crowd of about 350 people at a rally, “and if no leadership has been taken to that point, on my first day of office I will issue an executive order that puts a stay on same-sex marriages until the people of Iowa vote, and when we vote we can affirm and amend the Constitution.”

Another highlight from the same rally:

Co-founder of Everyday America, Bill Salier, told the crowd that state lawmakers need to thank the Supreme Court justices for their opinion but say it’s merely opinion and the law is still on the books.

Salier said: “(Lawmakers) can face down the court and say, ‘We passed DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act. You claim that it is stricken. And yet unless some magic eraser came down from the sky, it’s still in code.'”

Then there’s Republican State Representative Chris Rants, who is trying to amend the tax reform bill so that marriage would be defined as between a man and a woman. Rants failed last week to replace a huge health care bill with an amendment to ban same-sex marriage.

Meanwhile, Republican State Senator Merlin Bartz is pushing an amendment that would allow county recorders not to issue marriage licenses.

This daughter of a Rockefeller Republican is shaking her head and has a few more things to say after the jump.

Iowa Republicans are mobilizing against House File 530, which would allow employees to select their own doctor in case of a workplace injury. The workers’ compensation reform has already cleared a subcommittee (over the objections of its Republican member) and will be discussed at a public hearing tonight at 7 pm at the capitol. Iowa GOP chairman Matt Strawn held a press conference on the issue yesterday in Davenport, and most statehouse Republicans agree with the business interests working hard to defeat the bill.

Opponents claim the bill would let injured workers go “doctor-shopping,” even though the text states clearly that workers would have to designate a personal physician before any injury occurs. The Des Moines Register explains,

• If employees fail to select a doctor before an injury, the employer will select the doctor.

• If either the worker or employer is dissatisfied with the care chosen by the other party, the dissatisfied party may suggest alternative care. If the parties cannot agree, the dissatisfied party may appeal to the labor commissioner and a hearing may be set within 10 work days.

Seems reasonable to me. Shouldn’t every American be able to choose his or her own doctor?

We already knew Republicans don’t really care about the individual’s ability to choose a physician. If they did, they would support a “Medicare for All” approach to health care reform instead of the status quo in which private insurance companies routinely limit patients’ ability to go “out of network” for a doctor.

The controversy over Iowa House file 530 provides further evidence that Republicans don’t respect your right to choose your own doctor. If you’re an employee suffering from a workplace injury, Iowa Republicans think your rights are less important than the bottom line for businesses claiming this bill will cost them more.

Here’s hoping Iowa will join the 35 states that allow workers to choose their own doctors soon. It’s the least the Iowa legislature can do to advance workers’ interests after last month’s prevailing wage bill fiasco. The failure of Democratic leaders to find a 51st vote in favor of that bill provided a real shot in the arm for the Iowa GOP. Party chairman Strawn recently boasted to the Register about how he

sent e-mail alerts to county party leaders asking them to contact their local membership to flood undecided Democrats with phone calls. […]

“There was some very effective use of new technology that helped rally grass-roots Republicans around the state,” Strawn said. “Most all of that was done using these online tools. It wasn’t the old-school phone tree.”

Sounds like the Iowa Democratic Party and its labor union allies need to get those phones ringing down at the capitol.

I’ll have more to say on the doctors’ choice bill later in the week.

UPDATE: After the public hearing on March 10, the Iowa House Labor Committee approved this bill on a 10-6 vote. We’ll see whether leadership can come up with 51 votes to pass it.

One of the biggest tools in the GOP public relations toolbox is the use of “think tanks” and other non-profits to support conservative pundits financially while they make the rounds on talk radio, newspaper editorial writing, and of course – Fox News.  The conservative establishment is very good about taking care of their own.

Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo found a great new example with a little digging today.