A week ago or so I was working on publishing something from the Republican National Committee and was just about ready to schedule the post when I finished reading it.
The post was about the dysfunction among Democrats and the U.S. Senate race here in Iowa. Right before clicking on the schedule button, I read the last sentence or two.
It said something about how Chuck Grassley will win in November.
On Friday I received another email from the NRC. It previewed the Democrat debate for U.S. Senate. And it started:
”Tomorrow marks the first debate for Iowa Democrats vying to lose to Chuck Grassley in November.”
Again, this came from the Republican National Committee. It was paid for by the Republican National Committee.
And it completely ignores the fact, again, that Grassley is actually in a primary for the Republican nomination. Grassley has been promoted by the Republican Party of Iowa as well this election year.
Now, never mind the fact that at least Democrats in the primary are debating each other. Grassley refuses to even debate his primary opponent, Jim Carlin.
But the Republican National Committee is going out of its way to cut out some very important people from the political process here in Iowa — IOWANS. It is coronating Chuck Grassley as the nominee without paying any heed to Carlin.
And while Carlin is undoubtedly the underdog, he has a swath of support among the Republican base. Yet the RNC is, in essence, telling them to sit down and shut up. Their voice doesn’t matter. Their voice doesn’t deserve to be heard. Their voice doesn’t deserve to be on a debate stage with Chuck Grassley.
Keep in mind term limits have been in the Republican Party of Iowa platform previously. It’s hard to envision anyone supporting term limits of eight six-year terms in the U.S. Senate.
But we’re told by others we do not need term limits (and maybe we don’t) because that is what elections are for. But look at how the deck is stacked in this situation. The RNC is pushing Grassley. Governor Kim Reynolds is holding a joint yard sign event with Grassley. Congressional Representatives Ashley Hinson, Mariannette Miller-Meeks and Randy Feenstra immediately endorsed Grassley, as did Sen. Joni Ernst.
They’re ignoring Carlin. Yet they’re doing so at their own peril. Because in reality, it isn’t Carlin they’re ignoring — it is Carlin’s supporters.
Chuck Grassley voted to certify the 2020 presidential election — big deal, they’re telling Iowa Republican primary voters — you will support Grassley when November comes.
Chuck Grassley said he was looking forward to seeing Joe Biden’s agenda — big deal, you’ll support our pick for you come November.
Chuck Grassley voted for the Biden infrastructure bill — big deal, you’ll support him in November.
Chuck Grassley voted for the spending bill — big deal, you’ll support him in November.
Chuck Grassley confirmed Merrick Garland as AG, Pete Buttigieg as Transportation Secretary and Anthony Blinken as Secretary of State — big deal, he is your nominee for November.
Chuck Grassley has a failing grade — an F — from Conservative Review when it comes to his voting record over the last six years when it comes to liberty issues — doesn’t matter because you Iowa Republican primary voter will fall in line come November and do what you’re told.
I understand the reasons to be opposed to term limits, but let’s not truly trick ourselves into thinking an incumbent can be taken out in a primary — unless of course the party orchestrates it (Steve King, anyone…).
The RNC and the rest of the Republican Party establishment in Iowa pushing Grassley toward the finish line is sending a message to Iowa Republicans who aren’t comfortable with the prospect of a 48-year term for a U.S. Senator, a senator who has an ‘F’ when it comes to voting for liberty and a senator who said he was looking forward to Joe Biden’s agenda and later implored the House to pass the infrastructure bill because President Biden “needed a win.”
The message is simple: You don’t matter. We don’t care. Come fall, you will fall in line and you will vote for Chuck Grassley. He will be your nominee. There is no need for a debate or for a vigorous exchange of ideas.
Know your role, peasants. You can buy your tickets to the next fundraiser, but for now, let the political elites handle things.
It is a bold strategy in that it is so utterly obvious and patently offensive. I’ll be anxious to see if Republican primary voters in Iowa continue to just follow marching orders come June — and potentially November — or if a fair number of them will realize the change they seek will not come until they demand it does.
The beauty of our system — at the end of the day (including Election Day) — the power lies with the people. And if the people decide they’ve had enough, well, the general election race may be closer than anticipated.
Basically took the words out of my mouth.
And ironic when Jeff Kaufman preaches that the GOP = “Grassroots of People”. And of course he’ll probably stick around till 2024 before retiring so that the governor can appoint his grandson and keep the dynasty going.
The RNC shouldn’t dismiss the free thinkers in Iowa. Being involved with unseating District 88 RINO Dustin Hite and seating Helena Hayes, we expect the establishment by default to have X-number of votes – the usual suspects of the good ole boy country club elites. However, there is much going on in the grassroots that the establishment should not underestimate. We have an excellent ground game in 88 underway and plan on smoking Hite on June 7. Not only is Helna going to take Hite’s seat, my personal hope and prayer is she also takes Hite’s chair on the House education committee. The anger and disdain in the grassroots toward the establishment RINO class is palpable and effervescing. There will be a red wave even in the GOP. Coming soon to a theater near you! Watch!
It’s past time to replace Grassley. The Republican establishment will argue that we can’t take a chance on losing to the Democrat candidate and that Grassley has served us well for decades. Have you looked seriously at the two the Democrats have put up? Weak doesn’t sufficiently describe them. And the decades Grassley has served is a weak argument. Are we to point to age as a factor on Biden but ignore it on Grassley?
Anyone who has seen him speak recently can notice he’s not the man he was 3-4 years ago. No aging person is. And his votes this past year give a clear message that his once strong conservative voting record has been corrupted by his time in Washington.
Jim Carlin will bring a bright, articulate and truly conservative voice back to Iowa.
Thanks for your years of good work, Chuck. It’s time to get back to farming.
Senator Grassley is not serving Iowa by running again. He should have signaled an intention to retire two years ago. Democrats are in a very bad situation in this state and we do not need Chuck Grassley to prevail.
Reynolds running for Senate and Gregg replacing her would have been very strong and indeed Carlin has established himself as a strong candidate.
What the GOP megadonors care about is ethanol, pushing a pipeline to carry what is said to be CO2 pollution created by ethanol plants (were we not told that ethanol is green energy) and of course the even bigger boondoggle wind energy (by the way I wonder how many are shut down today because of well, wind). Anyway there is also the usual generic assortment of special interests wanting to feed at the trough. Nothing like that is likely to change without term limits. The arguments for and against are available at termlimits.com.
Grassley and the rest of the Iowa delegation, so pathetic in their responses to Jan 6 in parroting beltway thumb-sucking, could have been actual statesmen instead of thumbsuckers and called for a pause in certification as called for by Cruz and Cotton, genuine constitutional scholars.
But no they raised the hoary specter of “constitutional crisis” as they ushered in one hell of an existential crisis without a serious peep (were they more concerned about their sinecures). There have been an incredible array of assaults on our nation and culture that once ratcheted up as the Bidenasties have done and are moving aggressively to further, will be extremely difficult to end – – our very sovereignty due to the border situation indeed showing more concern about Ukraine’s borders than ours, runaway inflation, recession, stagflation or worse, dependency on government, the surveillance state, a deteriorated military, crime, an aggressive push for inculcating abortion and funding it aggressively, assaults on parent rights, grooming of children (yes I said that), possibly bumbling our way to a nuclear confrontation with Russia and whoever else Biden’s brain is in the process of allowing nuclear weapons, . . . oh and didn’t Grassley say recently he was not going to do anything about Obamacare (people are too dependent dontcha know) . . . All these assaults and more can be protected by the Democrats with a minority in the Senate not just from 2022 to 2024 but even after a Republican taking the 2024 election. So thanks Chuck et al for avoiding a “constitutional crisis” . . . but do tell how it gets any worse?
Whether or not you could have prevented it is not the issue here, the issue was ls joining with others to try rather than whimpering about a ridiculous ministerial duty. It would have been better if you had just taken a walk.
Indeed our forefathers gave us a republic “if we can keep it”, and many paid a price of their lives, fortunes and sacred honor all while facing bullets and the gallows and reprobation from a third of the country and indifference from another third. all without sinecures.
Indeed “if we can keep it” rather than roll over with a whimper (not even a serious test of the authenticity of the vote which is all many of us asked for), just let them steal it without comment, and pretend you are standing athwart, protecting the republic, . . . one more term . . .
As Jacob also laments, his saving grace is he is not a Democrat. Oh I will vote for him should he prevail in the primary but I can not defend his hazarding of the Republic on the big game day.
By the way, speaking of the ignoring of the Senate primary by the powers that be, the First District in convention (probably the others as well) were treated to a video statement from Trump that was mostly a paean to Chuck Grassley. I do not know which is more pathetic — Kaufman not issuing a disclaimer at the end, Trump thinking he has to saddle up to Grassley when Grassley did no better by him than Mo Brooks who Trump unendorsed for a squishy statement, or Grassley so desperate for praise and one more term.
One more thing — where is the statesmanship from the Iowa boondoggle establishment regarding food security while pushing corn for ethanol, CO2 pipelines cutting across cropland, energy vulnerability fostered by wind dependency . . .?
Watching what is going on with Grassley in Iowa is disturbing and disconcerting and a lot of other “dis” words. I have never thought of voting “down” the Republican ballot before, but this may be the primary to do that. In fact, I don’t see any difference between a vote for a Democrat and a vote for Chuck Grassley. They are one and the same. Jim Carlin is actually a conservative that votes conservatively. Was extremely sorry to see Trump support Grassley. Did Trump even look at Grassley’s voting record? Reynolds came out at District Caucus and gushed over all the positive things the Iowa Republicans accomplished in this past session? And what Chuck had accomplished in DC. Really? Reynolds obviously is looking at something else other than Chuck Grassley’s “F” conservative voting record. Could it be the money involved… hmmm? And what was passed this session in Iowa that answered Iowans’ concerns? The Bottle Bill? Really? That’s it?