Conlin Wins in Iowa—Is Grassley Vulnerable?

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Roxanne Conlin, a former Iowa Attorney General, won the Democrats’ Senate nomination there Tuesday night and will face incumbent Republican Chuck Grassley in the fall. Logic holds that Grassley should be vulnerable. Iowa has been trending blue, and is perfectly capable of sending Democrats to Washington—Tom Harkin, the Dem half of the state’s senate pair, is pretty liberal and a big supporter of organized labor. Grassley has definitely been feeling some pressure from his state’s increasingly blue hue—he flirted with negotiating on health care reform, for example. Most important, Conlin’s a serious candidate with the ability to raise real money. The Democratic National Committee is certainly excited about her chances. DNC chair Tim Kaine released this statement Tuesday night:

As we look toward November, the contrast for Iowa voters could not be more clear. Voters will choose between Roxanne Conlin, a Democrat who will fight for middle-class Americans, or Republican Chuck Grassley, a senator who has repeatedly put special interests and the insurance companies ahead of the people of Iowa. At every turn Senator Grassley and his Republican colleagues in Congress have opposed President Obama—from the Recovery Act, to the Affordable Care Act, to relief for out of work Americans. Senator Grassley had the opportunity to do right by the American people by standing with the President on health reform, but decided instead to stand with insurance companies. We know where Chuck Grassley stands, and it is not with the people of Iowa. This November Iowans will have the opportunity to elect Roxanne Conlin, a candidate who will work hard every day for the people of Iowa.

I’m not sure Grassley is as vulnerable as Kaine hopes. Sure, one poll had Conlin within 10 points of Grassley earlier this year. But that result hasn’t been replicated since. We can tell one thing from the statement, though: in Iowa, at least, the Dems are perfectly confident about running on their record. If this turns out to be an anti-incumbent, rather than simply an anti-Dem, year, look for Conlin to at least give Grassley a scare. 

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate