Republicans have Culver on the ropes, but can they deliver the knockout punch?

Wednesday, December 2, 2009, 4:21
Iowa, News Center, Top Story
1,009 views
14 comments

Culve77 Despite the reality of the world around him, Governor Chet Culver always seems to find a way to be optimistic when talking about the condition of the state or his campaign. When the state ended the FY 2009 budget year with a $161 million deficit, Culver remained calm and refused to call a special session to deal with the unbalanced budget. Instead, Culver opted to transfer $45.3 million from the state’s economic emergency fund and withheld paying $30 million in corporate tax refunds until the next fiscal year to balance last year’s budget.

When the Revenue Estimating Conference met at the end of the fiscal year in July, Governor Culver ignored the warning signs in hopes that revenues would rebound in the second half of the year. They didn’t, and since Governor Culver once again failed to call back the legislature to deal with the state’s overspending, he was forced to implement a reckless ten-percent across-the-board budget cut.

The same pattern existed with the film tax credit scandal at the Iowa Department of Economic Development. It seems that Governor Culver fails to act until his back is against the wall. While this has certainly been the case with how he has handled the state government, it’s also true about his re-election campaign and team of advisors.

Governor Culver has stated publically that he looks forward to campaigning on his record as governor. Various media outlets have indicated that Culver is on a record breaking fundraising pace. Yet, if everything is so hunky-dory, then why has Culver needed to replace his chief-of-staff, communications director, and campaign manager?

Yesterday, the Des Moines Register reported that Culver’s campaign manager, Andrew Roos, quit. Apparently, Roos didn’t mesh well with Culver and the rest of the campaign team. Roos didn’t even make it past three months as Culver’s campaign manager. It’s hard to imagine that things could have gone so poorly so quickly, but apparently they did.

Since Roos joined the campaign on September 8th, former Governor Terry Branstad entered the gubernatorial race, Culver was forced to make massive cuts to all levels of state government, the Culver campaign spent $250,000 on two different TV ads in an effort to reassure Iowans that he is up to the task, and the Des Moines Register’s Iowa poll came out showing Culver is in serious trouble. Making matters worse, last weekend, the Iowa Progress Project ran a scathing ad that blames Culver’s mismanagement for cuts made in education.

It’s impossible to lay the blame for this predicament at the feet of Roos since he has not been on the job long, but when things get bad in politics, heads begin to roll. The bad news for Culver is that things are unlikely to get better soon enough to help him with his re-election effort.

This is why Democrats have gone out of their way to take the focus off of Culver. The most significant example of this is the recruitment of Roxanne Conlin to run for the United States Senate against Chuck Grassley. Before Conlin entered the race, Culver was all alone at the top of the ticket for Iowa Democrats. While Conlin has a long way to go before being a serious threat to Grassley, she is the only candidate that the liberal news media would take seriously. We all know that the Des Moines Register will go through barrels of ink covering her attempt to be the first woman from Iowa to be elected to a federal office, and she is also a credible candidate because of her immense personal wealth.

There is no doubt that Iowa Democrats obviously wouldn’t mind knocking off Grassley, but their recruitment of Conlin was important because it will help take the focus off of Governor Culver and the condition that the state is in. If Culver is to be successful in 2010, Democrats must control the debate. So instead of talking about Culver’s mismanagement, they want to talk about how long Senator Grassley has been in office. Instead of talking about the state’s unemployment levels, they will want to talk about all the special interest money Grassley has accepted from PACs.

It’s a clever strategy and possibly the only way Democrats can be successful next year. Republicans, however, can circumvent that strategy if they are disciplined. Our Republican candidates must not forget that the real opponent is Chet Culver, not Speaker Murphy, Majority Leader Gronstal, President Obama, or worse yet, another Republican.

Iowa Republicans must also avoid the traps that create warring factions within the party. Up and down the ballot, Republicans will have spirited primaries. That’s a healthy exercise, but we must accept that the best candidate will emerge victorious after the primary. If your candidate doesn’t win, it’s not because they were robbed of their victory, it’s because their campaign and supporters didn’t do enough to win. Governor Culver is on the ropes, but it is up to Iowa Republicans to knock him out. To do that, we need a united party with a common purpose – to defeat Governor Culver.

Photo by Dave Davidson

Tags: Campaign 2010, Culver

About the Author

Craig Robinson has written 700 stories on this site.

Craig Robinson serves as the founder and Editor-in-Chief of TheIowaRepublican.com. Prior to founding Iowa's largest conservative news site, Robinson served as the Political Director of the Republican Party of Iowa during the 2008 Iowa Caucuses. In that capacity, Robinson planned and organized the largest political event in 2007, the Iowa Straw Poll, in Ames, Iowa. Robinson also organized the 2008 Republican caucuses in Iowa, and was later dispatched to Nevada to help with the caucuses there. Robinson cut his teeth in Iowa politics during the 2000 caucus campaign of businessman Steve Forbes and has been involved with most major campaigns in the state since then. His extensive political background and rolodex give him a unique perspective from which to monitor the political pulse of Iowa.

14 Comments on “Republicans have Culver on the ropes, but can they deliver the knockout punch?”

Carolyn J. Williams wrote on 2 December, 2009, 7:49
I really believe it depends on how much we bloody each other.

issues are one thing but lies and my favorite phrase “whisper campaigns” have got to stop.
red247 wrote on 2 December, 2009, 11:49
Not with Bob “I’ll shred the Constitution on my first day” Vander Plaats.
Peggy wrote on 2 December, 2009, 12:56
The lack of comments to this story should tell us something.

The two ordained front-runners, whether by polling or cash flow, aren’t creating much excitement in the party.

If they can’t excite the base, they’re sure as hell not going to win over Independents or moderate Democrats.

Rants is the man.
HawkCR1 wrote on 2 December, 2009, 16:29
Wow..again Peggy thinks that because there is a “lack of comments” on a blog…that it says something about the state of the GOP Gov nomination race.

Peggy..don’t know where you been…but the Branstad campaign isn’t having problems putting together grassroots or financial support for his campaign…far from it.

As for polls….DSM Register Iowa Poll had Branstad crushing Culver by 24 points…Rassmussen..Branstad crushing Culver by 20 points….Even the TIR poll had Branstad crushing Culver by 16 points.

Sounds like to me that Branstad isnt having any problems exciting people.
Peggy wrote on 2 December, 2009, 17:57
Do you really trust any polling concerning Republicans coming from the DMR? It’s the media whore of the IDP.
jjenkins wrote on 2 December, 2009, 19:07
Peggy, yes the DMR is a Commie-rag, but are you not looking at the broader picture here? Hawk just cited THREE polls showing Branstad up by nearly 20 percent or more. Vander Plaats does well in those same polls, beating Culver despite having lower name recognition. Both candidates are doing well.

To answer the question posed in the title of this article: Not with idiots like Kim Lehman in charge. If Branstad gets the nomination, do you think she’ll undercut him too? After all, undermining the candidates chosen by her constituents is a badge of honor for her.
Carolyn J. Williams wrote on 2 December, 2009, 20:30
I was thinkin’ the reason why there aren’t so many comments is everyone is busy bashing R candidates – no time to hit on Ds.
Timmy wrote on 2 December, 2009, 21:26
I’ll take the boring Branstad over the inept Culver any day. Rants really is the only one offering solid solutions so far, we could do a helluva lot worse. Remember, it’s the Economy, stupid! But if we stay focused on “gay marriage” or nominate the Huck wannabee BVP, we may very well end up with 4 more years of the “Bug Lug”!!!
Timmy wrote on 2 December, 2009, 21:29
Ooops, should’ve read “Big Lug”, I guess it’s past my bedtime!
Peggy wrote on 2 December, 2009, 23:28
“Hawk just cited THREE polls showing Branstad up by nearly 20 percent or more.”

Yes, and one of them was right here at TIR. Remember, the number of registered Republicans is dwarfed by Dems/Indys.

We must field a candidate that can fire up the other side and the only way that can be done is on the fiscal issues. That doesn’t mean we need to nominate someone who dodges the social issues, but we have to hook the other side with a strong fiscal message first.

Rants is our man, hands down.
jjenkins wrote on 3 December, 2009, 0:11
Peggy,

So we can raise reasonable suspicion with the Commie Rag and the TIR polls… but Rasmussen is a reputable source. And it does, to a degree, seem to back up the other two.

Rants is a great candidate too. I think there is certainly room in this primary for more than just BVP and Branstad. I’m not saying that Rants shouldn’t be the nominee at all – he brings an aggressive style and a lot of ideas not matched by the two “front runners.” And I think that message is starting to take hold with some people.

And I do agree with you on the fact that we need to focus on a strong fiscal message. I am a fiscal and social conservative. It doesn’t mean you’re selling out your beliefs if you tailor your message to the issues of the day. Talk to the voters about the issues they care about, and you win. Don’t hide from other issues, but lead with the current issues of concern. It’s that simple.
Peggy wrote on 3 December, 2009, 0:58
Rasmussen basically ran two polls: Culver vs. Branstad and Culver vs. Vander Plaats.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2010/election_2010_governor_elections/iowa/election_2010_iowa_governor_s_race

Rasmussen also opined, “If Branstad did enter the ring, it’s likely that his numbers would shift. It’s much easier for people to have fond memories of a former governor than it is of an active candidate.”
Peggy wrote on 3 December, 2009, 1:14
This one’s for you, Krusty.

Here, http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2009/09/24/poll-comparison-misses-the-mark/, Kathie Obradovich (I know, I know) analyzes the various polling data. She has a breakdown of the voter registrations.
jjenkins wrote on 3 December, 2009, 14:30
Peggy,

I understand Branstad’s numbers would shift some when jumping in the race, as that is natural. But the fact of the matter is that the state was in much, much better shape when Branstad left office than it is right now after one term of Culver. I believe that fact wins out in a battle between those two and I still see a 5-10 percent victory for Branstad if that match up were to occur.

But I also think that Rants could see that kind of win with the proper name recognition. He would make a great governor. You won’t hear me complaining about any of our candidates.