The best information is from experienced reporters on the ground, and that’s what Art Cullen, editor of the Storm Lake Times, can deliver about the Senate race involving incumbent Republican Joni Ernst and Democratic challenger Theresa Greenfield (D-IA) in our neighbor to the south, Iowa. Here he’s writing for WaPo:
Ernst trails Greenfield among women by 20 points in the Iowa Poll; all those votes to repeal the Affordable Care Act left some bruises; rural hospitals are on the verge of closing, and urban hospitals are shutting down maternity wards to cut costs. Duly noted.
Then there’s the court vacancy. The Republicans think this vote will help them with the pro-life crowd. I am not sure I follow that logic. In Iowa, abortion is already factored into the calculus for Ernst. People who vote on that issue have been energized and organized since 1973. They’re the reason Trump is even in the equation in Iowa. That support is maxed out, I believe.
I’ve come to regard abortion as the existential crowbar of American politics. All it takes is some incompetent, even malicious, third-rate boob running around proclaiming their pro-life credentials, and, in many parts of the country, the single issue anti-abortion voters will happily ignore the highly experienced and competent candidate who happens to be pro-choice and vote for the boob.
And then again. And again. Even among the smoking ruins caused by the boob. Thus, existentiality.
At some point, you’d think that someone has to sit down and realize that incompetency has consequences, and what lead to the incompetent getting into power needs to be analyzed, and conclusions drawn.
It seems to me that if anti-abortion was this magic position, this sacred life thing, then simply always following the rule of voting for the pro-lifer should lead to positive outcomes; when it doesn’t, and doesn’t repeatedly, that suggests that the anti-abortion position may not be the top-of-the-mountain issue that pro-lifers continually screech over.
But will that occur? I’m talking about rationality here; rationality is a tool in our toolbox, but not our essence. Someone talks about how life is sacred, and no one really wants to be the person who said, Wait, what? The social consequences can be severe. And so the herd goes trotting that-a-way.
All that said, I suspect that not only is Cullen right, but the turnout for the anti-abortion faction may be smaller than expected. This would be the result of two factors: first, the aforementioned disasters will certainly catch the attention of some anti-abortion single issue voters, and some of them will drop the latter clause, if not the former clause, and choose to vote Biden and Greenfield, even if they’re biting their tongues.
Second, the upcoming confirmation of Barrett, assuming it goes through, will ratchet down the tension about voting for Ernst and Greenfield. No open seat, why vote for the scoundrel Trump, and his henchwoman, Ernst? It’s already morally distasteful, and while there’s a distinct possibility that the next President may appoint up to four SCOTUS Justices, the fact that it’s not being talked about suggests it won’t be on voters’ minds.
So I have some cautious hopes that Trump-enable Senator Ernst will end her political career in November. The tide seems to be running that way. The bet is off if Barrett fails confirmation, though…
