The "vote for divided government" campaign approach is usually the last refuge of someone in the outsider party trying, in effect, to convince voters that the party in power is always inherently corrupt and can't be trusted to govern. It's rarely about accountability, but instead is about sleight of hand and tapping into voter disappointment. It's of course no surprise that the message changes when the party in control flips.
I heaved a heavy sigh seeing that it was one of Sand's first lines of attack. I also completely understand why it's working, and in this case hope it leads to a win.
Thank you for this article. One point of, well not exactly criticism, but observation. I say it is not exactly criticism, because I think this article did a decent job of avoiding the issue. But it does move around the issue. And that issue is trying to create unnecessary drama around certain Democratic candidates. Why even bring up the DSA candidates in this piece? It is only to create drama. To your reporting, Sand isn't campaigning with any of the stylings of recent DSA candidates. Iowa hasn't yet shown a major DSA constituency. As a counterpoint, one can say something like "reporters will ask him about..." or "Republicans will accuse him of..." Those are fair points but both of the points are in bad faith to the candidate and their campaign, and we should call them out. But you don't have to put them in your article. In an article like this, be the change you want to see in the world. Just say, like most of the article does, that Sand is running a solid campaign. Again, why it isn't exactly a criticism. But, I hope it is a note that you all will take on your coverage going forward. Cover the candidates as they are campaigning. Cheers.
I think this Democratic handwringing about people winning and other places is ridiculous. They were right for that part of the country. Sounds like Sand is right for this part of the country. Stop worrying about this stupid stuff! Let the people choose.
2 years ago, when we in SW Wisc were campaigning for Kamala, some folks from IA who knew some of us dropped in to our Dem office. They ll extolled the integrity of their guy, Rob Sand and wanted him to run for something even back then because he was so targeted on corruption and called it out no matter who did it. So he has been on my radar ever since. I lived in IA for over 30 years and now it pains me to think I actually voted 3 times for Grassley. (But he was much more reasonable before Obama came along.) :(
Nicely done, Andrew. I'd like to see a parallel piece on Zach Lahn, Rob Sand's opponent. When you were in Iowa, you undoubtedly learned about Lahn's unique candidate profile. Perhaps you can shed some light on his appeal to Iowans.
I'm sure I'm way to Sand's left but this is an encouraging column. What the Democratic Party needs right now is candidates (and then elected officials) who are going to serve the public, not the big donors and the lobbies. This can come in many flavors depending on the region and the strength of the candidates. We don't need perfect unity - we just need to be headed in the same general direction.
Thanks Andrew. When I read Laurens columns I feel like killing myself at the end. Its nice to have something a bit more upbeat and hopeful, instead of talking about how stupid democrats are.
Andrew, Excellent presentation of Rob Sand. Having a solid, intelligent and interesting populous approach may just work. If it does it will demonstrate that to win state races , you need to keep it to the issues most pressing to the state electorate. The federal, national party and cultural issues should be avoided like the plague. I hope he wins, for him and for us.
Following this from a blue state. I think the Democratic Party needs to start taking lessons from these candidates. And the DNC needs to get over their “don’t say socialism”. The Democratic Party needs to start embracing all platforms from moderate to DSA. Big tents offer more ideas to save our country.
I hear lots about the schisms in the Democratic party, and of course, that makes for good reading (and fodder for the opposition).
But it's these candidates who are relentlessly focused on the issues that matter to their fellow citizens that inspire me the most. Who refuse to get caught up in the food fight, whether it's from their own team or the opposing team.
The view from Ohio is that the "whats" are pretty damn simple: focus on public education, health care, utilities and housing costs. Support cities and municipalities to reduce the burden of property and other tax increases (Ohio slashed its primary flexible funding mechanism for local municipalities by roughly half between 2010 and 2024).
The "how" is not so simple, especially in these divided times. That's why I so appreciate the people willing to sign up for the job of figuring it out.
100% this, thanks Andrew. I wake every day and ask myself how the fork did we get here? I open my news feed and read headlines that make me cringe. Most often i bypass the stories because the chaos and the crazy wear me out.
Then along comes Rob Sand (i think Lauren wrote the first article on him) and i was so impressed at one point i scribbled if Rob can win Iowa, there is indeed hope in and for this country. Common sense, accountability, anti-corruption and not living his political life to go "viral" should be unstoppable. My God, i live to see that day happen.
He had me until "Approval Style Voting" I live in a city that has this (STL), and it is awful. It makes voters strategize their votes instead of picking candidates they truly believe in. Most voters are not even keyed into politics enough to know what "strategy" to deploy, so the more in tuned politicos in the city have more power with their votes than the average citizens. The issue is that when one person only picks one candidate, the vote has less weight than those who chose two or. I hate it so much, and I am saddened that this is picking up traction in other places.
By the way, a group out of California, The center for election science, spent $600,000 to make this happen in stl, which makes me even more angry about it. If your town is considering this, vote no!
Like Talarico in TX, I think this is the most effective type of approach for Dems campaigning in red states to take. However, I remain quite skeptical that this will translate into wins, as opposed to losing by a few points instead of 10-20. IA is very white, evangelical and rural. I think you can predict most election results by demographics, especially when they’re this heavily loaded to one side. I’m old enough to remember the huge Selzer miss in 2024. But I would love to be wrong!
The "vote for divided government" campaign approach is usually the last refuge of someone in the outsider party trying, in effect, to convince voters that the party in power is always inherently corrupt and can't be trusted to govern. It's rarely about accountability, but instead is about sleight of hand and tapping into voter disappointment. It's of course no surprise that the message changes when the party in control flips.
I heaved a heavy sigh seeing that it was one of Sand's first lines of attack. I also completely understand why it's working, and in this case hope it leads to a win.
Thank you for this article. One point of, well not exactly criticism, but observation. I say it is not exactly criticism, because I think this article did a decent job of avoiding the issue. But it does move around the issue. And that issue is trying to create unnecessary drama around certain Democratic candidates. Why even bring up the DSA candidates in this piece? It is only to create drama. To your reporting, Sand isn't campaigning with any of the stylings of recent DSA candidates. Iowa hasn't yet shown a major DSA constituency. As a counterpoint, one can say something like "reporters will ask him about..." or "Republicans will accuse him of..." Those are fair points but both of the points are in bad faith to the candidate and their campaign, and we should call them out. But you don't have to put them in your article. In an article like this, be the change you want to see in the world. Just say, like most of the article does, that Sand is running a solid campaign. Again, why it isn't exactly a criticism. But, I hope it is a note that you all will take on your coverage going forward. Cover the candidates as they are campaigning. Cheers.
This Waukee resident is in!
I think this Democratic handwringing about people winning and other places is ridiculous. They were right for that part of the country. Sounds like Sand is right for this part of the country. Stop worrying about this stupid stuff! Let the people choose.
So refreshing - someone who wants to solve problems and not play to fear and tribalism. These are the kinds of leaders we need.
2 years ago, when we in SW Wisc were campaigning for Kamala, some folks from IA who knew some of us dropped in to our Dem office. They ll extolled the integrity of their guy, Rob Sand and wanted him to run for something even back then because he was so targeted on corruption and called it out no matter who did it. So he has been on my radar ever since. I lived in IA for over 30 years and now it pains me to think I actually voted 3 times for Grassley. (But he was much more reasonable before Obama came along.) :(
Nicely done, Andrew. I'd like to see a parallel piece on Zach Lahn, Rob Sand's opponent. When you were in Iowa, you undoubtedly learned about Lahn's unique candidate profile. Perhaps you can shed some light on his appeal to Iowans.
I'm sure I'm way to Sand's left but this is an encouraging column. What the Democratic Party needs right now is candidates (and then elected officials) who are going to serve the public, not the big donors and the lobbies. This can come in many flavors depending on the region and the strength of the candidates. We don't need perfect unity - we just need to be headed in the same general direction.
Thanks Andrew. When I read Laurens columns I feel like killing myself at the end. Its nice to have something a bit more upbeat and hopeful, instead of talking about how stupid democrats are.
Andrew, Excellent presentation of Rob Sand. Having a solid, intelligent and interesting populous approach may just work. If it does it will demonstrate that to win state races , you need to keep it to the issues most pressing to the state electorate. The federal, national party and cultural issues should be avoided like the plague. I hope he wins, for him and for us.
Following this from a blue state. I think the Democratic Party needs to start taking lessons from these candidates. And the DNC needs to get over their “don’t say socialism”. The Democratic Party needs to start embracing all platforms from moderate to DSA. Big tents offer more ideas to save our country.
I hear lots about the schisms in the Democratic party, and of course, that makes for good reading (and fodder for the opposition).
But it's these candidates who are relentlessly focused on the issues that matter to their fellow citizens that inspire me the most. Who refuse to get caught up in the food fight, whether it's from their own team or the opposing team.
The view from Ohio is that the "whats" are pretty damn simple: focus on public education, health care, utilities and housing costs. Support cities and municipalities to reduce the burden of property and other tax increases (Ohio slashed its primary flexible funding mechanism for local municipalities by roughly half between 2010 and 2024).
The "how" is not so simple, especially in these divided times. That's why I so appreciate the people willing to sign up for the job of figuring it out.
100% this, thanks Andrew. I wake every day and ask myself how the fork did we get here? I open my news feed and read headlines that make me cringe. Most often i bypass the stories because the chaos and the crazy wear me out.
Then along comes Rob Sand (i think Lauren wrote the first article on him) and i was so impressed at one point i scribbled if Rob can win Iowa, there is indeed hope in and for this country. Common sense, accountability, anti-corruption and not living his political life to go "viral" should be unstoppable. My God, i live to see that day happen.
We'll see eh?
He sounds like a very smart, sensible man. We need more politicians like him.
“This is who I am and this is what I stand for. Period. Vote for me or don’t, but have a nice day!”
He had me until "Approval Style Voting" I live in a city that has this (STL), and it is awful. It makes voters strategize their votes instead of picking candidates they truly believe in. Most voters are not even keyed into politics enough to know what "strategy" to deploy, so the more in tuned politicos in the city have more power with their votes than the average citizens. The issue is that when one person only picks one candidate, the vote has less weight than those who chose two or. I hate it so much, and I am saddened that this is picking up traction in other places.
By the way, a group out of California, The center for election science, spent $600,000 to make this happen in stl, which makes me even more angry about it. If your town is considering this, vote no!
Like Talarico in TX, I think this is the most effective type of approach for Dems campaigning in red states to take. However, I remain quite skeptical that this will translate into wins, as opposed to losing by a few points instead of 10-20. IA is very white, evangelical and rural. I think you can predict most election results by demographics, especially when they’re this heavily loaded to one side. I’m old enough to remember the huge Selzer miss in 2024. But I would love to be wrong!