"Notably, Miller-Meeks has spent hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars on messages to constituents, with much of the spending going through her top campaign vendor. She has also built up goodwill by being one of the chamber’s most frequent floor speakers, and has used the earmark process to help fund projects in her district."
Any chance Iowa’s Electoral Votes are close to being in play? What happens if high enthusiasm gives, say, a five-percent higher turnout rate for Democrats, democracy-defending Independents and patriotic Republicans?
Only in the sense that "there's always a chance". My sense is that any scenario where Trump wins Iowa by less than double-digits means a 300+ electoral vote night for Harris.
Trump won Iowa by 8 in 2020. I could see him winning by 9 and narrowly winning the electoral college. I agree with your broader point that if Iowa's in play, the electoral college isn't.
I hope you are right, Mark. I’m extremely doubtful that Trump wins Iowa by 10% or more. If that makes 300+ the likely EC result, I’ll be immensely relieved. Kamala Harris needs a victory that is well beyond what I call the MoS – the "Margin of Steal".
America simply cannot afford to have 2024 be an election that’s decided by a few close races, litigation that’s kicked up to the corrupt Leonard Leo-led SCOTUS, or thrown to the House of Representatives.
IA-01: I wrote a deep dive on how Republican incumbent Mariannette Miller-Meeks has used her office to boost her re-election chances.
https://www.bleedingheartland.com/2024/09/30/how-mariannette-miller-meeks-uses-incumbency-to-her-advantage/
"Notably, Miller-Meeks has spent hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars on messages to constituents, with much of the spending going through her top campaign vendor. She has also built up goodwill by being one of the chamber’s most frequent floor speakers, and has used the earmark process to help fund projects in her district."
Any chance Iowa’s Electoral Votes are close to being in play? What happens if high enthusiasm gives, say, a five-percent higher turnout rate for Democrats, democracy-defending Independents and patriotic Republicans?
Only in the sense that "there's always a chance". My sense is that any scenario where Trump wins Iowa by less than double-digits means a 300+ electoral vote night for Harris.
Trump won Iowa by 8 in 2020. I could see him winning by 9 and narrowly winning the electoral college. I agree with your broader point that if Iowa's in play, the electoral college isn't.
I hope you are right, Mark. I’m extremely doubtful that Trump wins Iowa by 10% or more. If that makes 300+ the likely EC result, I’ll be immensely relieved. Kamala Harris needs a victory that is well beyond what I call the MoS – the "Margin of Steal".
America simply cannot afford to have 2024 be an election that’s decided by a few close races, litigation that’s kicked up to the corrupt Leonard Leo-led SCOTUS, or thrown to the House of Representatives.
I agree with Mark; oh noesssss; dogs and cats living together; mass hysteria !!!
Great piece, Laura. Infuriating though.
Proof positive that Miller-Meeks' hand should be nowhere near the taxpayers' money spigot.
That sounds legitimate. I don't think we'd have problems with a Democrat doing the same thing. Is there anything more damning in the piece?