Who do you think the DSCC would have endorsed in the 2022 IA-SEN primary?

[TML]

As we have probably observed, for this election cycle the DSCC has decided to stay on the sidelines during the primary season, unlike past election cycles such as 2016 or 2020 when they endorsed candidates during the primary season, especially in races that were widely regarded as competitive by most political analysts.

This is part of a series of threads surveying this forum about who the DSCC would have endorsed had they repeated their actions from past election cycles. For the purpose of this and other similarly related threads, I have only listed people who successfully filed and weren’t disqualified, and excluded those who declined to enter. I have also included a “someone else” option for those who think the would-be DSCC endorsee is someone not among the named options.

(For this race, I know conventional wisdom suggests that pretty much any Democratic nominee would likely be a long shot against such an entrenched/established opponent, but that didn't stop the DSCC from coronating someone the last time this particular seat was up.)

[NewYorkExpress]

Probably Finkenauer, but they might well have stayed neutral, knowing full well any nominee would lose in November.

[TML]

Probably Finkenauer, but they might well have stayed neutral, knowing full well any nominee would lose in November.

I don't think that in and itself would cause the DSCC to stay out; remember that the DSCC coronated a candidate in KY-SEN 2020, even though the overwhelming consensus on this forum was that whoever the Democratic nominee in that race was would be a long shot.

[NewYorkExpress]

Probably Finkenauer, but they might well have stayed neutral, knowing full well any nominee would lose in November.

I don't think that in and itself would cause the DSCC to stay out; remember that the DSCC coronated a candidate in KY-SEN 2020, even though the overwhelming consensus on this forum was that whoever the Democratic nominee in that race was would be a long shot.

Beating Mitch McConnell is a very attractive lure for any outside organization on the left wing. Beating Chuck Grassley? Not so much.

[TML]

Probably Finkenauer, but they might well have stayed neutral, knowing full well any nominee would lose in November.

I don't think that in and itself would cause the DSCC to stay out; remember that the DSCC coronated a candidate in KY-SEN 2020, even though the overwhelming consensus on this forum was that whoever the Democratic nominee in that race was would be a long shot.

Beating Mitch McConnell is a very attractive lure for any outside organization on the left wing. Beating Chuck Grassley? Not so much.

Then how would you explain the DSCC coronating a candidate the last time Grassley was up for reelection? That year, there had been some indications of Grassley being potentially vulnerable because of the Supreme Court drama that year, so they coronated someone back then; this time around, there were polls indicating that more people in the state preferred "someone else" to Grassley - which the DSCC could point to as evidence of Grassley's supposed vulnerability and use as justification to coronate someone against him.

[NewYorkExpress]

Probably Finkenauer, but they might well have stayed neutral, knowing full well any nominee would lose in November.

I don't think that in and itself would cause the DSCC to stay out; remember that the DSCC coronated a candidate in KY-SEN 2020, even though the overwhelming consensus on this forum was that whoever the Democratic nominee in that race was would be a long shot.

Beating Mitch McConnell is a very attractive lure for any outside organization on the left wing. Beating Chuck Grassley? Not so much.

Then how would you explain the DSCC coronating a candidate the last time Grassley was up for reelection? That year, there had been some indications of Grassley being potentially vulnerable because of the Supreme Court drama that year, so they coronated someone back then; this time around, there were polls indicating that more people in the state preferred "someone else" to Grassley - which the DSCC could point to as evidence of Grassley's supposed vulnerability and use as justification to coronate someone against him.

Iowa had voted for Obama in both 2008 and 2012, and there was no real reason to believe that Hillary Clinton wouldn't win Iowa too in 2016, which made Grassley at least slightly vulnerable, plus the drama surrounding the vacant Supreme Court seat.

This time around, Iowa has moved sharply to the right, to the point where while more people preferred someone else to Grassley, most of these people probably would have supported a primary challenger, not an opponent in the general election.

[SnowLabrador]

Absolutely Finkenauer.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Probably Finkenauer, but they might well have stayed neutral, knowing full well any nominee would lose in November.

I don't think that in and itself would cause the DSCC to stay out; remember that the DSCC coronated a candidate in KY-SEN 2020, even though the overwhelming consensus on this forum was that whoever the Democratic nominee in that race was would be a long shot.

Beating Mitch McConnell is a very attractive lure for any outside organization on the left wing. Beating Chuck Grassley? Not so much.

Then how would you explain the DSCC coronating a candidate the last time Grassley was up for reelection? That year, there had been some indications of Grassley being potentially vulnerable because of the Supreme Court drama that year, so they coronated someone back then; this time around, there were polls indicating that more people in the state preferred "someone else" to Grassley - which the DSCC could point to as evidence of Grassley's supposed vulnerability and use as justification to coronate someone against him.

I’d respond that they didn’t coronate anyone against Grassley in 2016 and that no one, not the DSCC and not anyone else, thought he was vulnerable.