Connect with us

Politics

Why Democrats are betting big on a buck hunter

Published

on

DES MOINES — Rob Sand got a hero’s welcome at a state deer hunting expo at the Iowa Events Center on a recent March weekend.

The state’s lone Democratic statewide elected official, and Democrats’ hope for flipping the governor’s mansion for the first time in 16 years, could barely make it through the Sunday morning sea of camo-wearing, venison jerky-chomping, Busch Light tallboy-nursing fellow hunters as more than a dozen people stopped and congratulated him.

But it wasn’t because of his politics. If anything, it was in spite of them.

“Rob, heckuva buck!” said one passerby.

Sand was at the annual Iowa Deer Classic to enter a Green gross-scoring 209-inch buck he’d tagged earlier this season. Photos of the deer have proliferated on Trophy Bucks of Iowa and other Facebook hunting groups across the state.

“Mr. 200!” said Levi Schmitz, a Trump-voting Republican who nonetheless plans to back Sand.

“You got me,” the 43-year-old state auditor responded with a grin.

As Democrats across the map continue to hunt for paths out of the metaphorical wilderness, Sand is betting that his own path to the governor’s mansion runs through his familiarity in the literal wilderness.

Sand represents the kind of candidate Democrats have long sought to win on tough red terrain: an inarguably of-the-place contender whose persona and bio can help sell political views that have become a tough pitch in places where many hear “Democrat” and picture coastal elites. Iowa, a swing state through 2012, moved hard right in the Trump years as Democrats increasingly struggled to connect.

Here, Republicans have taken advantage of the culture wars in a big way for years. Retiring Sen. Joni Ernst first won in 2014 by running hard on her pig-farming, military vet bio and painting her attorney opponent as an effete outsider.

Sand doesn’t run from some of his more liberal views. But like many other Democrats running this year, he’s banking that his local cultural cred will make him tougher for Republicans to caricature as a not-like-us coastal outsider.The day the expo kicked off, the avid bow hunter and fisherman’s campaign launched a “Hunting With Rob” microsite that extolls the rugged Iowa way of life. “For the first time in Iowa history, hunters, sportsmen, conservationists, and outdoor enthusiasts alike will finally have an ally in the governor’s office,” it reads.

Rob Sand engages with fellow hunters at the Iowa Deer Classic.

In a state where the first day of deer season is an unofficial holiday, Sand’s strategy to center his culturally midwestern hobby rather than his Democratic brand was on full display. He dropped $30 on a glove for removing burrs, $35 on a tool that keeps hunting bows level and $69 on MAXX Step Aiders for climbing trees. And the branding appeared to be working.

“I’m super-Republican, but you got my vote,” said Tom Buckroyd, a hunter from a small community near Marshalltown wearing a “Crossbows Are Gay” T-shirt who spent roughly 20 minutes talking to Sand about hunting.

As he picked at a free sample of barbecue venison jerky on a toothpick, Sand said he wasn’t surprised by his warm reception.

“Number one, it just means I shot a huge buck this year,” he told Blue Light News. “But number two, I go back to culture. And we have this stupid, broken, two-choice political system. … And we are told stories about who can be right in either party. And when you find someone that’s in a party, but then also doesn’t fit that story, I think for a lot of people that is a sign of realness or a sign of authenticity about who they are.”

Since their bruising losses in 2024, Democrats have tried all manner of ways to rehabilitate their brand, from cursing more to growing beards to talking about sports. This cycle, they’ve redoubled their efforts to find authentically local candidates — and in some races, those candidates have emerged and caught lightning as they challenge status-quo Democratic candidates. Many are leaning hard into local culture signals.

Sand has hunting. Maine’s Senate candidate Graham Platner has his oystering and his Second Amendment creds. Texas’ Bobby Pulido has his guitar; James Talarico has the Good Book. Alaska’s Mary Peltola has fish. Democratic candidates who can win in tough places often get national buzz. And Sand happens to be from a state that — at least for now — still plays an outsized role in the presidential process. Could Sand be a surprise 2028 contender?

“If Rob wins, he will instantly be part of that conversation,” said Tommy Vietor, President Barack Obama’s former Iowa press secretary and a host of Pod Save America.

Sand is running as a hunting-loving, churchgoing, Casey’s gas station pizza-loving state auditor who has spent the past five years positioning himself as a fiscally responsible friend to the Iowa taxpayer.

There’s been little public polling of the race; the only public survey, released back in October, found Sand beating GOP Rep. Randy Feenstra by two points, 45 percent to 43 percent. But national operatives in both parties see it as one of a handful of governor’s races that could flip. Sand is unopposed in the state’s June 2 primary, though five Republicans will be on the ballot for their party’s nomination.

He entered the show room at the EMC Expo Center after attending a chapel service for expo-goers where he quietly scrolled a Contemporary English Version of the Bible on his phone, listening dutifully to the sermon about Jesus’ feeding of the 5,000. “What sort of kingdom work is He asking you to do?” the pastor asked

And what does Sand see as his kingdom work? “Talking about the evils of the two-choice system and trying to break down a system that inherently divides us and leads our leaders into the temptation of being lazy, and leads our leaders into the temptation of lying, bearing false witness against their opponents, because they know that they don’t actually have to solve our problems,” he said.

“In order to get reelected, all they got to do is convince us that they’re the lesser of two evils,” Sand continued. “And they win because we only have two realistic options on the ballot — and that entire system, to me, is just such a temptation to not serve people, to not do good, to actively lie, to spread false information.”

You’d be forgiven if you forgot Sand was running as a Democrat. That, of course, is part of the point of his campaign. Sometimes to salvage the Democratic brand in a red state you have to first savage it.

Rob Sand at the Iowa Deer Classic with his buck mount

But Republicans will be sure to remind voters a few times between now and November.

“He hasn’t really had to take very many positions,” said David Kochel, a longtime Iowa Republican operative who has guided multiple presidential campaigns. ”He’s going to be forced at some point to either disavow the Democratic Party platform, which is going to piss off progressives, or he’s going to have to accept the label of being a Democrat in Iowa and defend it. And it’s gonna be hard for him to do.”

Republicans will paint some images of Sand of their own. As much as he would like to cut the figure of a rugged outdoorsman, they say, he also spent some time in college modeling in Milan and Paris — photos that may well pop up in GOP ads. “I mean, it was a part-time job I had in college,” Sand said. “Catching chickens was my first one.” Catching chickens? “Castrated male chickens,” he clarifies.

There is also the matter of his election financing: His wealthy in-laws have dumped $7 million into his campaign. “Hardworking Iowans know the value of a dollar, and don’t have the luxury of having a silver spoon feeding them their career,” Iowa Republican Chairman Jeff Kaufmann said in a statement.

Iowa Republicans are taking Sand’s candidacy seriously. In an interview, Bob Vander Plaats, the influential West Des Moines evangelical leader, called Sand “dangerous” and the “best candidate” Democrats could run.

“He’s trying to come off as a more folksy, more accomplished Tim Walz. ‘I go to church every Sunday. I hunt. I’m the taxpayers’ watchdog. I’m gonna hit all the Republican talking points, basically, that I can,’” Vander Plaats said before stressing that Sand “would be way outside of where Iowans are.”

On the Republican side, Vander Plaats endorsed Adam Steen over Rep. Randy Feenstra, the GOP establishment pick and primary frontrunner. “I just haven’t been impressed with Randy’s campaign. I don’t think he has the campaign to win a general election.”

Sand practices a judge-not-lest-ye-be-judge approach with would-be voters. When he was speaking to the man wearing a “Crossbows Are Gay” shirt, Sand didn’t bat an eye.

“I know what that shirt says, but I’m not going to assume that he literally is anti-homosexual because his T-shirt says that,” Sand said. “I’m not a believer that lecturing people is an effective way to get them to not do a thing. Now, I’m open about my support for gay marriage, for the gay community. He’s probably seen me say that. … And he’s not going to hear me back away from that. So to me, there’s probably room for someone to wear a shirt that they mean as a joke they don’t actually mean to be negative.”

Sand didn’t win the Big Buck contest he’d entered. But as he took selfies with the men who had beat him, an onlooker from Exira named Jeremy brought up a possible consolation prize.

“You’re the next governor of Iowa!” he told Sand.

As the day wrapped, the lanky state auditor pulled his buck head down off the wall and, carrying it by an antler, walked out of the convention center — its taxidermied eyes fixed in a frozen stare at Sand’s potential new voters.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Abigail Spanberger faces a national test with Virginia redistricting

Published

on

Virginia Democrats are putting pressure on Gov. Abigail Spanberger to get their redistricting campaign across the finish line as they grow increasingly worried about losing their April special election — and hurting their chances for flipping the House this November.

The aggressive effort to redraw the state’s congressional maps, if voters approve the referendum, could deliver Democrats a 10-to-1 seat advantage in Virginia, giving them four more seats than they would likely win under the current map. But despite Democrats’ having a fundraising advantage ten times that of the Republican side, the GOP is seeing strong early voting turnout.

With less than one month to go, nearly a dozen Democratic state lawmakers, strategists and candidates say Spanberger — Virginia’s popular Democratic governor who cruised to victory by double-digits last November — needs to step up more assertively to sell the referendum to voters. And they’re warning that she’ll bear the brunt of the blame if the effort fails.

It’s not that she’s doing nothing: Spanberger has endorsed the referendum and launched an ad supporting it this week, her first of the campaign, as Blue Light News first reported. But critics say it’s the bare minimum for an effort that is supposed to be a top Democratic priority as the party works to counter GOP-led states that are redrawing their own maps.

“We Democrats gotta stop bringing a spork to a knife fight. If the Democrats are putting all their stock in this, like, let’s bring our A game,” said Democrat Beth Macy, who is running for Congress in one of the five House districts currently held by the GOP. She added that it would be “helpful” for Spanberger “to be the spokesperson on redistricting because she did so well and won by so much” in 2025.

Prior to her inauguration, Spanberger, who campaigned as a moderate focused on affordability for Virginians, stopped short of fully embracing the drastic redistricting plan the Democratic-led legislature eventually approved. Once in office, she began towing the party line and signed legislation enabling the referendum to go before voters. But she hasn’t been nearly as outspoken on the issue as other leading Democrats in the state — or other Democratic governors who have pushed for gerrymanders in their states, like California Gov. Gavin Newsom.

The stakes are high for Spanberger: A loss on redistricting could impact her rising star status on the national stage.

“How could she watch what Gavin Newsom just did and do the exact opposite?” asked a Democratic activist in Virginia who has worked closely with the pro-redistricting campaign and was granted anonymity to speak candidly. “Out in the field, we really don’t know whether she is for or against this thing.”

Spanberger’s team argues she’s been fighting hard for the new map.

“There isn’t a Democrat in Virginia who has done more to encourage voters to support this referendum than Governor Spanberger,” Libby Wiet, a spokesperson for Spanberger, said in a statement. “She’s a particularly effective messenger because she’s meeting voters where many of them are — Virginians who supported the bipartisan commission in 2020 but understand that the ballgame changed when the President claimed he’s ‘entitled’ to more Republican seats in Congress, and states got to work to give them to him.”

Virginia is not nearly as deeply blue as California is, and many of the state’s Democrats view wooing voters to the polls in April, rather than November, as a gargantuan undertaking. Spanberger is also a brand-new governor with other legislative priorities she wants to spend her political juice on more than helping Democrats take control of the House. And the “yes” campaign is running the risk of turning off Virginians who in 2020 approved a constitutional amendment creating a bipartisan redistricting commission by a two-to-one margin.

Adding confusion to the Democrats’ push is the Virginia Supreme Court, which has reserved the right to potentially nullify the redistricting push after the April election.

Polling on the issue has not been a slam dunk for Democrats. Nearly two-thirds of Virginians support the current method of drawing Congressional districts, while slightly more than half said they would vote to keep the current process in place, according to a Roanoke College survey last month. A separate survey from January found a slight majority, 51 percent, supported the Democratic-backed push to redraw lines.

Spanberger’s defenders push back on the need for the governor to step in as a central figure of the “yes” campaign. It’s a collective effort, they argue, and is supported by towering Democrats in the state, including the lieutenant governor, attorney general and Democratic Sens. Tim Kaine and Mark Warner.

“There’s no one person that has to carry the weight alone,” said Kéren Charles Dongo, the campaign manager Virginia for Fair Elections, which has amassed more than $33 million in donations and is working to mobilize voters.

Virginia House Speaker Don Scott, one of the architects of the redistricting push, has vehemently rejected the comparisons of Spanberger to Newsom — and the need for her to hold more rallies or meet and greets around the state.

“She’s only been on a job freaking 70 days,” he said. “We’re gonna be fine. I feel very confident that we’re gonna win.”

The governor’s seven-figure ad buy this week featured her speaking directly to camera about her party’s “temporary” effort to redraw lines and slamming “Trump’s Redistricting War.” Dongo’s group has also been blanketing the airwaves and social media with ads, including one featuring former President Barack Obama telling Virginians they have a “chance to level the playing field” in the face of unchecked power in Washington. Those close to the campaign also note that more voting sites are opening up in Democratic strongholds in population-rich Northern Virginia, and they anticipate a surge in “yes” voters closer to Election Day.

Privately, some Democrats anticipate Spanberger will ramp up her involvement in the closing weeks of the campaign, after being tied up with reviewing the bills the Virginia legislature passed.

“I think it’s easier if there’s somebody who’s a central person,” said Sarah Pendergraph, chair of the Roanoke City Democratic Committee, who suggested a jolt from a prominent figure like Spanberger may spur more volunteers and voters into action.

Meanwhile, Virginia conservatives have been lambasting Spanberger on social media, essentially making her the face of their anti-redistricting campaign. They’ve slammed her for reversing her stance on redistricting and caving to pressure from state and national Democrats.

“Abigail Spanberger seems to be intent on trying to turn Virginia into California east, so she probably will welcome Gavin Newsom,” said Jason Miyares, the former GOP Virginia Attorney General who is serving as co-chair of Virginians for Fair Maps, which is working to defeat the ballot measure and has raised roughly $3 million.

A small group of cameras followed Spanberger as she cast her ballot last Friday and held an impromptu gaggle from the parking lot of the Richmond City Elections office, where the governor pushed back on Republican critiques that she’s a flip-flopper on the gerrymander issue.

“Had they spoken in opposition to [Trump’s] efforts, I would perhaps take their level of consternation with a bit more seriousness,” Spanberger said. “It wasn’t until their individual House seats seemed in doubt … that they decided to have any opposition to redistricting.”

That retort was insufficient for some Virginia Democrats, who were frustrated that Spanberger didn’t hit back even harder — or use the opportunity, on the heels of casting her “yes” ballot, to forcefully rebuke the misleading mailers Republican-aligned groups have circulated that suggest she is a “no” vote on redistricting.

“She is certainly not 1,000 percent on board,” said a Democratic official granted anonymity to speak candidly about how they view the governor’s involvement. The person suggested the Democratic-led “yes” campaign should work on luring other big-name surrogates to rev up excitement for the base, including Obama, Newsom, Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), to ensure the redistricting effort doesn’t fail.

“If it goes down,” the official said, “[Spanberger] is gonna own it [so she] might as well go out there.”

Continue Reading

Politics

No plan B: Trump is flailing to find an off-ramp for the Iran war

Published

on

This is an adapted excerpt from the March 24 episode of “All In with Chris Hayes.”

Donald Trump’s war on Iran is in its fourth week. Gas prices are up $1 a gallon in much of the country. Stocks continue to fall on fears of global supply shortages.

The death toll is growing. Thirteen American service members have lost their livesand more than 1,200 Iranians have been killed, along with upward of 1,000 people in Lebanonmore than 150 in the surrounding Gulf states and 17 Israelis. That’s not accounting for the millions who are displaced and the thousands who have been injured, including hundreds of U.S. troops.

But according to the president who launched the war, it’s all over.

It is becoming increasingly clear that Trump expected a fast and easy win.

“We’ve won this. This war has been won,” he told reporters Tuesday in the Oval Office. “The only one that likes to keep it going is the fake news.”

However, during those same remarks, Trump was all over the place — talking about an epic victory, ongoing peace negotiations and personal gifts.

It was all completely counter to his posture over the weekend, when he threatened to “obliterate” Iranian civilian power plants — essentially teasing a war crime — if Iran did not stop blocking oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuzsomething Iran was not doing before Trump attacked them.

But now, he has supposedly pressed pause on that bombing plan for five days because, he said, the negotiations are going well.

When he first announced that in a social media post Monday, it sent oil prices down 10% and boosted stocks.

However, those markets reversed themselves Tuesday after the Iranians said they have not engaged in any serious high-level negotiations with the Americans, and they claimed Trump was making things up to help oil prices. The Israelis said the same thing. (That’s not to say you should take Iran’s word for it, or Israel’s, but you shouldn’t take the White House’s word, either.)

It is becoming increasingly clear that Trump expected a fast and easy win. He had no plan B, and now he is flailing to find some kind of fallback position.

On Monday, sources from the administration told Politico that they have their eyes on a future U.S.-backed leader of Iran: Mohammad ⁠Bagher Ghalibaf, speaker of the Iranian parliament.

“He’s a hot option,” one unnamed U.S. source — who seems to really wants a deal — told Blue Light News. “He’s one of the highest. … But we got to test them, and we can’t rush into it.”

But on Tuesday, that “hot option” trolled Trump for what he called a “jawboning campaign” to stabilize oil prices. In a social media postGhalibaf wrote: “[L]et’s see if they can turn that into ‘actual fuel’ at the pump — or maybe even print gas molecules!”

Call it the fog of Trumpian war: a million contradictory messages flying around, constantly wildly pinging bits of news that don’t make sense together.

Right now, we have reports that Trump’s negotiators, including his envoy Steve Witkoff and Vice President JD Vance, are traveling to Pakistan for informal talks with an Iranian official.

At the same time, unnamed U.S. officials have told The New York Times that the Saudi crown prince is pushing Trump to continue the war until Iran’s government collapses — something the Saudis publicly deny.

In fact, The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Saudi officials are holding talks in Riyadh with their Arab counterparts to find a diplomatic off-ramp from the war.

On Tuesday evening, U.S. officials said the Pentagon was poised to deploy 3,000 troops of the 82nd Airborne Division to the Middle East. That is in addition to two Marine expeditionary units on their way to the region and the 50,000 U.S. troops already stationed there.

Also on Tuesday, Iranian-backed militias in Iraq are claiming that U.S. strikes there killed 30 of their members.

But, according to Trump, the peace talks are going great, right?

All eyes everywhere have been on the Strait of Hormuz, where Iran responded to the U.S. attack by striking oil tankers and shutting down 20% of the world’s supply of oil and liquefied natural gas. It is now essentially running a toll operation in the strait.

Some countries, such as China, Japan and India, are negotiating deals with Iran to get its oil out. Which is to say, Iran is shipping more oil and making more money than it was under the U.S. sanctions in place before Trump attacked it.

It’s clear the president sees what’s happening, so now he is trying to share control of the strait with Iran. Trump told reporters the strait would be “jointly controlled” by “maybe” him and “the next ayatollah.”

The administration really thought this was going to be another Venezuela. They told themselves that, and they were egged on to believe it by the staunchest advocates of the war, such as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Sen. Lindsey GrahamR-S.C.

But in Iran, a decapitation strike did not lead to mass uprisings. It did not lead to regime change. It led to the situation in which Iran’s regime is intact, even if militarily degraded, and they now have explicit control of the Strait of Hormuz — a huge pressure point.

It really looks like the U.S. is backed into a corner: It can sue for peace because of the oil tanker situation, but they do not have much leverage, or it can escalate the war. That may be why we’re seeing all these contradictory developments.

In Iran, a decapitation strike did not lead to mass uprisings. It did not lead to regime change. It led to the situation in which Iran’s regime is intact.

Trump issued an ultimatum he had to walk back from because he said there were deep peace negotiations, which then later proved to be completely fabricated.

Now, more U.S. troops are set to be deployed for a possible ground invasion in the Middle East, despite reports that the U.S. has supposedly sent a 15-point plan to Iran through Pakistan to end the war.

It almost looks as if Trump is trying to wave the peace card to keep a lid on oil futures and financial marketsjust long enough to have ground troops in position — and just in time for the markets to close for the weekend on Friday, when Trump’s “pause” on bombing Iranian power plants is set to end.

That could be the plan Trump now settles on, weeks into a deadly war where there was obviously, very clearly, no real plan at all.

Allison Detzel contributed.

Chris Hayes hosts “All In with Chris Hayes” at 8 p.m. ET Tuesday through Friday on MS NOW. He is the editor-at-large at The Nation. A former fellow at Harvard University’s Edmond J. Safra Foundation Center for Ethics, Hayes was a Bernard Schwartz Fellow at the New America Foundation. His latest book is “The Sirens’ Call: How Attention Became the World’s Most Endangered Resource” (Penguin Press).

Read More

Continue Reading

Politics

Arrington: Fraud cuts for war funding

Published

on

House Budget Committee Chair Jodey Arrington is making clear he will push for the “fraud prevention” spending cuts he wants across state and social safety net programs in order to pay for any Iran war funding in a second GOP reconciliation bill. The Texas Republican is meeting soon this afternoon with Senate Budget Committee Chair Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) in Graham’s office to discuss plans…
Read More

Continue Reading

Trending