A new Rasmussen Reports poll measures Grassley’s support at 56 percent against Democratic candidate Bob Krause, who earned 30 percent in the poll. Krause is a virtual unknown, and he will have to win a primary before he even faces off against Grassley.

U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley (Photo: Lauren Victoria Burke/WDCPIX.com)

Sure, Grassley is still polling above 50 percentage points, and that’s never a really bad place to be, but Grassley won with a significantly higher percentage of actual votes in 2004. That his support has sunk this low without an opponent that most people have even heard of is pretty surprising.

Rasmussen’s numbers mirror the approval/disapproval numbers measured by the Des Moines Register’s poll last week.

At FiveThirtyEight.com, Nate Silver graphed all of Grassley’s approval numbers from the Register’s polls dating back to January 2003, and the trend lines are bad news for Iowa’s senior senator. Since January of this year alone, Grassley’s approval rating has dropped 18 percentage points, and his disapproval rating has increased by the same amount.

Last December, a Research 2000 poll found that in a head-to-head matchup against former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack, who had not yet been named U.S. Secretary of Agriculture, Grassley was only ahead by four percentage points. Given his slide in the polls since then, it stands to reason that a high-profile challenger like Vilsack would actually defeat Grassley in a poll taken today.

Whether Grassley is truly in trouble remains to be seen, but his numbers are not headed in the right direction. Against a candidate with any name recognition at all, he could be in for a fight in 2010 unlike any he’s seen since winning his senate seat in 1980.

Reed appears to be holing the Republican base vote, despite dissent in GOP ranks and a lack of support from the state party, simply by being Not Tom Harkin. He performed nearly as well as Republican presidential nominee John McCain, who had 44 percent in the same survey to Barack Obama’s 52 percent.

The poll was conducted Thursday, the same day Reed called Harkin the “Tokyo Rose of al Qaeda and Middle East terrorism” in a debate. Rasmussen’s previous poll, a month earlier, showed a similar margin, with Harkin leading Reed 54 persent to 40.

In other findings, Rasmussen found Governor Chet Culver, not on the ballot until 2010, with good or excellent marks from 45 percent of Iowa voters, while 22 percent rate the governor’s performance as poor.

“If they show up in record numbers, they will decidedly tip the scale toward an Obama victory,” said David Redlawsk, the University of Iowa political scientist who directed the poll. “But if they fail to turn out, the final result is likely to be very close.”

The national poll, conducted Oct. 5-18, showed registered voters 35 or younger favoring Obama by a 26-point margin over John McCain. Voters over 70 favored McCain by five percent, and voters age 36 to 54 supported Obama by five percent.

However, less than 40 percent of younger voters are paying close attention to the election. “This suggests they’re less engaged,” said Redlawsk, “and perhaps less likely to turn out, because those who pay attention are more likely to vote.” Voter attention increases with age, with over 70 percent of the 70-plus voters paying close attention.

“By historical standards, the level of interest is extremely high across all ages,” said Redlawsk.

Another difference for younger voters is that they are the only group that uses the Internet as their primary news source. All older age groups rely more on television.

Perhaps as a result, the youngest voters were less tuned in to some of the controversies that have dominated television. Only 23 percent of young voters were aware of ’60s radical Bill Ayers, to whom the McCain camp has tried to link Obama, compared to 38 to 47 percent of older voters. But, more than 81 percent of younger voters had followed polls closely, which was right in line with the 79 to 87 percent of other age groups.

“Younger voters haven’t paid as much attention to the issues and personalities central to the campaigns as older voters have,” Redlawsk said. “Still, they’re just as curious to know which candidate is ahead as any other voter is.”

The Des Moines Register’s venerable Iowa Poll, conducted in the week following the Republican convention by Ann Selzer, found that 52 percent of likely voters in Iowa supported Sen. Barack Obama, the Democrat, and 40 percent supported Republican Sen. John McCain. The margin of error was four percentage points, putting Obama ahead by a statistically significant margin.

A Pollster.com average of polls shows a widening lead for Sen. Barack Obama in Iowa.

The Big Ten Network and the University of Wisconsin released a poll last week showing a 45-45 percent tie at the presidential level in Iowa. But the poll also indicated that a very large percentage of Iowans — more than three fourths — believe the nation is on the wrong track, even though a majority — 57.1 percent — believe Iowa’s Democrat-led state government is on the right track. A plurality of Iowans believed that Obama “shares my values,” and President George W. Bush is viewed “very” or “somewhat” unfavorably by 62.7 percent.

And a Sioux City Journal poll, released over the weekend and conducted about the same time as the Big Ten Network’s poll, showed Obama with a 53-39 percent lead over McCain. Obama led among men, women, and independents, who preferred him by an even wider margin than the general sample of likely voters.

If campaign spokespeople on both sides are to be believed, Iowa is still a hotly contested swing state. Republican insider Doug Gross told the Sioux City Journal, “Iowa’s still very much in play and will continue to be in play and is neck and neck.” Obama State Director Jackie Norris said “we are taking absolutely nothing for granted.” And in an interview last month with the Iowa Independent, McCain’s midwest campaign director, Gentry Collins, said, “In Iowa, we’re making a very large investment.”

But campaign spokespeople always say that. A look at the numbers tells a slightly different story.

Although the Big Ten Network’s poll, which pegged the race for Iowa’s seven electoral votes as a dead heat, caused Democrats some concern when it was released, most fears have calmed after the Sioux City Journal’s poll confirmed the results of the Register’s Iowa Poll, giving Obama a double-digit lead.

And regardless of the so-called “top-line” results of the three polls, the more specific questions about whether the country is on the right track, what the most important election issues are, and which candidate “shares my values” are almost universally encouraging. Even before the high-profile economic meltdown of the past two weeks, the Register’s Iowa Poll said that voters here consider the economy their top voting issue, and that Obama is seen as most capable of handling it. The Sioux City Journal’s poll confirmed this result. The Big Ten Network’s poll indicated that Iowans oppose the direction of the federal government but support the direction of state government.

In all, it appears Obama is headed to a fairly comfortable victory in the Hawkeye state, but Democrats still have reasons for worry.  Here are a few potential X-factors:

Down-ticket drop-off?

One big question is whether Obama’s tidal wave of new supporters — brought into the Democratic party in large part by his successful Iowa caucus campaign — will choose to vote in state and local races at all. In general, most Democrats can be trusted to vote “straight ticket,” but with a candidate known for so-called “post-partisanship,” the question may be more relevant this year.

Add to that the fact that Obama’s ground game is not associated with the traditional “coordinated campaign,” which Democrats traditionally use to pool the resources of all candidates on the ballot to form one big field operation, and this factor becomes a cause for concern.

Will turnout surge?

Another open question is turnout, which surged during the the caucuses earlier this year, propelling Obama to victory. Many believe that for Obama to succeed in November, turnout must surge again.

But turnout tends to increase most when races are competitive. In Iowa, Sen. Tom Harkin and four of Iowa’s five congressmen are likely to cruise to victory with comfortable, double-digit margins. That means that GOTV efforts will fall squarely on the Obama campaign’s shoulders. Incumbents will certainly spend some of their resources campaigning and turning out supporters, but it will not be close to what Iowa saw in 2006, because, by and large, the state’s federal incumbents are feeling safe.

Local politics in the mix

It remains to be seen how local and state-based political issues might shape the decisions Iowa voters make this November.

In Cedar Rapids and Iowa City, where Democrats traditionally run up large margins that help carry them to victory in statewide races, flood recovery weighs heavily on voters’ minds. While so far the issue does not appear to significantly benefit either Democrats or Republicans, there is a chance that further inaction on recovery funding will begin to make a dent in state and federal Democrats’ approval ratings.

Across the state, social conservatives have attempted to rally the Republican base behind efforts to amend the Iowa constitution to ban same-sex marriage. But in worsening economic times, when the nation is engaged in two wars, the issue seems to be resonating less than it did in 2004 and 2006. That could all change if the Iowa Supreme Court acts before election day to uphold the Polk County court decision that overturned the state’s Defense of Marriage Act.

And, in the increasingly unlikely event that the governor calls a special session of the state legislature to appropriate funds to flood recovery, the anti-gay marriage groups could again protest outside the capitol, gaining valuable press coverage even in the absence of a supreme court ruling.

But the local issues that could play out here between now and November might not all work against the Democrats. When it comes to agricultural interests, at least, Iowans may be more likely to rally behind Obama. McCain, who opposed the last two farm bills and wants to cut farm subsidies from the federal budget, is not likely to have the full force of the powerful Farm Bureau, which the GOP can usually depend on in presidential races, behind his campaign. Agricultural interest groups seem to be breaking from past tradition and either endorsing Obama, a Democrat who hails from an agricultural state himself, or declining to endorse either candidate.

So, while conditions here appear to favor Democrats at all levels of government, one September or October surprise could still call Iowa’s seven electoral votes into question.

The poll, conducted Sept. 8 through 10 after both parties’ conventions, also included Libertarian Bob Barr, at 2 percent, and Ralph Nader at 1 percent, and has a 4 percent margin of error.

In the U.S. Senate race, incumbent Tom Harkin leads Republican challenger Christopher Reed, 53 percent to 34 percent.

Other key findings in the Register article:

• Independents prefer Obama to McCain, 49 percent to 36 percent.
• Voters under 35 prefer Obama by two to one.
• Obama leads among women, 53 percent to 39 percent for McCain.
• Republicans are more satisfied with McCain’s running mate, Sarah Palin, than Democrats are with Joe Biden, Obama’s vice presidential pick.
• President Bush’s approval rating with Iowans is at an abysmal 25 percent, with 71 percent disapproving.
• Senator Chuck Grassley remains popular with Iowans, at 69 percent approval.

The rollout of Iowa Poll presidential results usually signals a weeklong series of Register stories featuring polls on other races and issues.

“The race in Iowa, while relatively close, appears to be moving in Obama’s direction,” said University of Iowa professor David Redlawsk, the Hawkeye Poll director.

Demographic breakdowns show Obama leading McCain among all groups except senior citizens, though Obama’s lead with men is less than one percent and within the margin of error.

Both major party candidates seem to have solidified their party bases in Iowa, but Democrats have more confidence that their candidate will win. Three-quarters of Obama supporters think he will win, as opposed to only half of McCain’s backers who expect a Republican win. “Confidence in your candidate is another motivator to actually get out and vote,” Redlawsk said. “When you believe you will win, it’s all the more reason to show up at the polls. When you think you will lose, it’s easier to not bother.”

Other key findings in the poll:

• Obama leads among women by nearly 13 percent. That’s been harder for him in some states, where disappointed Hillary Clinton supporters still aren’t on board.
• Obama’s strongest lead is among young voters under 30, where he has a 62-35 percent edge over McCain.
• Over a third of respondents think Obama’s race could make it more difficult for him to win support. “We can’t directly ask voters if they are unwilling to vote for someone because of race,” said Redlawsk, “but we can ask what they think others will do. It seems clear, though, that race is a factor, even if it’s hard to quantify.”
• It’s lower than the national average, but 8 percent of respondents still identified Obama as Muslim.

Despite Obama’s lead, the state is no sure thing for the Democrats this fall. “It’s very clear that voters who continue to support George Bush will vote for John McCain,” Redlawsk said. “Not only is this a simple continuation of partisan support, but McCain is clearly associated with supporting much of the Bush agenda, and voters recognize the connection.”

“The challenge for Obama lies with independents who disapprove of Bush,” said Redlawsk. “While McCain has the support of more than 8 in 10 Bush supporters, Obama is only picking up 6 in 10 of those who disapprove of Bush. This gap is allowing McCain to claim a plurality of all independent voters at this time.”

The Johnson County Auditor’s office started running the mock vote in 1999, and has only missed one year since. If the patterns of the past hold, the mock results indicate a good year for Democrats.

Barack Obama’s 66.5 percent at the fair was well ahead of John Kerry’s 56.5 percent in 2004. Granted, this is the heavily Democratic People’s Republic of Johnson County. But comparing results from past July mock votes to the final November tally shows that the fair crowd leans a bit more rural and Republican than the county as a whole. Kerry improved to 64.1 percent in Johnson County in the fall, but that big Johnson County margin wasn’t enough to make up the deficit for Kerry elsewhere in Iowa as George Bush carried the state.

Just as notable as the Democratic gain was Republican slippage at the fair this year, as John McCain managed only 26 percent. Bush’s totals at the fair, and in the real election, were stable between 2000 and 2004 in Johnson County, with Bush taking about 42 percent in the mock election and 34 percent in the real election both times, with the difference in Democratic margins being due to shifts in third party totals.

Third party votes have been bigger at the fair than in the fall, for a couple reasons. Any poll is a snapshot in time, and historically, third parties have lost support as election day gets closer. And since the mock vote doesn’t really count, it’s easier to get a protest vote out of your system at the fair.

Yet the county fair was an early indicator in 2004 that the Ralph Nader vote had largely collapsed. Nader took 8 percent of the fair vote in 2000, on his way to 6 percent in Johnson County in the real election. But in 2004, Nader slipped to less than 1 percent at the fair, and was down to 0.5 percent in the real vote. This year, Nader was at 1.7 percent at the fair.

In some sense, the third party tallies at the fair can be considered a none of the above or undecided vote. County fairs, even in Iowa City, are not known as hotbeds of Marxism, so how else to explain the 7 percent that the Socialist Workers candidate for U.S. Senate, Diana Newberry, picked up? That closely matches the 8.5 percent that independent moderate Brian White got in the U.S. House race, and the 7 percent for all the third party presidential candidates together.

The Senate race indicates smooth sailing for Tom Harkin, who won the fair with 68.5 percent to Republican Christopher Reed’s 25 percent. That’s better than Harkin did in 2002, when he won 60.5 percent at the air on the way to 65 percent in the real election. The Greens lost two-thirds of their Senate vote between the fair and the fall in 2002, and the math indicates that it shifted to Harkin. The fair exactly predicted Greg Ganske’s 32 percent of the fall vote.

The fair predicted bad news for Democrats in the 2002 2^nd District congressional race, when highly touted challenger Julie Thomas lost to Jim Leach even as Harkin and Tom Vilsack were winning their mock contests. The 51 percent to 45 percent margin was within two percent off the real election result in the county.

But this year, Dave Loebsack ran about even with Obama and Harkin, at 65 percent to 27 percent for Republican Mariannette Miller-Meeks and the aforementioned 8.5 percent for White. (2006 was the one year the auditor’s office missed the fair, making the mock election just one more source that didn’t see Loebsack’s win coming.)

Supporters of a local conservation bond referendum got good news at the fair. The bond will need a 60 percent supermajority to pass, and it carried the fair with 76 percent. But one in eight skipped the measure. Bond supporters are pushing the phrase “turn the ballot over” to remind voters not to forget the $20 million measure.

And, in what may be the only poll of any sort between now and November on the “Idiot Amendment,” fair voters overwhemlingly supported changing the language of the Iowa Constitution from the 19^th century term to the more politically correct “mentally incompetent.”

Other mock elections involving children, like the Kids Vote program in schools, show a pattern of younger children following the lead so parents, so maybe that doesn’t invalidate the numbers as much as one would think. The Secretary of State will also be running a student mock election on October 30. Last winter, the Secretary of State’s mock caucus program for students correctly predicted the finishing order of Obama-Edwards-Clinton on the Democratic side and Huckabee-Romney for the Republicans, though Obama’s margin with the students was well above his actual caucus result.

“We think the critics are missing what we are doing,” Redlawsk told Iowa Independent, “but we think that’s mostly our fault. at some point I said — and I think it is in the press release this way too — that Edwards supporters are more likely to caucus than Obama’s.”

The poll (complete results) showed a close race on the Democratic side, with Hillary Clinton at 29 percent, Barack Obama at 27 percent and John Edwards at 20 percent.  The Republican results showed a strong lead for Mitt Romney at 36 percent, with  Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee at 13 percent and Fred Thompson at 11 percent.

Redlawsk explained the poll’s three-step screen of likely caucus goers.  “First, we ask people if they caucused in 2000 or 2004. Technically this isn’t done as a screen, but it allows us to understand the real likelihood of folks caucusing this time around, since probably the best predictor of caucusing is having done it before.

“Second, we ask people to indicate their likelihood of caucusing this time on a 4 point scale, very, somewhat, not very, and not at all,” Redlawsk continued.  “We drop the not at alls completely – they’re done. We then ask the remaining three levels — 1’s, 2’s, and 3’s — which party they plan to caucus for. Anyone saying ‘don’t know’ or some party other than Republican or Democratic is also dropped — if they can’t name the party, they’re probably not caucusing.”

Redlawsk said at that point the 1’s and 2’s are considered “likely” caucus goers, and the 3’s are “potntial” caucus goers.

“Edwards’ supporters are more likely to be 1’s — in the VERY category, while Obama has more 2’s,” he said

The poll did not look at the possible impact of different caucus dates.  “At the time we were in the field, the Republicans had set Jan. 3 and the Democrats had not yet moved,” said Redlawsk.  “We simply did not have time to query the Democrats on different date options, since the survey was already too long.  And frankly, I assumed the Democrats would end up on the 3rd in any case.”

Plenty of people say they are still “somewhat likely” to change their mind but fewer than 10% said they are very likely to do so, said Redlawsk. “Republicans though are noticeably less firm than Democrats.”

Drawing from sources around the state, the exhibit features a large collection of famous and not-so-famous photographs, campaign buttons, and video and film clips.  Visitors will meet a cast of “caucus characters” who will be familiar to anyone who has ever caucused or tried to shake hands with a visiting presidential wanna-be including: reporters, video bloggers, campaign staff, precinct captains, county chairs, politician’s families, photographers, voters, and caucus organizers.

Video available below the fold.The State Historical Museum’s Mark Holub managed the production of “Caucus Iowa.”  In this 3 minute video, he talks about some of the specifics of the exhibit.

Walking through the 10,000 square foot exhibit, look for a campaign button collection found in the area for “retail politics” at a make-believe coffee shop. 

The differences between Republican and Democratic caucus procedures are demonstrated when you shake the fake snow from your boots, step across the front porch of a host house and enter a living room that serves as a Republican caucus center.  In this space a first-time caucus goer appears poised to ask questions while a precinct captain watches over the proceedings.

The Democratic caucus is held in a school gymnasium where one display gives details behind the mathematics of Democratic caucus procedures.

Other areas include a media room with print and broadcast sections, a candidate portrait gallery, and a historical area telling some of the key stories behind each caucus held since 1972, when Iowa became “first-in-the-nation.”

Exhibit designers have taken care to include interactive elements like touch-screen voting stations for voicing opinions on issues like abortion and the Iraq War.  As you leave the hall a final touch-screen has a straw poll voting station with all the candidates.  In deference to the Democratic party, which disallows publication of a straw poll vote, the results will be available after January 2007.

The museum has planned many family-friendly events, including a Ben and Jerry’s ice-cream event Oct. 17 about the non-profit organization, Priorities Action Fund, and “Caucus! The Musical,” which opens in December.

More information about “Caucus Iowa” can be found at http://www.iowahisto…

“Republicans appear to be punishing both Giuliani and McCain for their unwillingness to compete in the Aug. 11 Straw Poll,” said political science professor David Redlawsk in a press release announcing the results.  Complete results here.

"For Giuliani I don’t think the game’s over, though he has dropped a lot and is well behind Romney," Redlawsk told Iowa Independent. "For McCain it is a different story — I am fairly confident he’s done in Iowa.  Iowa Republicans never really liked him very much, and now they have more reason to go elsewhere. But for any Republican who isn’t Romney, it is currently an uphill road."

Redlawsk

"While good-old Don’t Know remains the leader by quite a lot, Romney is working on developing a sense of inevitability," said Redlawsk.  "If he manages to take the straw poll by a large enough margin, he’ll make himself even stronger. However, there is still a long time to go and a lot of uncommitted caucus goers — the race is not settled by any means." 

Several candidates are on the bubble of survival, and Saturday’s straw poll may eliminate some.  Redlawsk says the most likely victim is former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.  "I think Huckabee is out" after the straw poll, he said.  "While we see some support for (Kansas Sen. Sam) Brownback and for (Colorado Congressman Tom) Tancredo among caucus goers, we get close to no mentions of Huckabee at all." 

Former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson, who has not yet officially entered the race, showed 5 percent support from Iowa Republicans.  That puts him third among Republican candidates, but trailing undecided and Obama.  "I think a few folks are looking forward to Fred Thompson’s entry — and some of them may currently be in the ‘don’t know’ group," said Redlawsk. "Historically he has not been a dynamic campaigner, he’ll be getting in late, and he hasn’t yet developed a compelling message. But our polling does show that Republicans are willing — and some are anxious — to consider alternatives to the existing slate." 

While Texas Rep. Ron Paul runs away with most self-selected, unscientific polls, Redlawsk’s research shows Paul with 2.4 percent support.  Redlawsk called Paul’s support very small and very intense.  "Paul is the Republican’s Kucinich," he said.

"I can’t see him ever getting out of the race, but in the end he won’t draw more than a relatively small fringe." said Redlawsk.  "Republican caucus goers are not that interested in driving off a cliff.  Electability still matters, which is why Romney, who is seen by Republicans as pretty electable, is getting so much traction even among conservative Republicans."

On the Democratic side, Clinton leads with 30 percent, followed by Don’t Know at 23 percent, Obama with 20 percent, and former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards at 16 percent.  The margin of error was 4.6 percent for Democrats and 5.2 percent for Republicans.