Reynolds vs. Hubbell: An Evaluation
“each faction of the party of Order had to assert their joint rule, that is, the republican form of bourgeois rule.” — Marx, 1850
While many people in Iowa like to delude themselves into believing the state is a mostly apolitical paradise, the race for the next governorship trudges on. It is looking like the appalling Branstadian Kim Reynolds will eventually face off against the anti-charisma of millionaire centrist Fred Hubbell.
Fantastic.
If I had to choose a Democratic candidate, I would prefer the social democracy of Cathy Glasson’s platform. Unfortunately, current polling suggests Hubbell’s moneyed name has commandeered the popular discourse. Considering his wealth allowed him to proactively bombard Iowans with media much earlier than his competitors, it’s no surprise that his campaign has captured the attention of Democrat voters.
While Glasson offers a more heartening alternative to Hubbell’s technocratic candidacy, it is likely Iowans will be forced to experience the abject gubernatorial slog of a Reynolds vs. Hubbell contest. What would be more Midwestern than watching these two paragons of malaise debate about the deficit?
If Hubbell is chosen to be the nominee, I’m afraid the November election will be disappointing for anyone who does not want to be governed by a coterie of supply-side adulating autocrats. Hubbell’s present organization portends flawed electoral strategy.
The Reynolds camp has already conveyed how they will go about delegitimizing Hubbell as a candidate. Utilizing the faux-folksy American mythos of the neoconservative election handbook, Reynolds has characterized herself as a hardworking, down-to-earth Iowan while Fred Hubbell is just another Democrat city-slicker elite.
Obviously, this is ethnonational gibberish. Reynolds and her rich benefactors are equally as urbane and haughty as those in Hubbell’s inner circle, but try telling that to a Republican RV salesman in Fort Dodge. As specious as this criticism sounds, I don’t think it will be ineffective. It will surely spur the howling throngs of Iowan conservatives who will get to pretend that they are somehow confronting the imperious political class while voting for that same class. Hubbell has no meaningful response to this rhetoric of “Iowanness.” To negate Reynolds’s constructed worker image, Fred would have to exercise a class consciousness he fundamentally has no access to, because he is quite rich and very aware of it, echoing Donald Trump’s own campaign dictum that he is too wealthy to be swayed by corporations and their lobbyists.
The class interests of workers and marginalized identities are essential to any leftwing political movement. Fred Hubbell does not represent any of these stratums.
Outwardly, Hubbell and Reynolds would be opponents. In reality, they are members of unambiguously allied political classes. Hubbell is especially friendly with his Republican peers, continuously calling for bipartisanship and even donating money to “family friend” Republican State Rep. Peter Cownie. The match of Reynolds vs. Hubbell would simply be American pomp, a competition without real political struggle.
While I personally believe that Hubbell’s centrism is impotent and will be ultimately uninspiring, I admit that even his campaign’s lackluster platform offers Iowans substantially more than Reynold’s grim capitalist agenda. At least Hubbell acknowledges that maybe it’s inhumane to let people be crushed by the debt of privatized medical infrastructure. Hypothetically, if Hubbell was to actually oppose Reynolds, how could he win?
According to a study conducted by political scientists Thomas Hansford and Brad Gomez, “high turnout also has a significant anti-incumbency effect. Peripheral voters not only have weak partisan ties, but they may also be less likely to support the electoral status quo. Consequently, when the electorate expands with these voters, the incumbent party is fighting an uphill battle.”
Iowa is currently a red state. While the dominion of elephant and donkey has historically fluctuated, the rise of Trump demonstrated the contemporary weakness of state Democrats. A Hubbell victory over Reynolds would depend on ushering swathes of non-voters to the polls. This conclusion seems obvious because it is. Unfortunately for Democrats, they haven’t been able to consistently motivate their voting blocs in the last two decades, a trend that culminated with Trump’s election.
Can Hubbell provoke Iowan voters to refute Reynolds? Despite being a delegate of the rich, does Hubbell have the political acuity to convince those in the underclass to support him? We will have to observe how the race progresses. It’s plausible, but if the outcomes of 2016 taught me anything, it’s that the mainstream liberalism Hubbell subscribes to is futureless.
Work Cited:
Hansford, Thomas G., and Brad T. Gomez. “Estimating the Electoral Effects of Voter Turnout.” American Political Science Review, vol. 104, no. 2, May 2010, pp. 268–288.
