2010 Senate race in Indiana
Posted by Mike Sylvester - 2/9/10 @ 7:56 pm - Filed Under 2010 National Elections, Featured, State Politics
I do not want to see either Indiana Senator re-elected when they next run for office. Neither has impressed me and both often vote in favor of programs and policies that I oppose.
Democratic Senator Evan Bayh is the incumbent Democrat that is up for re-election in 2010. I cannot imagine very many circumstances where I could possibly vote for him. He is not an effective Senator and I am highly offended that his wife; who is completely unqualified to sit on any large corporate board, currently sits on several corporate boards just because her husband is a US Senator. That is wrong on many levels and I think Indiana voters should be outraged by this.
I have yet to decide which Republican I will support in the primary; however, it is likely that I will support whichever Republican manages to win the Republican primary.
With that being said I just do not understand the media’s interest in the likely candidacy of former Senator Coates. Former Senator Coats was a reasonably good Senator, he is a reasonably conservative Republican, and he and I actually lived in the same neighborhood for several years (Walden). He lived around the corner from my parents house on Vance and lived maybe ten houses away from my family when I was enrolled in FWCS.
Senator Coats moved away from Indiana to Virginia where he has been a lobbyist for most of the last twelve years.
Why would any Indiana Republican be excited about electing a DC lobbyist to the US Senate who has not lived in this state for the last twelve years?
Seriously, are any of the readers of this blog excited about a Coates candidacy for US Senate?
If so, why are you excited?
The only reason I can think that anyone would be excited is that they think former Senator Coates could win the race…
I was excited when I thought Mike Pence might run. Mike Pence is an awesome Republican who I wholeheartedly support.
Mike Sylvester
Comments
27 Responses to “2010 Senate race in Indiana”
Leave a Reply
I always liked Coats, nice guy, did a good job as Senator.
That was then, this is now. Dan needs to remain “retired” from office.
As for the remaining Republican line up, I’m still undecided and need to do more research.
I believe Coats’ statement from 2008 may come back to haunt him and possibly rub Indiana voters the wrong way:
“If you don’t tell the good people of Indiana, Marsha and I decided that there might be a better place where some of these older bones can absorb,”
Coats said he and his wife only vacation there now, “but hope will be our first home and then I’ll be able to register and vote for your two senators and congressmen and be a North Carolinian.”
http://www.courierpress.com/news/2010/feb/06/coats-hoped-retire-nc-if-you-dont-tell-good-people/
On the plus side- Coats has name recognition.
On the negative side- he has a record. Such as: While most Republicans think that Clinton did not do enough to stop Bin Laden, Coats was one of a few Senators that questioned doing anything.
Bayh will win this one…55-45%
Marlin Stutzman questions Coats’ Washington lobbying ties, and his recent plans to become a North Carolinian:
“Stutzman told reporters in the Statehouse that Coats needs to explain work done for the government of Yemen and a company connected to Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez.”
Stutzman said, “Us good folks here in Indiana, we’ve got questions about where you’ve been and what you’ve been doing and who you’ve been relating with, with your relationships through lobbying firms and also why are you talking about moving to North Carolina in the past year and a half and now you want to come back and run for U.S. Senate?”
http://www.wishtv.com/dpp/news/indiana/coats-lobbyist-activity-under-scrutiny
Hmmm….Stutzman is standing up for himself. His boss, Souder, has pulled his endorsement and will back Coats.
Doesn’t this whole “party picking the candidate thing” remind you of Peters/Kelty?
I’m happy Coats decided to run. Coats is well respected and has name recognition. Admittedly, I know little about Stutzman or Hostetler. What I have seen from them so far hasn’t excited me.
Like it or not, Coats’ entering the race generates excitement, particularly among seasoned citizens, who vote in primaries and fondly recall the 80’s when he represented the area. Should be good for all primary candidates - a chance to hone their skills before the main event.
I don’t agree with others that the GOP’s shoving Coats down our throats–just another option. May the best candidate win.
Let me qualify what I’m about to say by saying Dan Coats seems like a nice guy and a good conservative politican. With that being said, let’s get on with it.
First, I’m not sure who these people are for whom Coats entering the race generates excitement. I was at the Republican Dinner and his speech was, well, what’s the opposite of exciting. I’m sure he is a great guy, but how can you get excited about the campaign of a 63 year old lobbyist who used to be a Senator? The only way his entry into the race could be exciting is if his opponent was a ham sandwich (without mayo - with mayo its still a toss-up on the excitement factor).
Second, Mark Souder endorsed him.
Third, he was already Senator once, and he ran terrified from Bayh. If he was terrified of Bayh the challenger, how is he going to do against Bayh the incumbent?
Finally, who can forget the Harriet Miers debacle. Coats was the one picked to shepherd her through Congress and made this famous quote:
If great intellectual powerhouse is a qualification to be a member of the court and represent the American people and the wishes of the American people and to interpret the Constitution, then I think we have a court so skewed on the intellectual side that we may not be getting representing of America as a whole.
Really? That is of course reminscent of Senator Hruska’s defense of Nixon appointee G. Harrold Carswell (”There are a lot of mediocre judges and people and laywers. They are entitled to a little representation, aren’t they?”). I guess we should appoint a big giant blowhard to the Supreme Court to represent the Knuths of the world.
I am not sure what is more ironic:
Bayh supporters accusing Coats of not being a true Hoosier, when of course Bayh grew up in Virginia and only moved to Indiana to run for Secretary of State and then Governor.
Coats running against Bayh as part of the “anti-incumbency” movement after Coats has spent the last 30 years in DC.
Take your pick.
It will be a close race thats for sure, but I do think Coats can beat Bayh given the current political landscape and Bayh’s shift to the left over the last 4 years. He is not the same politician that lived in our Gov mansion. I say Coats 50.1 to 49.9
Marlin has been working hard for over a year now. He threw his hat into the ring when no one else would consider it. It seems that it had to get easier for other folks to want to jump in. When there was hard work to be done, the other candidates were nowhere to be found. When the field has been plowed and the seeds have been sowed, these other candidates show up wanting their cut in the harvest. Not sure if I like that at all and not sure if anyone else should like that. Having said that I understand that Pragmatism reigns supreme and the do whatever it takes mentality is so ingrained in politics that principle has been thrown into the deep depths of the ocean to never be remembered again.
I’m not sure that Stutzman’s showing up at the Kendallville library and attending a couple pancake breakfasts made it any easier for Coats to get in the race. If Stutzman did all this work, you would think it would be harder for Coats to get in.
Coats has name recognition, that is all now. I “assume” when campaigning against Coats democrats will associate him with Reagan/Bush as they always do.
As the election gets closer Bayh will move center and bring up his “financial conservatism as governor” like he has previously.
Bayh wins 50.5 to 49.5
I saw Dick Morris talking about seats democrats might lose and he didn’t even mention Bayh in Indiana. I assume Democrats think its locked up. Now that republicans have some infighting going on it could be.
If Bayh gets beat 2010 is/could be his most vulnerable time. I’d love to see it but would be shocked if it happens.
Coats has more than name rec. He also has “youth”. I think Coats should emphasise his youth during the campaign. At 66, he is a relative young whipper snapper in a day when most of these guys retire either in a box or slobbering down their wheel chair arm rest.
Gee - do ya think the recent Supreme Court decision buddying up with corporate America had anything to do with Coats crawling out of the woodwork? Seems pretty coincidental that now that corporate America is unleashed to contribute, Coats decides to throw his hat into the ring.
If I were the other Republican candidates, I would be furious with Coats and his opportunistic grab for the senate seat. He needs to stay in North Carolina and complete his plans to live there and vote for their senators and congress people. Since the “good people” of Indiana already know about it, looks like he is too late on that one.
It will be interesting to see how Republicans handle his candidacy. Will they go with what they think is a chance to take the senate seat back despite Coats absence from Indiana and his lobbying and his status as a Washington insider? Or will Republicans actually reject him for those things that Republicans keep railing against and for which they slam Democrats?
As to Souder?? True to his colors, he is going with the flow. He puts his finger up, decides which way the wind blows, and then takes a position.
Charlotte- I am speechless - with my agreement with you on these two guys: Coats retired saying it was due to his belief in term-limits - so now he is going back on that? Sounds like Souder - Mark also was all for term limits UNTIL he reached what he said they should be!
And, by the way, it has been one year (Feb. 10, 2009)since you posted on your website, “An articulate, intelligent, and reasoned President”. You stated in regard to Republicans, “They are backed into a corner. They no longer control anything, let alone their futures. If they continue to oppose Obama, they run the risk of losing even more seats in 2010 - especially if Obama’s stimulus plan salvages this nation …..(from Bush who was not)…. paying attention to his own constituency”
I promised you back then I would follow up in one year and in 18 months to see how Obama’s plans were doing, and here it is:
1) Per the referenced SCOTUS decision, our country is returning to the 1st amendment free speech controls!
2)The stock market has a long way to go to get back to the 11,517 DOW on September 2, 2008 - Today it is running about 10,100 - still 417 point below what it was at the time of Obama’s election.
3) At Obama’s inauguration, the unemployment rate was 8.2%. Now it stands at 9.7% and we lost another 20,000 jobs in January. The “underemployed rate” is now at 16.5% (counting those no longer looking because of discouragement)
4) None of Obama’s key plans have happened yet:
a) We still are in Iraq
b) We are deeper into Afganistan
c) Chicago lost out on the Summer Olympics
d) The world has vetoed the “carbon-foot- print taxes” he proposed in Stockholm
e) The Federal Government “take-over” of our
health care system looks to be dead
f) His party has lost a Senate seat in
a state that had held it almost forever
g) Many office-holders in his party are
jumping ship - today including Evan Bayh !!
5) The outlook for November 2010 is that Obama’s party is going down to a very large defeat!
6) When Obama took office, our National Debt was $10.63 trillion - it now stands at over $12.35 trillion!
7) George W. Bush started his second term in January, 2005, the debt was $7.63 trillion - one year later it had risen to $ 8.2 trillion - an increase of $0.57 trillion. After one year of Obama, our debt has risen over $1.7 trillion !
So, I guess I would have to say:
“I TOLD YOU SO !!! And we will follow up in 6 months, as promised.
Now Bayh’s gone, this is going to get interesting.
AWB…ohhhhhhhhhhhh yeah, it’ll get real interesting, and not just for us hoosiers. This puts an enormous “twist” in the Dems national strategy.
John - yee gads - we agree on Coats and Souder.
Am I pleased with the way things have gone? Not for the most part. I opposed and still oppose our involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq. I still think Obama will come out of this a better president than people are willing to give him credit for.
As to the SCOTUS decision, go back and research corporations as people. Our Founders and the citizens distrusted corporations to the max. After all, it was corporations (or their equivelent) that owned many of the charters of the first colonies.
Corporations are not people, and they should not have the same free speech rights as people. I am not sure I quite understand your statement that the decision is returning us to “free speech controls.”
Free speech has never been absolute - there have been areas that have been controlled.
And, Bayh - of course he is stepping down because he is a coward. Any politician who alleges that there is so much partisanship that he or she just can’t take it obviously doesn’t have much of a grasp of the enormous amount of partisanship that has existed since the birth of this country.
If people think there is rancor and devisiveness in today’s political scene, then take some time and review our history of the founding of this country. I just finished reading “Founding Brothers” and watched a three-hour documentary about Thonmas Jefferson. Talk about partisanship!!
At least we have moved past having duels to settle disagreements.
John- by the way, in today’s political unrest and climate, you might say “I told you so” today and in the next year have to eat those words.
I will wager you that if the Repubs take over Congress this year, they will do no better than the Democrats at this point. After all, Republicans had control for a number of years unbder Bush and got booted.
At best, Barry is serving Carter’s second term. That’s the best he can hope for. According to my calculations, there’s a 10% chance he’ll go down as the worst president in history.
Keith:
Just curious - how do you come up with a calculation as to how a president will be judged? The first year with 75% left to be served? At the end of his term (which is another three years)? Or just a gut feeling?
Thanks.
Charlotte, I’m not sure what formula Keith uses to determine how a president will be judged, but I use history and comparisons. The similarities in Carters admin and this one are undeniable. Granted, he has 3 years left, but that’s not a lot of time.
Your remark above regarding Republicans doing no better if elected because “Republicans had control for a number of years unbder Bush and got booted.” is correct in the sense that Americans were fed up and switched their votes and allegiance to what was sold as “THE MOST ETHICAL CONGRESS EVER”, and we all see how that worked out. If Republicans win back the House & Senate and go back to their previous “drunken sailor” behavior, they’ll get booted again, and what will be interesting is (if that happens) is whether or not a viable third party will really take off.
Tim:
One thing that I have been trying to figure out is how an individual gets elected without financial backing. Once the contributions start rolling in, the candidate begins to become beholden to various interest groups, businesses, you name it.
Third party candidates will be no different - especially if a Third Party candidate wants to get elected. It really is too bad that candidates need thousands, hundreds of thousands, and millions of dollars to run and feel the need to kowtow to those contributors once elected.
Charlotte
Its my own thumbnail formula based upon a number of factors such as approval ratings, legislation passed, interim elections, increase in spending versus change in revenue, etc. (Before you accuse me of bias, Bush II is the worst two term president in history).
You are correct that he has 75% of his time left and that works in his favor and why it is only 10%. If he had to be ranked today, I don’t think there’s much dispute he would be the worst president in history.
I agree with Tim that there are a lot of similarities between Obama and the Carter Presidency, but there are also a lot of similarities between Obama and the first years of the Clinton Presidency.
Clinton’s presidency was saved and he will go down as an above average president, ironically, because he is such a spineless worm. Remember Hillary’s nationwide bus tour on healthcare? Bill pulled the plug on that at the first sign of trouble. Gays in the military? Bill did a 180. Clinton criticized Bush’s policy of intercepting and returning Haiti refugees and then once elected adopted the same policy. Even with all this backpedaling, the Republicans took both the House and the Senate and Bill was effectively restrained and even did some good things like welfare reform and a crime bill.
What Obama doesn’t seem to get is that over the last 30 years it is a bedrock principle of politics that you gain approval and effectiveness by moving/staying right and lose approval and effectiveness by moving/staying left. Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton understood this, Carter, Bush I and II did not.
It will be interesting to see if Obama gets it.
Charlotte - Keith is correct, Clinton at least did not continue to pursue ideas about governing that ran counter to what the voters felt strongly about on a topic - and if he had kept his zipper up, would be remembered as a very astute president. Obama is a “loose cannon” who is about to sink the ship of state unless he can be bolted-down to the deck - and soon!
And yet Ronald Reagan had LOWER approval ratings than Obama….so maybe you are all puttng the cart before the horse…..
I know Ronald Reagan, Ronald Reagan’s a friend of mine, and Barack Obama, you’re no Ronald Reagan.
Im sick of the greedy politions bullying and throwing all of us poor people under the bus so why not make a change do a write in for Carl Miller of noblesville for senete i wont let you guys down.
if you have questions about my views or issies feel free to email me.
fyi im 31 year old male
us citizen
and i will fight to get things done.unlock those who take bribes i will not.
its time to make a Change
Write in Carl Miller Noblesville IN 46062 for Senete and make a change for a better future.