Handicapping the upcoming 3rd Congressional District Caucus

I am going to take a shot at predicting the outcome of the upcoming 3rd Congressional District caucus. Caucuses are notoriously hard to predict and candidates can influence the outcome with hard work and by “pressing the flesh.” As candidates are eliminated they often try to get their supporters to vote for a specific candidate and this can strongly influence the vote.

The way the caucus is going to work is that each candidate will appoint a person to speak for them for a maximum of two minutes and then will be able to speak for them-selves for three minutes.

Then there will be a secret ballot cast by all certified Precinct Committee persons present. I would guess that there will be about 450 people present who can vote. If one candidate receives one more than half of the votes the caucus is over and that candidate is the winner. If no winner is determined in the first ballot (and in my opinion there will not be a winner in the first ballot) then all candidates who received less than 5% of the total votes cast in the 1st round are removed from the process and the second ballot is cast.

On the second ballot if a candidate receives one more than 50% of the votes cast that candidate is the winner. If there is no winner than each candidate who receives fewer than 10% of the votes cast will be eliminated and there will be a 3rd ballot. If this provision eliminates all candidates but one then the candidate with the fewest votes will be eliminated and the process will continue.

On the third ballot if a candidate receives one more than 50% of the votes cast that candidate is the winner. On this ballot and each future ballot the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and the process continues until a candidate receives 50% of the votes cast plus one.

If 450 votes are cast (this is just a guess as to the number of votes that will be cast) then a candidate will have to receive 23 votes or more in order to move on to the second ballot. Currently the following people are expected to run:

Randy Borror
Liz Brown
Wes Culver
Greg Dickman
Ryan Elijah
Mike Foster
Rachel Grubb
Bob Morris
Lonnie Powell
Joe Schomburg
Marlin Stutzman
Bob Thomas
Richard Thonert
Phil Troyer
Dennis Wright

I would like to insert here that I know several of the above candidates and there are a lot of good candidates in this field. That being said; I think a tremendous number will be eliminated in the first ballot because I do not feel that they will be able to garner at least 5% of the votes cast. So here is my prediction based on what I know now and with the field outlined above:

I think that about eight candidates will be eliminated on the first ballot due to not getting 5% of the vote. In no particular order I think that Schomburg, Powell, Dickman, Thonert, Wright, Foster, Morris, and Grubb will be eliminated.

My prediction is the second ballot will have seven candidates advance. That being said the candidates will have to garner 10% or more of the vote to survive the second round. I believe that three candidates will likely be eliminated in the second ballot. In no particular order I think that Thomas, Troyer, and Elijah will all be eliminated in this ballot.

That leaves for my predicted third ballot only four candidates: Borror, Brown, Culver, and Stutzman. On this ballot I think that Culver will be eliminated.

On the fourth ballot I think Brown will be eliminated leaving Borror vs Stutzman. I am having a hard time predicting which of these two candidates I think will win. I truly think one of these two will win and I think they will win on a 5th ballot.

I think the 5th ballot will be extremely close and at this point I think either candidate can win. I tend to think the candidate that works the hardest between now and June 12th will win; however, I think that the endorsement of some of the candidates who are eliminated could put either candidate over the top. I think the fifth ballot will be 52% for Borror and 48% for Stutzman. I think Borror will get the votes of many of the elected officials and their families and well as the votes of many of the Allen County Republican establishment. I think Stutzman will draw the Tea Party vote, the votes of many of the younger delegates, and quite a few votes from the northern counties.

That is my prediction; what is yours?

P.S. For the record I do not know who I am going to vote for at this point. There are a lot of good candidates. I am currently leaning towards Borror, Brown, Stutzman, or Troyer.

3rd District Congressional Caucus

I attended a “meet and greet” for Randy Borror this evening.

He presented himself very well and did a good job as portraying himself as:

An effective legislator as far as job creation and improving the business environment in Indiana.
An effective leader within the Indiana Republican Legislative caucus.
A strong fundraiser.
A proven and experienced leader.
A hard working politician who would not be “out worked” in this race.

All in all I was fairly impressed with Mr. Borror this evening.

I think he will appeal to a lot of Republicans who want an experienced fundraiser and legislator.

I still have not decided who I will support at the upcoming caucus; however, I am certainly considering Randy Borror and I have to admit that before tonight I was not considering Mr. Borror.

Mike Sylvester

3rd District Caucus

I have had numerous people ask me who I will vote for in the upcoming Republican 3rd District Caucus. The truth of the matter is; I am not sure yet.

I think there may be more people who decide to run and it is hard to decide who to vote for when you do not know who all of your choices are going to be.

In an earlier post I predicted that I would get 50 pieces of direct mail and additional phone calls.

To date I have received:

A letter from Marlin Stutzman
A letter from Randy Borror
Another piece from Marlin Stutzman. This was in invitation to a cookout and then a Tin Caps Game. I plan on attending the cookout.
A letter from Matt Bell, supporting Randy Borror.
An email from Kurt and Carrie Gutman inviting me to an event with Randy Borror. I plan on attending this as well.

I also got a phone call from Marlin Stutzman over Memorial Day weekend and a second call from one of his supporters. They had my work number and so left messages since the office was closed.

Since the candidates only have a little over 500 people to market to I am certain that all of the Precinct Committee persons will get a huge amount of direct mail, email, and phone calls.

I truly believe that this is a race that only two people have a chance of winning. I truly think that the final two contestants in the Caucus will be Randy Borror and Marlin Stutzman. I do not think there is realistically any chance of anyone other than those two winning this Caucus. That being said, caucuses like this are strange events and we will know who wins on June 12th!

Mike Sylvester

Local Libertarian Opines on Rand Paul Civil Rights Controversy

Rand Paul is a libertarian (and son of Ron Paul) who easily won the recent Republican Senate primary in Kentucky. Shortly after, he became a national point of discussion due to his comments about the 1964 Civil Rights Act and how the federal government imposes on private businesses.

I asked Robert Enders, local Libertarian and blogger, for his thoughts regarding this controversy and his response is shown below. I’ve also included a clip that contains Rand Paul’s comments…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3O2rBz9gwo

(Robert Enders) I was asked about my perspective on Rand Paul’s comments on the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Frankly, I’m surprised that this is an issue. There is no movement to repeal or modify any portion of the law in question. No business is clamoring for the right to turn down paying customers on the basis of their skin color. The question of whether or not any business has such a right is academic at best in this day and age. If a businessman insists that he has such a right, he’ll have to find someone other than me to defend it because I won’t do it.

A common theme that I see in criticisms of libertarianism is critics will oversimplify the philosophy, then insist that it can be used to justify allowing toddlers to carry handguns or throwing all poor people into the street. Such arguments are reductio ad absurdum and they are wrong. Like everyone else, we recognize that freedom has its limits. Every set of political beliefs allows for a few exceptions. Environmentalists don’t advocate protecting every tree, Democrats can’t protect every job, and Republicans don’t protect every marriage. I personally will not protect a restaurant’s right to exclude my family, friends, and neighbors.

President Obama gets a pass from the press and from the anti-war movement

The New York Times has a must read article entitled “ U.S. Is Said to Expand Secret Actions in Mideast.”

I am sure many of the neo-conservatives reading this blog are ecstatic that President Obama is EXPANDING the war on terror in the Middle East.

One of the things that I thought I agreed with President Obama on was the “war on terror.” I was against invading both Iraq and Afghanistan (though I preferred the conflict in Afghanistan to the conflict in Iraq) and I think the “war on terror” is a complete waste of taxpayer dollars. The Democrats took control of Congress in the 2006 elections and President Obama was elected in the 2008 election. Democrats have been “bashing” President Bush on the “war on terror” for several years; however, since the Democrats have taken the majorities in Washington DC they have been criminallyhypocritically silent on reversing some of the bad decisions made by the Bush Administration. Lets consider a few:

1. The Patriot Act has been extended and per Freedom of Information Requests the Obama Administration is allowing the Patriot Act to be used more extensively than the Bush Administration did.

2. We currently have slightly more troops in the Middle East than we had under President Bush. We have lowered our force levels in Iraq; however, we have poured those troops into Afghanistan. All signs indicate that President Obama is taking a more active role in Pakistan using our covert forces.

3. President Obama promised to close Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Needless to say; it is still open.

4. Military spending has increased.

5. The use of private contractors and “no bid” contracts has continued. Does anyone remember when the Democrats opposed these items?

6. The NYT article I linked to has some particular disturbing items in it:

First off the NYT is publishing a synopsis of our clandestine operations in its newspapers.

Secondly per the article “The top American commander in the Middle East has ordered a broad expansion of clandestine military activity in an effort to disrupt militant groups or counter threats in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Somalia and other countries in the region, according to defense officials and military documents.”

Third per the article “While the Bush administration had approved some clandestine military activities far from designated war zones, the new order is intended to make such efforts more systematic and long term, officials said.”

We all realize that the United States (Bush and Obama) have detained supposed “enemy combatants” and stripped them of their rights and locked them up in the name of “fighting the war on terror.” Per the NYT article we would be putting our troops in foreign countries (some of which are our allies) and if they are caught they could then be persecuted using the exact same logic The United States is using since our personnel would not be wearing their uniforms. Consider: “Many in the military are also concerned that as American troops assume roles far from traditional combat, they would be at risk of being treated as spies if captured and denied the Geneva Convention protections afforded military detainees.”

The vast majority of the anti-war wing of the Democratic Party are absolute hypocrites. President Obama is pursuing policies that mirror the Bush Administration concerning the “war on terror;” in fact, in some cases President Obama has escalated “the war on terror” that he campaigned against.

Do any of you liberals want to defend President Obama and his policies on the “war on Terror?”

I thought not…

Mike Sylvester

3rd District Republican Caucus

Today I received my second piece of direct mail for the upcoming Caucus. This piece was from Marlin Stutzman. It was in the form of a letter. This was a reasonably good direct mail piece and was a positive mail piece.

So now I have received two direct mail pieces for the upcoming Caucus; I still predict I will get 50 by the time June 12th, 2010 is here.

Mike Sylvester

3rd District Congressional Caucus

The caucus to replace Mark Souder as a Republican candidate will be held in Whitley County on June 12th. Time and location to be announced.

About 520 Precinct Committee persons are eligible to vote on June 12th. The candidates can easily get the contact information for all 520 people. Based on this fact I expect to get a lot of direct mail over the next three weeks and several phone calls from prospective candidates.

I got my first piece of direct mail from a candidate yesterday. I got a piece from “Randy Borror for Congress.” It was a positive piece and I think his campaign did a reasonably good job designing this letter. It is positive and talks only about Randy Borror.

I think I will likely get at least 50 direct mail pieces from candidates between now and June 12th, 2010!

Mike Sylvester

More about Mark Souders illicit affair with his Congressional Staffer

The Associated Press is reporting that Marlin Stutzman, who today announced his intention to to run for Indiana’s 3rd Congressional Seat, said that he heard about Congressman Souder having an affair “several years ago” and the he and another staffer confronted Congressman Souder about the affair and he denied the affair.

It justs gets worse and worse.

Mike

Mark Souder is a “sanctimonius jerk”

After sifting through all of the media reports it is still hard to tell exactly what happened. As near as I can tell here is what happened:

1. Mark Souder had an affair with a part time staffer named Tracy Jackson.

2. According to the Washington Post this affair started soon after Tracy Jackson was hired in 2004. That being said the Washington Post is the only media source I have seen who is reporting when the affair started; the rest of the media reports seem to be getting the starting date from the Washington Post.

3. According to various press reports someone (or maybe multiple people) started making anonymous phone calls to the press, to County GOP organizations, to Souder staffers, and to at LEAST one of his Republican Primary opponents. It is hard to tell exactly when these anonymous calls started; however, it is clear that these anonymous tips started AT LEAST three months ago:

Steve Shine specifically said he has heard rumors about Congressman Souder having an affair for six months.
News Center 33 said they got a tip in February of 2010 and could not verify the affair. Further I heard one of their reporters tell Pat Miller on WOWO specifically that he had talked to Congressman Souder on the phone in February and Congressman Souder denied the affair. Further the reporter said that the conversation occurred in time for Congressman Souder to elect not to run in the primary. He also said that he knew other news outlets received these tips as well.
The JG reports that Monica Boyer, who is a founder of the Kosciusko County tea party group called an emergency Board meeting to discuss how the group would react if Souder resigned; they had this meeting the Friday before the Congressman resigned. Boyer said she had heard rumors for weeks.
David Long reports that he heard rumors as well.
I know of at least three local bloggers who have heard rumors; one of those local bloggers told me today that he first heard the rumors six weeks ago.

4. No one knows who discovered the affair and then tried to bring it to light. I have investigated this over the last couple of days and I am unsure who discovered the affair and tried to make the affair public. It is obvious that this person (or persons) spent a great deal of time trying to bring the affair to light; however, they were unwilling or unable to prove that the affair occurred. I cannot tell what this person’s motive was. After talking to various people I have six names of people who may have been the anonymous source. No one has provided me any proof and so I am not going to list the names of these individuals because what I have heard is just rumor and innuendo. The person could be almost anyone; however, there is a lot of speculation that the leak was a member of Souder’s own staff; however, this is just speculation and it well could be entirely off base.

5. Rumor has it that the Congressman and his mistress may have stopped the affair a few months ago; however, that does not seem certain based on the news reports that I have read. It seems likely that Congressman Souder had a long term affair with his “staffer” Tracy Jackson. How long the affair was is in doubt; however, based on the news reports it seems likely that the affair spanned several years.

6. Mark Souder finally figured out that the affair was going to be made public and so he admitted to it and resigned.

Congressman Mark Souder Resigns

You can read a copy of his resignation letter here.

In his resignation letter Congressman Souder admits to having an affair with a part time female staffer. His resignation from Congress is effective as of Friday of this week.

An interesting quote from the letter is:

I SINNED AGAINST GOD, MY WIFE AND MY FAMILY BY HAVING A MUTUAL RELATIONSHIP WITH A PART-TIME MEMBER OF MY STAFF.

Once again my heart goes out to Congressman Souder’s wife and to the “part time female staffer’s” husband.

Fort Wayne Observed has an excellent explanation of how the 3rd District Congressional Seat will be filled for the remainder of the term and how the new Republican nominee will be determined for the November election.

Mike

← Previous Page — Next Page →