« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Indiana GOP Pushing Back on Dan Coats

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  February 13th, 2010 at 01:13 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

This is an interesting article in the Politico today about the push back the Indiana GOP is giving the NRSC for anointing former Senator Dan Coats as the presumptive GOP nominee against Evan Bayh.

Folks in Indiana aren’t pleased, inside or outside the party.

One day after Coats announced his interest in the race, a Huntington, Indiana, Tea Party group circulated an e-mail with the subject line, “NO to RNC/Coats for force feeding us this crap sandwich,” while Emery McClendon, a Tea Party organizer, has distributed an e-mail to activists declaring that the push for a Coats candidacy “is the Republican Party’s way of slapping we the people in the face…”

….

For Indiana Republican Party leaders, who are aware of fierce anti-establishment backlash from grassroots conservatives in states like Florida and Kentucky over NRSC involvement in contested primaries, the early warning flares from grassroots conservatives have not gone unnoticed.

After Knochel’s e-mail to Bopp last week, state party officials on the message chain traded e-mails expressing concern over the grassroots unrest, according to copies of the emails provided to POLITICO.

“They view it as Washington insiders disregarding the ‘voice of the people,’” Pete Miller, a state committee member, wrote in one note.

For my part, I decided last night I’m going to go with State Senator Marlin Stutzman. He need new, young, conservatives in Washington — fresh faces, fresh voices, and fresh ideas based on time tested principles. Marlin Stutzman fits the bill. I’m going to send him some money today.

Tags: ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • youthgrunt

    to say that it is the Indiana GOP pushing back. As best as I can tell it is the Stutzman campaign that is pushing back. They and their surrogates are making a lot of noise.

    I am still undecided in this race. Quite frankly I was leaning toward Stutzman, but his reactions to Coats joining the race indicate to me that he will run a very amateurish and ineffective campaign.

  • itsjoanne

    Any chance of Jim DeMint endorsing him I wonder?

  • toughintn

    n/t

  • gekster

    From Project Vote Smart::
    His voting record in the IN senate.

    http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=3423

  • Aaron Gardner

    You dropped the trailing “0″

    http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=34230

  • hoosierstate

    I’ve heard thru the grapevine that a DeMint endorsement is in the works but these things take time and there is no guarantee it will ever come. Regarding the Stutzman camp pushing back … They tell me he’s been campaign now for 16 months, what would you expect from a competitive campaign, Personally I see no problem in Stutzman fighting this, in fact it shows he has backbone and fire in the belly. If Coats is the best man for the job then he’ll get the required signatures and will win the May 4th primary. But I understand why so many Hoosiers are against NRSC hand picking a candidate to represent them. They tried with Pence but he didn’t accept. A Pence candidacy would have cleared the field. A Coats candidacy only angers the people and makes Stutzman look like the best candidate to match up against Bayh in the fall. Voter frustration is against DC Insiders and Coats definitely fits that bill.

  • http://www.downstateiladvocate.com anacreon

    We had the same problem over here during our primary. We had an anointed one foisted upon us as well. Although there is no known cure for the Illinois political disease; there are promising signs elsewhere around the country that we hope we can apply here as well. Good luck to you in Indiana, you have a long hard road ahead of you.

  • proudgop

    Hasn’t he been in the race for over 4 months and has raised less then 100,000 and only has 20,000 COH?

  • RedBeard

    With any luck, the day of the D.C. insiders picking candidates to represent the sovereign states is coming to an end.

    And on a related tangent, the law of unintended consequences was put into play as soon as the 17th Amendment was ratified. What seems a good and fair idea at the time has helped erode states’ rights in the time since. The direct election of senators has decidedly altered the intended function of the Senate, and rendered it only a smaller, more elite version of the House.

  • redtillimdead

    He’s been in the race since summer. Erick, no matter what, in any state, is a candidate who is raising $16,000 a month going to beat an incumbent with over 13,000,000 on hand. PERIOD. I’m sure this endorsement has nothing to do with issues either. If the NRSC had been working with Marlin Stutzman, you’d endorse Dan Coats. Its getting a little annoying to see all these knee-jerk endorsements of candidates without any knowledge of all the candidates values, campaign operation, and strength.

  • RedBeard
  • gekster
  • ktsub

    redtillimdead, also, if the NRSC did not find a candidate, everyone would be demanding…why doesnt the NRSC work to find a big-name candidate in Indiana!

    Dont forget…”dont send the NRSC any money”, and then complain they are not spending any money on a Senate special election.

    Oh do not DARE back any moderate candidates…….EXCEPT if the candidate is in Massachusetts (I am sure there are more needles to thread on the rules).

    We have a bunch of NRSC recruited conservative candidates, that can win in November, its like we are trying to aim and shoot at our own feet. Indiana’s 13 million+ man will not be brought down easy, its possible in this environment, but it will take much work and money.

  • redtillimdead

    If Dan Coats had said he was considering it and then decided against it, the same people here would be damning the NRSC for not forcing him into the race

  • shadowtax

    I lament reflexive anti-establishment endorsements. I know nothing about Mr. Stutzman, but I am student of human nature. Mr. Stutzman and the Tea Party movement have been running for a while. Now, just as the crest of a conservative/populist tsunami is visible on the horizon, another conservative threatens their position, “No fair! We were here first!” It is an understandable reaction, but it tells us nothing about whether Mr. Stutzman is better than Mr. Coats. Coats left the Senate just before Bush was elected. He should not be held responsible for subsequent GOP Senate sins.

    I agree that there is a need for new faces in DC. And after the 2010 election there will be. It does not follow that we need to vote fresh for freshness sake.

    Wasn’t there a lesson to be learned from the Debra Messina interview?

  • Chief1942

    “…..need new, young, conservatives in Washington ? fresh faces, fresh voices, and fresh ideas based on time tested principles.”

    One of the problems with JD Hayworth here in Arizona is that he already has a Federal political track record, and it isn’t necessarily favorable to him. Once someone has aquired the stench that comes with politics at the Federal level over the last few decades, it’s hard to spray enough cologne on them to even make someone want to be near them.

  • thurman

    The bottom line right now for, in 2010, is WINNING.

    I will take a few Scott Browns after a year of being crippled to stop anything.

    I am no NRSC fan, but the kneejerk bashing they take on here is a little stale.

    They very deftly got involved behind the scenes in Mass and played a crucial part in that race, I grudgingly give credit where credit is due.

    Not every race need to be a NY-23 any more. Let the people pick their candidate, then once the primary is over, back them 100%

  • Third Street

    your earlier post, from the day after Coats’ candidacy was announced, in which you seemed to be grasping for a reason to complain about an extraordinary recruiting coup. Most of us were frankly stunned at this; specifically, posters from within and near Indiana thought Coats was a great candidate and that you were being ridiculous in your unfocused wishing for some other, ethereal candidate who was not “an old white guy”.

    As others have noted, the Politico article gives no indication that the “Indiana GOP” is “pushing back” on Dan Coats. It says that a number of tea party groups and other grassroots organizations are grumbling about the perceived intrusion by the NRSC into their politics; but tellingly, it makes no mention that any of them are coalescing around any particular alternative. One of the interviewees is a supporter of Marlin Stutzman, a long-shot candidate even under the best of conditions. Another backs Don Bates, Jr., who has about as much chance against Evan Bayh as the tuna sandwich I just ate. As with your earlier post, nobody has a more conservative, winnable alternative to Coats, and the primary complaint of the interviewees in the Politico article seems to be “stay out of our business”, as though these grassroots groups had already fielded a viable Republican candidate and we were not well into February of a election year with time running out to put a strong candidate and campaign together.

    We need to knock off Bayh. 2010 is likely to be the only chance we’ll ever have to do it, and it will take a top-tier candidate to accomplish it. Marlin Stutzman is not that top-tier candidate. This is not another Scott Brown situation, in which a state senator can prevail in an open-seat race — Bayh is an entrenched incumbent who still has a very deep base of support with Indianans, and it’ll take the biggest gun we can draw to get him out. This is why nobody seriously had Bayh on their radar before Coats got in the race. And we are fortunate enough to have in Dan Coats not only a winning candidate, but a good conservative. I’m for him.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    I’d say he just got sweet, sweet vindication.

  • JadedByPolitics

    ………..

  • Third Street

    You can’t beat something with nothing, and Dan Coats isn’t exactly Charlie Crist.

  • proudgop

    If this guy has so much grassroots in Indiana where is the money then?

    Pence endorsed him right away and so did AG Zoeller both Conservatives not sure why immediate need to slam the NRSC for all good they are doing.

  • Third Street
  • bs

    Just like Marco Rubio was last summer, right?

  • aesthete

    against Dan Coats. From Erick’s endorsement, the only crime he’s guilty of is the crime of having been affiliated with the “establishment” at one point in his career, and of being a “retread” (funny how we don’t see this charge levied against JD). His voting record, such as it is, is conservative, he makes the race against Evan Bayh competitive, and locals seem to like him just fine. Is there anything else to this opposition, or is there something else that Erick doesn’t like about Coats?

  • toughintn

    The “crap sandwich” tea party activist in small town Huntington, Indiana better decide which is harder to swallow:

    Bayh hurting his state (and the country) by being in office ad infinitum, or supporting a conservative candidate who isn’t his first blush choice but can win.

    Hat tip to Third Street.
    “This is not another Scott Brown situation, in which a state senator can prevail in an open-seat race ? Bayh is an entrenched incumbent who still has a very deep base of support” — and I would add, has support among senseless Republicans in the state who only split their ticket for him.

    Look, Stutzman is just a little ahead of himself, and if he’ll be patient, he’ll probably get that seat after Coats serves one or two terms. Patience is the better part of valor in this case, and Stutzman will only mature and grow in stature in the meantime.

    But most importantly, we need to remember this:
    Mike Pence has given his support to both Marco Rubio and Dan Coats.

    If we can trust anyone’s judgment, it’s that of Mike Pence.

  • hoosierstate

    I doubt Erick makes any knee-jerk endorsements but since you obviously know what he is thinking I guess you can call it what you want. Here is my point, if you had any knowledge of Indiana you would know that 16 months ago nobody thought Bayh was vulnerable except Marlin. Because Rasmussen showed Pence beating Bayh by 3 everyone started paying attention. Marlin has strong authentic conservative values, a solid campaign team, and a very large grass-roots organization that is growing every day. The money will come. Yes $16,000 a month is very small compared to what Bayh has but money isn’t everything. Bloomberg spent over $100 million of his own money and barely won his mayoral election. Money isn’t everything!!

  • hoosierstate

    There seems to be a growing them of establishment vs. non-establishiment and while this is important this really should change to a conversation about conservatism. Besides the basics of strong national defense and fiscal responsibility, there are three other conservative values that are important to Hoosiers: life, judges, and guns. I can tell you that Marlin Stutzman is solid on all three. Coats is strong on the life issue but is not a true conservative when it comes to liberal judges or the gun issue. Is Coats a good guy, yes! But look up his record when it comes to voting on gun bills and supporting judges who are not in the conservative camp.

  • jfindl2

    The guy has around 6k in the bank after being in the race for 6 months. If his campaign team is so experienced why isn’t he raising money faster or increasing his cash on hand totals? If the grass roots is so large why has he only raised 50k from individuals? Money isn’t everything but it still counts for a lot, especially against a candidate with zero funds.

    Also I think the question on many people’s mind is, would Erick have endorsed Stutzman if the NRSC had not recruited anyone? It seems like he saw the NRSC recruit somebody and immediately endorsed the a candidate regardless of his viability. I don’t know Erick personally, and I obviously can’t read his mind, but that is what it looks like to me. If somebody has a better explanation for why he is getting behind a candidate who has shown an inability to raise money or his campaign’s profile after 6 months, I would like to here it.

  • jfindl2

    I meant to say, “He saw the NRSC recruit somebody and then immediately endorsed the rival candidate regardless of his viability>”

  • Scope

    I don’t know anything about any of the candidates in Indiana, running for anything. Something you said, peaked my interest- “Grassroots organizations are grumbling about the “perceived” intrusion by the NRSC into their politics; but tellingly, it makes no mention that any of them are coalescing around any particular candidate.” Those were your words. Yet, Cornyn in fact made a statement as to the Coats candidacy-

    http://hoosierpundit.blogspot.com/2010/02/john-cornyn-national-republican.html

    I don’t know what comments you have made, or what views you have taken, as to the NRSC, NRCC or the RNC getting involved in “primary” races, but, I do know that many many here have been very vocally opposed to any of the national committees involving themselves in “primaries.” They have no place in recruiting, and in essence choosing who they (the elites in Washington) think will be the big winners, despite what the voters in any area of the country prefer. It seems disengenious to give the NRSC a pass, because you claim their involvement is “perceived” in the Coats candidacy. I don’t know how Cornyn’s statement that “with Coats now entering the race, the Republicans now have a chance to unseat Byah” cannot be seen as an endorsement.

    Here, in Virginia, the NRCC has interjected itself, in recruiting, and endorsing a candidate, State Senator Robert Hurt, to challenge Liberal Tom Perriello. It is the same exact scenario. The Tea Parties, and the people who have been on the ground consistently working to unseat Perriello, are also incensed that the NRCC has annointed their choice of candidate in Hurt. It is at the point here that we most definately will have a third party challenge if Hurt wins the primary. Do I agree with that NO. Hurt has skipped out on the first 2 debates, with all the candidates, because he believes that the Tea Party people are enemy territory for him, and, he is correct. How will he face Pelosi if she is still the speaker, or the combatitive Progressives, if he can’t even face the Tea Party folk?

    My point is that you have every right, and responsibility to back, support, campaign for, or donate to the candidate of your choice. Rather than to post that Erick is “trying to validate his original post against Coats”, it might be more wise to just post in support of your guy, rather than to attempt to paint Erick as the “numbskull.”

  • youthgrunt

    Erick’s complaint in his earlier post when Coats was recruited was that he is a retread (my summery, not his words). He asked if Indiana could do better and get a fresh face. I tried to note that the up and comers are kind of committed to a path that does not include the US Senate seat that Bayh is in.

    So we are left with various State Representatives and Senators running for a US Senate seat. So far, this does not seem to be a very successful approach–as it has not worked in prior elections. Their general level of support is very regional (and usually a very small region).

    What is the usual path to the US Senate? Bayh ran for Senate from the Governor’s office. Lugar was the mayor of Indianapolis. Coats had been a US Representative, as had Quayle. The other state that I have some familiarity with is Virginia where it is typically the Governor’s office or other state wide office that makes the run for the Senate.

    That is one of my problems with Stutzman and the others in the race. Quite frankly they need to be running for the House of Representatives where they can expand their base and work up the donation base where they can get enough money to make a push against someone like Bayh.

    By the way, the critics in the Politico article are all committed to one of the other candidates, which does not exactly make them impartial.

  • hoosierstate

    The NRSC has no business being involved in Primaries. PERIOD!!! Let the states pick their candidates then have the NRSC support them 100% for the general election!

  • jfindl2

    shouldn’t try to encourage quality candidates to get involved? They should sit back and wait for primary season to be over b4 they lift a finger? No, I think they should try to get candidates who can win to run. This does not mean that the NRSC hasn’t made giant mistakes and screwed the pooch recently, they have, but this NRSC should never ever ever have any role outside of the general is crud. Nobody complained when they tried to woo Mike Pence and they shouldn’t.

  • Scope

    are not thrilled with Coats. I also read that he voted to confirm Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and, also for Sotomayor for the 9th circuit court of appeals. I read on an Indiana blog spot that he was considered a Bush type of “compassionate” conservative. Don’t know if it’s true.

  • IJB

    I don’t think anyone has a problem with recruitment.

    But then, once recruited, if it’s a contested primary the national committees need to butt the heck out.

    The problem is when the committees recruit somebody, and then try and put their fingers on the scale in the favor of their “recruited” candidate.

    I have no problem with the NRSC trying to get Coats in IN or Norton in CO or Ayotte in NH or Grayson in KY to run.

    But, once that happens, they need to leave it to the locals to sort it out.

    I suspect the NRSC recruited candidates will win in all of these states anyway (even in KY – I can’t see a RonPaul! loon actually winning there, and if Paul does win that it’ll be a disaster). But the surest way to make sure their recruited candidates *do lose* the primary is for the national committees to butt in to these primaries (see: Crist and FL…).

    So, now that they’ve gotten Coats, et al., to run, they need to let those guys wage their own campaigns to see if they’re up to stuff…

  • IJB

    The national committees get *pilloried* here all the time when they “fail to recruit” a candidate to certain races. That is, in fact, probably their main job in a number of races.

    So, the national committees absolutely do have a place in recruiting candidates, even if there are already people running in the primary field.

    What they *don’t* have a place in doing is then “rigging the game” so their recruited candidates have outside advantages towards winning.

    There is nothing wrong in the NRSC trying to recruit someone like Dan Coats (or the NRCC with Hurt, for that matter) to run.

    The problems come in when they then start to either endorse or *give money* to “preferred” candidates in the primaries – THAT is the big No-No.

  • IJB

    …Or if it were, we’d have to throw out about 75% of the currently serving GOP Senators.

    (Don’t get me wrong – I’d *like* to do that! But stringing Coats up on a vote where someone passed 97-3 with nearly unanimous GOP support at the time seems a little short-sided to me. Now there may be more to the Brady Gun bill thing and Coats, I don’t know…)

  • jfindl2

    if Stutzman actually had a chance of beating Bayh. Candidates with less than 10k in cash on hand after being in a race for 6 months aren’t candidates, they are jokes who get defeated by over a 60 – 40 margin in the fall.

  • jfindl2

    I do have to disagree and say lots of people have problems with the NRSC recruiting candidates. If that were the case then there would not be all this complaining over the Dan Coats alleged recruitment failure.

  • jfindl2

    they recruited Dan Coats, they didn’t endorse him. I will contribute $50 to Stutzman if DeMint endorses him. The only reason I’m offering this is b/c DeMint will never endorse him. I know you are wondering where I got my ability to see the future from, it is pretty simple: DeMint doesn’t endorse disorganized campaigns that don’t raise any money. It is why the Senate Conservatives’ Fund didn’t back Hughes in the Illinois primary, he had a cruddy organization and he could not raise money. Stutzman is the new Hughes.

  • Spiral

    I think the fact that Dan Coats voted to confirm Ruth Bader Ginsberg to the US Supreme Court, given Ginsbergs ultra-Left record on all sorts of issues, means Coats has some ‘splaining to do.

    I would ask him, “If you are elected to the US Senate and Obama nominates someone to the federal court of appeals or the US Supreme Court who does not subscribe to originalism or strict constructionism or any sort of grounding principle that would prevent a judge from making law from the bench, would you still vote to confirm that nominee?”

    This would give us an idea as to whether Coats would be a Lindsay Graham lapdog for the Left US Senator or a good conservative US Senator.

    I like Dan Coats. But he needs a few tough questions hurled at him.

  • hoosierstate

    … in an election year like this Republicans should do very well. Nobody was serious about this race for the last year except Marlin. I agree that, that fact alone should not grant him the Rep. nomination. But it does speak to his vision when nobody else was willing to step up. I personally heard from Coats own lips that Quayle agreed to run for Senate if the Rep. promised an easy primary. So that helped him. Coats was appointed the Senate and when finally tested by a serious challenger he ran away. I don’t think there is a one size fits all path to the US Senate. Which brings me back to this election year. Marlin has traveled over 18,000 miles across Indiana. He is doing it the hard way but it can still be effective given the election cycle we are in. I wouldn’t count him out just yet.

  • jfindl2

    n/t

  • mbecker908

    Ginsberg’s confirmation was another time and another place.

  • jfindl2

    just like Kit Bond, Mitch McConnell, Trent Lott, Orrin Hatch, Strom Thurmond, Phil Gramm, and Chuck Grassley. All of those senators voted to confirm Ginsburg. Nevermind the fact that when Stephen Breyer came up for a vote, and was confirmed 87-9, Coats was one of the few who opposed him.

  • Scope

    Ginsburg’s confirmation hearing was in 1993, during the Clinton presidency, with a Democrat Senate majority, if I am not mistaken. Here is an analysis, well after the fact to be sure-

    http://www.nationalreview.com/whelan/whelan200507260753.asp

    Ginsberg refused to talk about many of her views, and in essence pleaded the 5th during those hearings. She had a history as a judge to go by. She was a Liberal. Of course Clinton wouldn’t have chosen anyone who was not a Liberal. For only 3 senators to vote no for Ginsburg is very similar to Graham bringing Sotomayor’s record into the sunlight, proving she is a Liberal, and then voting for her confirmation.

    So, the Republicans of today, are not that different from the Republicans in 1993. When they don’t have the majority, they get on their knees, and, vote for judges, who hold life long positions, that go against every conservative prudent and wise decisions. Coats apparently didn’t hold the conservative ground, he went along with the rest of the squishes. No wonder they want him back.

  • Third Street

    And nice try there, putting “numbskull” in quotes as though I had said it.

  • http://www.lookoutkokomo.com lookoutkokomo

    GOP + Coats = IN + Bayh

  • Scope

    or state should take a back seat to who the Washington Republicans decide should be the candidate? Isn’t that the very exact thing that the Tea Parties are trying to fight? Isn’t that why it has become such a big anti-incumbent race? Isn’t it a fact that the majority of people are sick and tired of those in Washington picking their winners and losers?

    Robert Hurt has the biggest war chest, but, he didn’t raise that money from the people in the district who will be the voters. Eric Cantor was on local radio touting how great his “good friend” Hurt would be for the district. I wish you knew how un-popular Cantor is here. He keeps getting re-elected because no one ever primaries him. Easy to win when you have no competition.

    Great, they want to finance a candidate when they have won the primary terrific. Before that, stay out of the local voters business.

  • jfindl2

    start up a group to try and primary McConnell, Hatch, and Grassley for their votes? Oh wait b/c it would be totally ridiculous to do so. At the time, most presidential nominees were given a great deal of deference. This is obviously not true today, also today judicial nominees routinely refuse to discuss specific issues.

    Is Ginsberg a wacko lefty? Definitely, but back in 1993 the tradition was to only oppose if nominees if they were unqualified. So, no, I’m not going to hold this vote against Coats or any of the other senators b/c that is not how Senate confirmations operated at that time.

    Also in regards to your, “Coats apparently didn?t hold the conservative ground, he went along with the rest of the squishes. ” Are you saying that Kit Bond, Mitch McConnell, Trent Lott, Orrin Hatch, Strom Thurmond, Phil Gramm, and Chuck Grassley are squishes? B/c if they are then you have an insane definition of what it is to be a “squishy” Republican. Also what about the Breyer vote? Do you give Coats any credit for that vote?

  • jfindl2

    case for endorsing people in primaries right? The Republicans recruiting people is not endorsing them.

    Also the reason Eric Cantor hasn’t been challenged in a primary is b/c he is a solid conservative.

  • Spiral

    I think the problem is that you get candidates who say, “Sure, I’ll run for Senate, if I can get you to promise me that I will be well-funded.”

    In that case the NRSC has to say, “We will make sure you are well-funded after you get the nomination, if you get the nomination.”

    But look what happened to Senator John Cornyn when he got behind Charlie Crist in Florida. At the time the “conventional wisdom” was that Crist was the man in Florida. But this was also when the “conventional wisdom” said that Obama was invincible.

    Now Cornyn looks stupid for having gotten behind Governor Crist in such a public way.

  • Spiral

    I agree with a lot of what you wrote. But this year could be an anti-incumbent year, when Evan Bayh’s status as an incumbent might work against him instead of for him.

    In that case, someone like State Senator Marltin Stutzman, someone who has never been a member of Congress, could be more attractive to the Indiana electorate that we might realize.

    I will support Coats or Stutzman or probably any other GOP nominees for US Senate in Indiana (I moved to Indiana in the summer of 2008). I don’t know who I will support in the primary.

    I don’t think that Evan Bayh can any longer get away with selling himself as a moderate Democrat in Indiana, given his votes in favor of the 800 billion dollar stimulus boondoggle and the Senate Health Care nationalization bill.

    At least that’s my hope.

  • IJB
  • Third Street

    …in fact, that’s probably the only reason Bayh is vulnerable even on paper this year. Association with the party of Obama and Reid, and the votes he’s cast for the Obamagenda as an incumbent, will hang around his neck like an albatross.

    But that only goes so far, because incumbency always brings with it powerful advantages, even in the most anti-incumbent year. A good measure of an officeholder’s vulnerability is the profile of the candidate who shows up to oppose him, and it’s significant that Coats appeared as a candidate now and not months and months ago, back when Marlin Stutzman started running.

  • jfindl2

    I was just bringing up that there are lots of people who think they should totally stay out of everything.

  • youthgrunt

    that Stutzman has done. You are right–he is doing it the hard way. It is possible that he can be effective, but he is going to have to run a VERY good campaign. It is going to have to be done on a shoestring budget (at least comparatively).

    And that is one of the things that bugs me. The reaction by Stutzman and his supporters to Coats getting into the race is making an argument that Coats can’t run because he can’t use the “Bayh is a political insider” argument. Well, that may be true, but it is not the argument that SHOULD be made whether or not Coats is the GOP nominee! Stutzman is also coming across as a whiny kid upset that a bigger fish just jumped into his little pond.

    I am not convinced that Stutzman is ready for the fight. The whole primary will tell. And if he and his surrogates decide to fight the primary by running negative on the other candidates (all good men–Coats included), then he will be undeserving of our support.

    By the way, Coats has a lifetime ACU rating of 90. He is no squish on the issues.

  • proudgop

    Coats defeat Baron Hill already ( I would not consider Hill a cake walk)

    Defeating Bayh will take a lot money and you need to have someone that excites even “DC Republicans/ K Street” and Coats can do that

    I don’t think anyone can win being outspent 13:1

    I hope Rasmussen does poll soon on this race

  • discerningconservative

    Did Coats defeat Baron Hill?

  • discerningconservative

    I remember now… It was when he ran for Quayle’s seat, after Coats was appointed to it. I forgot about that.

  • dtalcott

    Marlin is a great state legislator. I think he could run for statewide or federal office at some point in the future. I do not think he is ready to beat Bayh. But, what about Hostettler? He is in the race and has won congressional races in the state. He seems like a good alternative to the country club/establishment candidate of Coats. In fact, it seems like Hostettler would be a perfect fit with Tea Party Independents.

    Coats voted for the Assault Weapons Ban in 1991 (under Bush I, when it failed) and 1993 (when it passed under Clinton). Hoosier gun owners remember those votes. That is the kind of thing that will really dampen enthusiasm for Coats.

  • proudgop

    He was very poor fundraiser who has an issue with bringing a gun to an airport too boot. Plus, he voted against Iraq War.

    Bayh is so vulnerable. He won his first election in 1996 a Dem year and re-elected in 2004 when Republicans should of contested him.

    This is the year we knock him off. He is a liberal period. His votes on Obamacare, stimulus, raise the debt, his votes on John Roberts and Alito all confirm it.

    We need someone who can go toe to toe on money area to make Indiana residents realize behind the nice head of hair and sweet boy charm look he is a liberal.

  • aesthete

    wasn’t endorsed by DeMint.

  • howardcountychairman

    The only official Republican Senate candidate in Indiana is Don Bates, Jr. He filed the necessary signatures on Friday. Bates will now move to a fundraising emphasis. Keep in mind that Scott Brown only raised a little over $1 million by the end of 2009. In January, he started raising $1 million per day. When Indiana has a Republican candidate, conservatives will rally with the money they will need to beat Bayh.

  • youthgrunt

    Listening to the Garrison show on WIBC in Indy and they are reporting that Bayh is not going to run for reelection.

    This puts a pinch on whoever would like to run from the Dem side as signatures are due at the end of the week (500 from each district).

  • youthgrunt

    http://www.wibc.com/news/Story.aspx?ID=1196410

  • dtalcott

    Coats, Hostettler, and Stutzman will have the paperwork filed by the deadline on Feb 19th. So, the game is on…