Indiana is a Republican state. But, it seems that the right wing of the Indiana Republican party almost seems to be daring the state to vote for Democrats. They chose Richard Mourdock over Republican institution, Richard Lugar, for the 2012 Senate campaign. My views on Mourdock’s antics during the Chrysler bankruptcy proceedings are well known. On top of that kind of economic acumen, Mourdock has vowed to bring more partisanship to Washington and featured in his campaign his determination to end the EPA. He’ll be a nice complement to Mike Pence on the ballot.
For those whose tastes run more to the center-right of the political spectrum, the Democrats will be offering blue dogs, Joe Donnelly and John Gregg. If you like center-left, far-left, or radical left; well, I’m sorry, but Indiana has nothing for you.
Update Mourdock, speaking to Chuck Todd, on his governing philosophy:
I certainly think bipartisanship ought to consist of Democrats coming to the Republican point of view. […] Bipartisanship means they have to come our way […] To me, the highlight of politics, frankly, is to inflict my opinion on someone else with a microphone or in front of a camera. […] Even those Republicans who more often than not vote the right way aren’t coming back into their states or their districts and getting in front of the unfriendly crowds and unfriendly microphones to make the point as to why our point of view is good. […] I feel I can defend the purpose of conservatism, and more Republicans should be doing it just as I want to.
An example of the old quip about declaring that government doesn’t work and seeking office so you can prove it.
There was an article I read a year or two ago talking about “Predictions for the next 50 years.” In it, some political scientists had redrawn the U.S. into 5 different new Nations. Their basic theory being that partisanship and division were going to cause the U.S. to break up into like minded regions, people would migrate and eventually we’d be completely different people. (They didn’t predict the resource wars that would happen 50 years after that, when certain regions polluted or drained their resources due to bad policies, but I’d bet on it.)
With every hard right or hard left politician, with every threat of “No Compromise!”, with every signed pledge to a well funded minority, we get closer and closer to the new reality.
Sadly, I’ll be moving to whatever the new North East America gets called. Indiana won’t be one of the moderates districts….
If you like center-left, far-left, or radical left; well, I’m sorry, but Indiana has nothing for you.
Leave us not be so negative. It’s a great proving ground for comedy. And if you like opportunities to say “I told you so”…
http://www.AndréCarson.com
I didn’t know that Mourdock had already lost 5 elections (including 3 for
Congress) prior to his 2006 win for state treasurer. What a political hack.
He probably hears voices from 1950s Joe McCarthy too.
Yeah, that Lincoln guy who lost a bunch of times before becoming President must have been a hack too.
Are you drawing a electoral success rate comparison or a substantive comparison between Mourdock and Lincoln?
I am stating that elected success rate is a poor way to evaluate a politician.
Lincoln only lost one direct-vote election in his life. The other “losses” were due to various machinations of the Whig Party (various Whig candidates took turns as U.S. Representatives in Illinois, so he only served one term in Washington) and the way elections were done in Illinois at that time (his famous “loss” to Stephen Douglas in 1858 was due to the fact the Republican Party did not win control of the Illinois legislature that year, who got to choose who became Senator at that time).
“If you like center-left, far-left, or radical left; well, I’m sorry, but Indiana has nothing for you. ”
I thought that was how Senator Lugar was just portrayed?
I could (and hereby briefly do) quibble about what’s center, center-left, center-right, far right – or even about how meaningful those labels are substantively – but pledges to be more partisan and to abolish the EPA do not strike me responsible, and promises to end pork barrel politics are quite implausible.
Everyone on Facebook is lamenting Lugar’s loss and throwing their hands up like it’s a foregone conclusion that we’ll have Mourdock in office. I refuse to do that. Instead of being upset that Lugar is leaving, I’m looking at this as an opportunity. Now we have a chance to put a Democrat in that seat, a really good opportunity. The Tea Baggers are the loudest for the Republicans right now, but I really don’t think they represent our whole state.
Call me an optimist if you will…
I am disappointed with Lugar’s loss and the size of the Tea Party margin. But the election demonstrates the intransigence and totalitarian nature of the modern GOP. Any pretense to the “loyal opposition” is gone.
It is a party that lacks any aspiration to govern, only to acquire power and dispense favors. It knows that Obama will likely be reelected. It knows that demographic changes will erode and end its base of mean old white people and rural bigots.
But having lived outside Indiana for many years, Indiana is not the nation’s standard bearer. It is a state that embraced the KKK in the teens and twenties. Birthed the John Birchers in the 1940s. The best and brightest usually leave for better pickings.
Can Donnelly beat Mourdant? .I will bet my money and time on that proposition. Even if he does not win, money that Lugar would have saved the Republican Senate Election Committe will spend money it could have spend in other races.
Bet your money and time on Donnelly. The Club for Growth and the Kock brothers are betting on Mourdant.
Amy, I hope you’re right. I couldn’t stand Lugar, but I want this guy even less.
I’m totally someone that could have voted for a Republican, too.
The only part of either post race speech I caught was murdock telling us what a great public servant lugar had been. Funny, I thought he was anything but from listening to the campaign. Other than “pro life conservative anti obama care” I can’t tell you what any of them plan to do to you know, actually *govern*
“I have a mindset that says bipartisanship ought to consist of Democrats coming to the Republican point of view,” Mourdock said on Fox, according to Politico. “You know, I’ve said many times through this campaign that one of the things I hope to do is to help build a conservative majority in the United States Senate and continue to help the House build a Republican majority and have a Republican White House and then bipartisanship becomes having Democrats come our way. So that’s what we’re working towards and I think in the days ahead, Mr. Lugar will join our effort.”
Reported by David Taintor
Goes right along with his fellow traveler, Grover Norquist, who said, “Bipartisanship is another name for date rape.”
Let me state Mourdock’s opinion another way on another topic:
I certainly think marriage ought to consist of wives coming to the husband’s point of view.
So you’re allowed any opinion you like as long as it’s the same as theirs. Right. That’s what America needs.
Yeah, we tried Murdock’s approach once before. Boy, that Whig Party turned out to be really successful and its unity lasted a *really* long time.
I caught a clip of Mourdock saying that he intended to bring the Indiana House to the national level or something like that. Yeah, that’ll help. He’s lost my vote.
What shouldn’t be underestimated is the amount of partisan energy focused on establishing lasting GOP majorities in Congress. Mourdock will have the benefit of a an active and angry base combined with unlimited money from outside groups. I hate to say it, but I don’t like Donnelley’s chances.
He has an active and angry base. Mourdock will always have that.
I tend to agree with you, that the Super Pac money will be used by the Republicans more in house and senate races. I believe that the party already sees Romney going down and will use the money more effectively. They also know that 2012 is likely to go there way, as most elections following an eight-year incumbent swing to the other party. They had better spend it know. The demographics of the nation are moving away from the Republican party
Is there any way to find out how many of Mourdock’s votes were from Democrats who think Lugar’s defeat means a Dem can now take that Senate seat? And is there a breakdown anywhere of which counties supported which candidate? I’m curious if the rural counties are true believers in what Mourdock is selling, and I’m curious if the urban counties went against Lugar because they’re actually pro-Dem.
In other words, how many Hoosiers actually like and support Mourdock and his ideas?
To my knowledge there would be no reliable way to state how many of Mourdock’s votes came from Dem’s. Anyone can take a ballot, and you don’t have to register to a particular party in Indiana. So all the votes in the primary would “appear” to be Republican votes.
I’m sure you could check the rural v. urban votes. I don’t know if they are consolidated in any one place or not, but if you’re easily amused (such as myself) you could cruise the net and view publications from each of the 92 counties and tally where the support came from. It would be pretty tedious, and I suppose depend on how you define rural vs. urban (i.e. Boone County is pretty rural on whole, but it’s hard to call Zionsville rural with a straight face).
I didn’t get the sense that many Democrats were pulling for Mourdock, even as a way to help Donnelly. To the extent they crossed over, I think you’d find most of them voting for Lugar – who historically got plenty of Democratic votes in the general elections of the past.
You are describing me, Doug. I did something I have never done before, dontate to a republican in anyything but a local race. Youi pay your money and you take your chances.
Time to change the game. I did not wait long. I just dropped a check to the Donnelly campaign and I will send more.