On my trip home, I was riding with a friend who took residence in Indiana within the last few years. He looked slightly nauseous when I told him that Mike Pence had the same fiscal sensibilities as Mitch Daniels but was far more focused on social conservative cultural issues than Gov. Daniels. And, based on his electoral experience while he’s been in Indiana, he reasonably came to the conclusion that there is no way in hell that Hoosiers would vote for a Democratic governor.
I didn’t pitch a very optimistic line on that, but I had to reassure him that Indiana isn’t necessarily doomed to four or more years of Planned Parenthood demonization, righteous discrimination against gays, and ambient political Christianity. The smart money has to be on Pence right now. But, he had no idea that, from 1988 to 2004, the Republicans were unable to win the Governor’s mansion in Indiana.
John Gregg is as good a candidate as the Democrats have fielded for quite some time, and as a candidate and a lawmaker, Mike Pence is a mile wide, but an inch deep. If Hoosiers spend more than 20 seconds considering the capabilities of the two men, it’s going to be a race. It’s true that Hoosiers’ default setting is to vote Republican. And, Pence’s socially conservative catch-phrases are more likely to be reassuring than horrifying to the average Hoosier. But, Gregg is fairly conservative himself, and his “just folks” persona might be effective against the Pence choirboy image.
Whether their respective personalities come into play depends on how aware the public becomes of the two men. Can John Gregg penetrate the public consciousness? I don’t know. But, a Political Notebook piece in the Journal Gazette suggests that he’s making some headway. The Republicans are at least worried enough about Gregg’s criticism of the Daniels administration’s half billion dollar accounting goofs that they are trying to tag Gregg with budgeting problems with which Gregg’s involvement was muddled, specious, or non-existent.
John Good (a Democratic candidate for state House District 83) noted that the first independent polling of the Governor’s race had Pence up by 13 points. Again, this is much better news for Pence than for Gregg, but it’s hardly insurmountable if John Gregg can figure out how to get Hoosiers to know who the hell he is. And, maybe this is just me, but I think the more Hoosiers know about Mike Pence, the less they will care for him. He has a lot of name recognition, but I think most folks are a little vague on what he’s actually done or what kind of laws, specifically, he wants to impose and enforce or repeal. I think that, the more voters get to know Gregg and the more they get to know Pence, the more that 13 point gap will shrink. On the other hand, if voters never have cause to think much about this race, then Pence will win in a walk.
Here’s where you hope for the prevailing wisdom that ‘Libertarians take votes from Republicans’ works out for your tribe.
You’re right about Gregg and his name recognition. He is currently in 3rd in that category, behind Pence and Rupert. He’s had a lot of time to do something about it, and thus far has not.
I hope you’re right when you say, “I think the more Hoosiers know about Mike Pence, the less they will care for him”. Man, I hope you’re right.
I don’t agree. A poll showing a Republican with only a 13% lead at this point for Governor isn’t a good poll for the GOP. I remember when Governor Hudnut has something like a 40 point lead on incumbent Joe Hogsett running for Secretary of State. The story is that the Hudnut people actually went to the Sec of State’s office to measure the windows for new drapes. Then the wheels fell off the Hudnut campaign. I don’t think that will happen with Pence, but Gregg is a formidable candidate.
Pence has to be careful about running on the coattails of Mitch Daniels instead of being his own person. I remember when Mutz was running for Gov against Evan Bayh. There had been 16 years of Governors Bowen and Orr. They did a poll of Hoosiers to see if they liked the direction of the state? Some 70% said “yes.” The next question was whether the State shoudl charnge direction. Some 70% said “yes.”
You’re right about Gregg being a relatively strong candidate. I haven’t boned up on his voting record, but my recollection was the he was pretty moderate – as was his demeanor. He wasn’t a scorched earth Democrat partisan (or I really am losing my memory).
I’m sure the Pence campaign will, in due course, call my attention to any flagrant exceptions.
Are pro-choice going to come out and vote for a pro-choice candidate in Gregg? Or is he sufficiently “not really pro-life but I say I am” to get that 40% of the population to pull his lever?
I’ve heard what Gregg is against (RTW, mistakes in the Dept. of Revenue), but I haven’t heard what he represents. Is he in favor of gay marriage? How does he feel about property caps? Let’s get some of his opinions out and see what happens. It is too bad the Democratic Party of Indiana is against true competition and we don’t have a Dem. primary (for virtually any position) to flush this out.
I don’t think it’s fair to just pick on the Democrats for not having a primary in the Governor’s race. Pence had Jim Wallace as a primary challenger; but Mitch Roob asked the State Election Commission to take him off for lack of signatures in the 7th Congressional District. As a matter of law, I’m sure the challenge was sound and he lacked the signatures. But it doesn’t suggest a predisposition among Republicans for a robust primary season.
As a practical matter, I think you’ll typically see active primaries for the political party that tends to win a district’s vote — win the primary, win the seat most times. On the other side of that dynamic, there might not be a lot of primary effort for a party with a tendency to be a sacrificial lamb cycle after cycle in a given district.
I can’t speak for the rest of the state, but in Southwest Indiana the lack of primaries carries a Democrat theme. Republicans had a pretty well funded (if self-funded) challenge by Wallace that fell flat ( I don’t care who challenged it).
We have Mourdock challenging the untouchable Lugar.
We have Kristi Risk taking on an incumbent Larry Bucshon. Meanwhile, the Dems. have a single candidate for every State House, Senate, fed House, Senate, and Governor. The fed House situation is particularly unseemly, as all three Dem primary candidates let the precinct committemen pick the ultimate candidate.
Dem candidacy ain’t great in NE Indiana either. I always shake my head in wonder at the number of local races without a single Democrat on them. And I’m not sure why…
Not having a single candidate is a concern. I am guessing the reason for this is the super Republican majority in NE Indiana. Nobody wants to throw their hat in the ring just to have it thrown back at them.
My concern is a little different now. It appears that the Dem. party is making a concerted effort to not have contested primaries, at least here in SW Indiana. There are quite a few reasons why this is not a good democratic (lower d) move.
“Is he (Gregg for gay marriage?”) This isn’t realistically an issue in Indiana, although if you listen to the GOP, all those “activist judges” on the Indiana Supreme Court “including the three Mitch has or will appoint?) are poised to impose it. Ask Gregg instead: “Do you think that next January’s General Assembly ought to self-castrate future lawmakers from being able to enact anything at all to let same-sex couple have what married folks take for granted?” Maybe if he really helps advance the dialogue even some conservative GOP folks will see what the issue of a “marriage amendment” is REALLY all about.
Sorry Don. You don’t get to pick the question I am asking. I asked about Gregg’s thoughts on gay marriage. I already know the fact that he doesn’t like the answer our current legislature has picked. But the question is, does he actually want to allow gay marriage or not? Just being a one man party of “no” doesn’t get him anywhere.
Apparently you don’t know Gregg’s answer either. Otherwise you probably would have answered my question.
Perhaps the better question is for you, Paul. Why do you think your question is useful for evaluating a candidate for Governor’s qualifications given Indiana’s current legal and political environment?
I don’t know Gregg’s stance. If I had to guess, I expect that politically, he’d prefer not to answer it; because to do so is to potentially alienate one group of voters or another. Which, of course, is why his opponents would like to ask it. In terms of governance, my guess is that it wouldn’t be anything like a priority for Gregg. He’d be cool with the status quo; not supporting adding a Constitutional amendment, but also not messing with Indiana’s current “DOMA” law.
Personally – and here is where I’m really guessing – I’ll bet he doesn’t think much of gay marriage. As sort of a southern Democrat who is closer to 60 than 50, I’ll bet it doesn’t keep him up nights, but it probably seems kind of weird.
Doug, I only mentioned it because you did. The first two policy discussions in your 2nd paragraph are abortion/planned parenthood and discrimination against gays, which most people mean to include gay marriage.
I agree, Gregg would prefer not to answer it. That is exactly my point. He is sorta against the gay marriage amendment, but not really for gay marriage. He is sorta against abortion, but doesn’t seem to care when Planned Parenthood, who performs something like 3 million abortions a year, receives tax dollars. Those kind of differentiations are acceptable, but don’t make people rush to the voting booth on the right or the left.
Consider him the Dem. Mitt Romney, without the experience, impressive qualifications, and good looks.
I plan to vote for Gregg, but because he’s been so laid back in the intro department, it’s really more of an anti-Pence reflex. I do remember a years-ago media-reported situation that made me wonder if an unnamed white-haired person who self-identified as being from Indiana was referring to him, but I can’t recall any details except feeling Ewwwww.
I suspect Doug’s thoughts on where Gregg stands on “gay marriage” (wouldn’t jump for joy over a law or decision establishing it) and his views on a constitutional amendment (“sorta against” it) pet it pretty well. Paul’s observation that most people equate discrimination against gays with opposition to “gay marriage” is interesting in view of claims by HJR-6 pushers that it has nothing to do with liking gays and lesbians, just protecting the institution of marriage itself. I think an increasing number of Hoosiers who may not relish “gay marriage” but who want fair and equal treatment for same sex couples under the law will see why that vague and convoluted “shall not recognize” anything “substantially similar” to marriage has gone way too far.
Especially since it applies to both state, and to private contracts and court decisions related to them.
For the record, my reference to “most people” was short form for “most people that use phrases like ‘righteous discrimination against gays.'”
yes, I’m sure it should be self-righteous…
Don- Here is Rupert’s position: “I publicly pledge to fight for 100% marriage equality in Indiana”.
He’s not hiding from the issue or mincing words.
I’m 100% behind Gregg. I really wish I could find the quotes, but I know that during the “W” years, Pence said a LOT of stupid and incendiary stuff. Not that most people will care.
My biggest worry for Gregg is that he has very little money. Besides the fact that Pence is way up in funding, it’s only a matter of time that American Crossroads turns its Eye of Sauron gaze toward Indiana – ESPECIALLY if Gregg starts making up the poll numbers. See the recent “This American Life” about campaign finance, and then shudder to think what a $5M negative ad buy from out of state is going to look like…
My impression of John Gregg’s candidacy is that it is jobs, jobs, jobs, and he is largely ignoring social issues, on which he is more conservative than the average Democrat anyway. He has been hitting a LOT of blue-collar areas and getting attention from some voters who otherwise have tuned out of the political process. If he can motivate those folks on economic issues, he has a shot, otherwise Pence’s Radical Right outsider friends will truck in tons of money to the state and pretty much buy the election.
I don’t think Pence needs to ‘buy the election’, based on Gregg’s low name recognition and polling numbers. What I’m fairly convinced of is that Pence is hoarding cash for now with a two-part plan: spend the money at the end if Gregg (and/or Rupert) closes the gap; do whatever possible to have a whole lot of money on hand late so that he can fund Republican state House & Senate candidates so they are beholden to him, and therefore, his legislative agenda.
Thanks to the redistricting which may well have displaced several Republican incumbents, the end result is a likely large group of Republican freshmen. If Pence helped fund them all? So, if Pence is seeing a lot of money trucked in from out of state late in the day, I will expect to see it as much redirected down his ticket as spent on TV ads. Pence already has well enough for that.
Pence will win NE Indiana (Allen & Kosciusko), Hamilton, Elkhart County and many smaller counties such as Fulton, Wells.,
Gregg will win Lake, Marion, St. Joseph, Monroe, Vandenburgh
and a few smaller and medium counties such as Starke and Laporte.
If he does well in Southern and SW Indiana?