Indiana 2012 Congressional Races

[Miles]

I think tmth is 'moderate' Republican in the same sense that I'm a moderate Democrat. Yes, we're to the center relative our parties, but when push comes to shove, we'll support our respective parties' candidates the vast majority of the time.

[tmthforu94]

Dick Lugar came out and supported Mourdock, even did an event or two with him over the summer, FWIW.

Miles is right - I'm a fairly moderate Republican, and in primaries, usually support the candidate closest to center (Which is also usually the most electable as well). Most of the time, I'll end up supporting Republicans though in the General Election.

If battle for the Senate wasn't so contested, I would have voted for Donnelly. This was more of a vote for a Senate Majority than anything.

[JoeyJoeJoe]

Anything happening in the 5th or 6th districts?

[tmthforu94]

Anything happening in the 5th or 6th districts?

Susan Brooks is the GOP nominee, taking on Scott Reske in the 5th district. It has an R+17 PVI, and considering Brooks has ran an organized, well-funded campaign, I expect her to easily win with over 60% of the vote.

The 6th isn't as Republican, partly because it encompasses Muncie, but R+10 anyways. Republican Luke Messer is facing off against Brad Bookout. Bookout has some well thought out idea's, and I may actually have considered voting for him in the 6th - a Democrat in the mold of Evan Bayh and Brad Ellsworth. However, the tide is completely against him, and the race hasn't received any attention. In a year like 2006, I think this race could be somewhat close (though Republicans would still be favored to win). Now, though, I expect Messer to win, probably by around a 57-40 margin.

[Gass3268]

I know this discussion has always come up, but what makes Indiana so different then the rest of the Midwest? I mean Michigan/Minnesota are Democratic strongholds, Iowa/Wisconsin lean Democratic and Ohio is a pure toss-up, but Indiana is more similar to Kentucky then to the rest of its region. I just find it so interesting.

[tmthforu94]

I know this discussion has always come up, but what makes Indiana so different then the rest of the Midwest? I mean Michigan/Minnesota are Democratic strongholds, Iowa/Wisconsin lean Democratic and Ohio is a pure toss-up, but Indiana is more similar to Kentucky then to the rest of its region. I just find it so interesting.

I'm honestly not a great person to answer this question. I spent my early childhood years in Kansas, and now I live in Southwestern Indiana. I've only ventured to the northern part of the state a couple times, and have only been to states like Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio a couple of times.

Here's what I can tell you though, at least for my area. The southern half of Indiana is basically part of the South, IMHO. A more proper way to divide state lines would have been to take Illinois and Indiana and split it in half North and South, not East and West. You have a lot of evangelicals around here who are very socially conservative - you rarely see a pro-choice candidate, and the few that exist usually end up on the wrong side on Election Night. We make up a good chunk of the Indiana electorate, and it's something I'm not sure other Rust Belt states have.

Also, just mentioning, I've always been so confused by the term "Midwest", because it has a different meaning to everyone. I always considered the Midwest to be Kansas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Nebraska, etc., but a lot of other people seem to think of it as this area. Hmm...

[JoeyJoeJoe]

Thanks for the response.  I thought that since Dems had gotten a seious recruit in the 5th, they might have at least tried there a little bit.  I hadn't heard about either race since the primary, so I was wondering.

[bore]

I know this discussion has always come up, but what makes Indiana so different then the rest of the Midwest? I mean Michigan/Minnesota are Democratic strongholds, Iowa/Wisconsin lean Democratic and Ohio is a pure toss-up, but Indiana is more similar to Kentucky then to the rest of its region. I just find it so interesting.

The other states either have larger cities and/or toss up d leaning rural areas. Indiana doesn't have a Detroit or an iron range, so there is not enough to cancel out the super republican suburbs and rural areas.

[tmthforu94]

http://www.courierpress.com/news/2012/oct/30/no-headline---8thdistrict/

Congressman Larry Buchson leads former State Representative Dave Crooks by a 51-35 margin. This was conducted by Public Opinion Strategies for the Buchson campaign. I can say that yesterday, I spoke with someone high up in the Bucshon campaign, and he said that for polling, they based it on a worst-case scenario, which is a mix of 2004 and 2008. Since they felt comfortable to begin with, the survey also had no "attack questions" on Crooks.

[tmthforu94]

Some notes:
- Gregg seems to have some late momentum, but it won't be enough to win. My guess is around 50-42-6.
- At this point, I'd say there is a 95% chance Republicans have 7 of the 9 Congressional seats here.
- Also, being struck with the reality that the GOP won't take the Senate regardless, I'm going to end up cheering for Donnelly on election night. I have a fundamental difference with him in terms of healthcare and government spending, but I truly believe he has Indiana's interests at heart, where I honestly don't think Mourdock does anymore - he just strikes me as an opportunist. Indiana deserves better than to be represented by someone as vile as Richard Mourdock.

Oh, if only Lugar had been nominated. This will be a nice "Told ya so" I'll be venting about for months and months after the election is over.

[tmthforu94]

My county's newspaper did a straw poll, and the party ID and such looked right. The results had Buchson winning 65-30, Mourdock winning 55-40, and Romney winning 71-27.

The numbers will be a tad closer - Romney should get around 65% here, Buchson should be around 60%, but what is troubling is Mourdock leading by just 15 points among a group that also favored Romney by 44 points.

Mourdock will likely barely scrape by with a win in Clay County - that spells recipe to a comfortable loss overall. I'm going to say Donnelly wins this 51-43-6.

[Gass3268]

I'd love to see a county map of how you think the Indiana Senate race will go!

[tmthforu94]

I'd love to see a county map of how you think the Indiana Senate race will go!

I'll try and get a rough sketch tomorrow. It'll look fairly similar to the 2008 Presidential map, but with a few more southern counties voting Donnelly.

[Torie]

Indiana is more Pub than the rest of the zone because it is more culturally traditional, it is "in" to be young and a Christian, it's light on the ground with upper middle class liberals, and the base of the Dem support there is white working class folks who have been trending Pub as the private sector unions died. And the Indianapolis Star is still a conservative rag so far as I know, unlike most big city papers. It also doesn't have many Hispanics of course, but yes that is true of the region in general outside of Chicago. It also has less of a Yankee cultural population than say Michigan, Wisconsin, and Ohio and Illinois (Protestants from New England), which population has trended to the Dems. Just my guess at it.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

Try the curbstomp Stutzman threw on the democrat in the third.

Stutzman 2018 would destroy Silent Joe.

Jackie won :-)

Indiana has also a tendancy to be nortorious vote splitters

[tmthforu94]

Well, I said Donnelly would win 51-43. He won 50-44. So I was pretty close.

Every district voted exactly how I thought it would...except the 2nd. I expect Walorski to win by around 10 points - the district is much more friendly to her than 2010, and she faced a weaker opponent. I was completely shocked at how close that race was, but at least she held on!

Also, I'll officially jump on the bandwagon - Stutzman `18!!!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Well, I said Donnelly would win 51-43. He won 50-44. So I was pretty close.

Every district voted exactly how I thought it would...except the 2nd. I expect Walorski to win by around 10 points - the district is much more friendly to her than 2010, and she faced a weaker opponent. I was completely shocked at how close that race was, but at least she held on!

Also, I'll officially jump on the bandwagon - Stutzman `18!!!

I thought he had his eyes set on 2016?

[tmthforu94]

Coats has been raising money - all signs point to him running for reelection. His voting record has been solid as well, so I don't see him being primaried either.

[Mr.Phips]

Well, I said Donnelly would win 51-43. He won 50-44. So I was pretty close.

Every district voted exactly how I thought it would...except the 2nd. I expect Walorski to win by around 10 points - the district is much more friendly to her than 2010, and she faced a weaker opponent. I was completely shocked at how close that race was, but at least she held on!

Democrats should keep IN-02 in their sights.  Perhaps Tim Roemer would run there?  Its quite a bit like his old district. 

[JoeyJoeJoe]

What about Todd Rokita for Senate?  He's already run statewide.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

Indiana is more Pub than the rest of the zone because it is more culturally traditional, it is "in" to be young and a Christian, it's light on the ground with upper middle class liberals, and the base of the Dem support there is white working class folks who have been trending Pub as the private sector unions died. And the Indianapolis Star is still a conservative rag so far as I know, unlike most big city papers. It also doesn't have many Hispanics of course, but yes that is true of the region in general outside of Chicago. It also has less of a Yankee cultural population than say Michigan, Wisconsin, and Ohio and Illinois (Protestants from New England), which population has trended to the Dems. Just my guess at it.

I recently drove through Indiana, and I think it gave me a pretty good feel for the state's politics. You can see that there's a lot of farm country, which we all know is pretty decisively Republican (despite its absolute dependence on government subsidy). But once you get to the suburbs of Indianapolis, you get a different feeling. The area is much more modern. People congregate at Starbucks. People own iPads. They're Republicans, a lot of them, but they're living in the 21st century.

That's why Donnelly won. These voters took a look at Mourdock, and didn't see themselves. They saw some bizarre caricature of the worst of the Republican Party. They saw someone who, while pro-life like them, took his beliefs to a hateful extreme that made it sound like he was blaming women for their own rapes. They saw a man who, in the primary, said that it was his duty to inflict his beliefs -- these ugly, reprehensible beliefs -- on others.

Romney isn't that kind of Republican. It's hard to know what Romney truly believes (and personally, I think his position on social issues has a very unfortunate super-conservative Mormon taint to it), but it's easy to separate Romney from Mourdock. That's why Romney won. Voting for Mourdock requires a very specific ability to rationalize brutally out-of-step, countercultural behavior. And in the end, that's all the votes he got: Some from hyperpartisans who were willing to look past clear faults to win a GOP Senate, and some from tea party true believers who think it was a mistake giving women the right to vote. That's just not a winning coalition in Indiana or Missouri.

[adma]

Indiana's like an Ohio where a Columbus totally overpowers anything a la Cleveland or Cincinnati.