Political Hay
Coats is Clear
But only because Indiana conservatives were divided between Marlin Stutzman and John Hostettler.
In Indiana’s Republican primary for U.S. Senate, conservative insurgents got more votes than the GOP establishment. There was only one small problem: the party establishment had just one candidate in the race while the conservatives split their votes between four.
Two of those candidates, Tea Party activists Don Bates and Richard Beheney, did little to help former Sen. Dan Coats get a crack at returning to Washington as a legislator rather than a lobbyist. But strong pockets of support for both state Sen. Marlin Stutzman and former Rep. John Hostettler allowed Coats to parlay a fairly lackluster showing into a primary victory.
A pollster for Gov. Mitch Daniels told Politico that Coats needed to win at least 55 percent of the vote to avoid embarrassment. With 99.2 percent of precincts reporting, the ex-senator failed to break 40 percent. But Coats still finished first, suggesting that it was perhaps an embarrassment of riches.
Conservatives failed to beat Coats, but it wasn’t due to a lack of trying. In the waning days of the campaign, the Beltway right rallied behind Stutzman. Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) endorsed him and helped him raise over $200,000. Other prominent conservative endorsements followed.
Prior to that, the little-known state senator had been treading water. With low name identification, Stutzman fared the worst of the three major candidates in head-to-head match-ups against likely Democratic nominee Brad Ellsworth (though he did manage to narrowly outpoll the Democrat). An early leaked poll obtained by an Indiana political blog showed Coats at 29 percent, Hostettler at 26 percent, and Stutzman at 18 percent.
The only public poll of the GOP primary electorate, conducted by Survey USA, showed Coats at 36 percent, Hostettler at 24 percent, and Stutzman lagging behind at 18 percent. Even the poll taken for DeMint’s outfit, the Senate Conservatives Fund, found Stutzman stuck at 18 percent. But when the votes were counted last night, Stutzman zoomed to 29 percent and leapfrogged Hostettler for second place.
Hostettler remained a force to be reckoned with, however, as his grassroots army of conservative Christians still turned out. The former six-term congressman took nearly 23 percent of the vote. Stutzman was a fresh face, Hostettler a proven conservative. Together, they won a majority. Separately, neither was able to beat Coats.
Dan Coats is no liberal Republican himself. Yet since leaving Indiana he had grown comfortable with the ways of Washington, voting for the Brady bill and Ruth Bader Ginsburg because that was what was expected at the time. After leaving the Senate, Coats became a lobbyist for bailout recipients, tariff-increase beneficiaries, cap and trade, and a pharmaceutical industry that supported Barack Obama’s health care plan.
Coats was a compassionate conservative, not a combative conservative. His conservative critics were unfocused in their combativeness. The National Rifle Association sent out anti-Coats mailings highlighting his votes against the Second Amendment, but signaled both Stutzman and Hostettler were suitable pro-gun votes. Indiana Right to Life was the only organization that got to vote five times in the primary, initially endorsing all of the Republican candidates.
Nobody doubted that Hostettler was a combative conservative, voting against big government even when it was served up by Republicans. Despite drawing large crowds, he was a characteristically poor fundraiser, unable to afford television airtime for his hard-hitting anti-Coats ads. A bigger Hostettler haul might have deterred Washington movement conservatives from getting into the race on behalf of Stutzman and allowed him to consolidate the conservative vote.
In the end, Hostettler might have proved too willing to buck the party line. His opposition to the Iraq war earned him Ron Paul’s endorsement and a semi-successful Internet “money blitz” in April. It also made him the subject of an 11th-hour Stutzman campaign attack email alleging that Hostettler “is in agreement with Ron Paul’s views of Israel and the Jews.” The only evidence was a quotation from Hostettler’s antiwar book that was itself actually a quote from another author.
Thus conservatives ended the primary fighting each other instead of the Republican establishment. They will now put aside their differences and unite behind Dan Coats, with his 90 percent American Conservative Union rating, against a Democrat who voted for the stimulus, the public option, and a health care reform measure that did not prohibit taxpayer funding of abortion.
But many of these conservatives will always wonder: Could they have won this primary if either Stutzman or Hostettler had a clean shot at the frontrunner? How might the race have been different if Washington had stayed out and let Hoosiers pick their own candidates?
No one will ever know.
About the Author
W. James Antle, III, author of the new book Devouring Freedom: Can Big Government Ever Be Stopped?, is editor of the Daily Caller News Foundation and a senior editor of The American Spectator. You can follow him on Twitter @jimantle.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (90) | Leave a comment
Related Articles
More Articles by W. James Antle, III
More Articles From Political Hay
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/05/05/coats-is-clear
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Pingback| 5.5.10 @ 6:25AM
Twitter Trackbacks for The American Spectator : Coats is Clear [spectator.org] on To links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Ryan| 5.5.10 @ 7:58AM
Maybe it's the Louisianian in me, but any election that there is no 50%+1 votegetter needs a runoff.
Prickly Thorn| 5.5.10 @ 8:07AM
I agree with you completely my brother,....
old white guy| 5.5.10 @ 9:13AM
the first past the post is a disaster. in canada we use that way to determine winners in elections and a party can get a majority with 40% of the vote.
Anthony| 5.5.10 @ 9:18AM
Another Republican circular firing squad. When will the stupid party learn ?
loulou| 5.5.10 @ 10:30AM
Little Anthony has found himself a neat-o phrase: "Republican circular firing squad". Real clever, you copycat. It doesn't even apply in this case. If you're going to try out a nifty phrase, make sure it's appropriate, stupid.
Tomas| 5.5.10 @ 5:58PM
This is not exclusively a GOP problem, Anthony. To imply it is just reveals your partisanship.
The goal in this off-year election is to rid Congress of incumbents. Since Congress won't impose term limits on itself, we must do it for them.
Two problems with this: 1. While Congress' approval rating is at historic lows, voters always seem to adopt the "not my guy" attitude. Must be some other guy's problem.
2. The incumbent must be knocked out in the primary, else we get a repeat of the 2008 debacle. This is almost impossible given the number of candidates vying for the seat. Since the vote is so widely split, the incumbent skates into November.
It's nice to say, "I'm voting against the incumbent." However, when you are presented with 5 other choices, well your choices are limited by the abundance of their options.
And we're right back where we started.
-
Lunamaximus| 5.5.10 @ 9:25AM
I worked for Dan Coats' 1992 campaign and got to know him fairly well. Anyone who thinks Coats insufficiently conservative does not know Dan Coats. In fact, he was criticized at the time for being far to the right of his predecessor, Dan Quayle. It's critical that all conservatives support Coats to prevent a true wolf-in-sheep's-clothing, Ellsworth, from casting his first vote for Majority Leader Reid (or Schumer or Durbin).
loulou| 5.5.10 @ 10:43AM
Lunamaximus: I'm glad to hear that. Stutzman would have been better and maybe Stutzman's strong showing will be a reminder to Coats to not go wobbly.
A.M. Mallett| 5.5.10 @ 12:42PM
We know his voting record and his recent work history. What are we missing that you know?
GBowman| 5.5.10 @ 4:38PM
I also hope that you are right. A new fresh conservative face may have been interesting, but defeating Ellsworth is the primary goal. I'll back any horse that is running against the socialist agenda.
Roy| 5.5.10 @ 10:20AM
Yeah, this doesn't seem like too bad a result. Coats doesn't sound that bad and the other two made a good enough showing that Coats probably understands there an awful lot of conservative voters out there.
Somebody who "bucked the party line"(that is, embraced the Democrat party line) on Iraq would not have been my first choice, but if somebody like that won the primary in Wisconsin, I would certainly vote for them over any Democrat if they did not believe in vivisecting the unborn.
Mimi| 5.5.10 @ 11:38AM
I was routing for Marv, the farmer, But good luck to Dan even though 52% wasn't for him. I agree with Ryan, there should have been a run-off. In the future we need to rectify " The 3 -Way " and shoot for the "2-Way". This will take a non-egotist, and patriots to run..."THE SAKE OF THE COUNTRY" Any way the farmer, has a future. As for Durbin and Schumer a Majority Leader?... I don't know about Durbin bit as for Schumer he's on the '" THE NO-GO LIST" In N.Y. He's been on the public dole since law school, never had a real job! He does his Dem/damage and then 6 months prior to election-day he puts effort in to change his image. We New Yorker's got the " PICTURE" on Chuckie. It's too bad we can't Pataki and Rudy Guiliano to run for our 2 Senate seats in N.Y. I wish they would step-up for the good of the country!!!
W. James Antle III | 5.5.10 @ 12:06PM
Actually, closer to 61 percent of the Republican primary voters weren't for Dan Coats. Stutzman and Hostettler got 52 percent combined, but there were also two other candidates in the race who got the rest. Coats got a little more than 39 percent of the vote.
Mimi| 5.6.10 @ 10:45AM
W. James,...OOPS bad math on my part, lost the 8% of the 2 Tea Partiers. God Bless them both for getting out there, hope they keep trying and don't give up. Our country needs good citizen's in government now as never before!!!
pstreitz| 5.5.10 @ 12:34PM
This is another case of conservative republicans cannibalizing each other and allowing a moderate to cruise in. At what point, conservatives will be willing to forego their own individual goals for the good of putting one strong candidate forward, who knows? Probably never.
pfs
JP| 5.5.10 @ 4:27PM
The days of the Moderate Republican are over -perhaps for a generation. Coat's moderation in his earlier terms will not hold forth in today's economic, social, and political climate. Any moderate Republican who thinks he can ride the fence will get blown off by the coming hurricane of US government defaults, hyper infaltion, and increased unemployment. There is no way to mitigate $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities. By the time the next Congress convenes, some of those headwinds will surely be felt. Coats et als must know that when facing reality there can be no compromise. Either he will vote against Obama's agenda or he won't.
Derek Leaberry| 5.5.10 @ 12:40PM
If memory serves, Coats was a pal of John McCain in the Senate. He needs to be nailed down to the wall on immigration right away.
Pingback| 5.5.10 @ 1:08PM
News From 91.3 KUWS Congressman Dave Obey to retire links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Nobama| 5.5.10 @ 1:30PM
you can be sure there were plenty of dems voting in that primary.
Ohiolad| 5.5.10 @ 1:49PM
Wasn’t this what happened in the last presidential race where several conservative candidates split up the conservative vote, allowing the moderate RINO McCain to slip through? Isn't there some way to prevent this from happening?
astonerii | 5.5.10 @ 2:36PM
Nothing wrong with Coats. He is a solid conservative. I certainly prefer him to Hostettler.
Tim*| 5.5.10 @ 4:18PM
Coats :
* Voted YES on allowing more foreign workers into the US for farm work. (Jul 1998)
* Voted YES on visas for skilled workers. (May 1998)
* Voted YES on limit welfare for immigrants. (Jun 1997)
JP| 5.5.10 @ 4:22PM
The Hoosier GOP made the correct choice. If Hostetler won, Ellsworth would have plenty of ammo, and the race would tighten up come November. Ellsworth will probably either attack Coats as a stoogie for Big Pharma, or attempt to tie him to W or some such thing.
However, Coats will surely bring up Ellsworth's flip flop on ObamaCare, and the fact that as a House member he was in thrall to Pelosi about 90% of the time. Bayh really screwed his own party by wating so long to retire. A competitive Dem primary would have attracted some conservative Dems who voiced thier displeasure with ObamaCare. As it stands, Ellsworth will probably get beat by at least 5-8 points.
kaybaker| 5.7.10 @ 2:02PM
Don't kid yourself. Bayh knew exactly what he was doing by waiting to retire. This assured that there would be no opponent to Ellsworth in the primary; otherwise, Bama Brad might already be gone!
Matt| 5.5.10 @ 4:47PM
Anthony| Another Republican circular firing squad. When will the stupid party learn ?
I would rather have people voting for who they like in the primary, and unite in the general election. Dan Coats has a "90%" conservative rating. The 'Stupid' party will win this election against the 'stupid' Democratic candidate.
Smirking Weasel| 5.5.10 @ 4:55PM
Hostettler was the only candidate that could conceivably be called conservative in this race. Coats is a hack lobbyist and Stutzman showed his neo-con lack of character and ethics with his lying ad. Ellsworth would be a better choice than either of those two; he's at least as much a cultural conservative as either of them. Maybe Hostettler will finally realize the futility of turning the other cheek in politics and endorse Ellsworth as at least being a more honest choice than a leech lobbyist.
Stutzman should fade into well desrved ignominity and oblivion.
somnolence| 5.5.10 @ 5:53PM
It makes no difference if Ellsworth is a social conservative. He voted for Obamacare, and that does not bode well for the future of America. That and not dealing effectively with illegal immigration will kill us. Go Coats!
Purpleguy| 5.5.10 @ 6:17PM
Ooopsy - Conservatives lost again ... this bodes poor for the Conservative agenda in the fall election... hmmmm? The Reagan Revolution has died and the Tea Baggers are the last wimper of a proven failed philosophy and policy....
Tim*| 5.5.10 @ 6:54PM
Gee , Axis Sally !
" The most surprising single piece of data in the poll was Coats' strong standing among likely voters who "identify with the Tea Party movement". In that group...Coats got 30%...Stutzman 23%...Hostettler 21%...Undecided 11%...Bates 9% and Behney 4%. "
Nick| 5.5.10 @ 7:57PM
PurpleJackass,
Yeah, you're a real political expert.
Why don't you tell us all about how Virginia governors run for re-election, again. Dope.
Purpleguy| 5.5.10 @ 9:00PM
They can, just not consecutively... dick
Nick| 5.6.10 @ 3:38AM
PurpleJackass,
And, I was the one who informed you of that fact, twit.
Which completely destroyed the stupid point you were trying to make. Moron.
Have you learned how to spell "hypocrite" yet, brainiac?
somnolence| 5.5.10 @ 6:46PM
Conservatives hardly lost when Stutzmand and Hostettler got 52% of the vote between them. A misguided vote for the Brady Bill and support for Harriet Myers do not have the same impact on the American way of life as forced or coerced Obamacare, which in no way is equivalent to car insurance, Medicare, or Social Security. And of course liberals want to gradually siphon off of S.S. forever too.
Pingback| 5.6.10 @ 12:14AM
The American Spectator : Coats is Clear Help links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Joe Blow| 5.6.10 @ 12:34AM
Let's see if this guy does what he's supposed to. They have to know they are being watched more than ever. If he sours then we will hound them all to no end. Even more so since he claims to be conservative. We'll sniff out a left leaning RHINO cause they start to stench like the liberals themselves.
Pingback| 5.6.10 @ 5:47PM
Democracy Now! journalists sue police, Secret Service | RepublicanDaily.info links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Margie| 5.6.10 @ 6:52PM
I heard Coats on the radio yesterday. he sounded like one of the good guys to me! I'm glad he won. Especially against anyone with even the slightest stench on non-interventionism.
Pingback| 5.7.10 @ 12:47PM
Question for all the German Sheperd owners out there…? | Best Bagless Vacuum Cleaner links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Steel Stamping Necklaces | 5.8.10 @ 2:44AM
http://www.csteeljewelry.com/ Stainless steel jewelry
http://www.csteeljewelry.com/ stainless steel necklaces
Schwenkie| 5.8.10 @ 6:07PM
Lesson Learned: Do NOT do a 3 way run-off with candidates. It is lost opportunity sending in 2 great candidates against a 3rd opponennt. You just dilute your vote.
Pingback| 5.13.10 @ 12:26PM
Is mesothelioma a sign of Ceiling Cat’s favor? | Mesothelioma links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
fjdsk| 7.1.10 @ 2:26AM
beijing massage
shanghai escorts