Subscribe
Jobs
Cars
Real Estate
Apts
Classifieds
Shop
Dan Coats finished dead last among a straw poll of people who attended a debate of the five candidates seeking the Republican nomination for U.S. senator in Warsaw.
Which, in itself, means little.
Sponsored by the Tea Party-esque Kosciusko Silent No More, the forum was destined to draw more of a right-wing, anti-incumbent audience – the kind of crowd that would oppose Coats. Further, though the estimated attendance was 400, fewer than 250 participated in the straw poll.
State Sen. Marlin Stutzman received 80 votes; Richard Behney, himself active in the Tea Party movement, was a close second with 76; Don Bates Jr. received 47; former U.S. Rep. John Hostettler received 18; and Coats had 16.
Just how major a force the Tea Party movement will be in the May primary is unknown, but the further to the right the GOP nominee, the harder it will be for him to win in November.
One point that is worth noting: The pitfalls of a five-person race was clear in the straw vote, with Stutzman winning with just about 33 percent of those who voted and only 20 percent of the attendees.
Those pitfalls won’t change, and they will make voter turnout essential in May. The Tea Party supporters will show up, but they could well split their support behind Stutzman and Behney. Coats’ challenge will be to make sure his supporters turn out in a big way.
While opponents seek to use Coats’ political experience against him in what is shaping up to be an anti-incumbent year, the former senator’s campaign is trying to use it as an advantage. A recent news release referenced “Dan’s Ability to Start on Day One,” as if any other candidate won’t show up for work when the Senate convenes.
The “Day One” theme will likely be recurring throughout the Coats campaign.
The Indiana Court of Appeals threw out the state’s voter ID law because it violated the state constitution’s “privileges and immunities” clause, creating a higher burden for voters who cast ballots at the polls on Election Day than those who mail in ballots.
But when both sides argued the constitutionality of the law before the state Supreme Court law week, the dispute went far beyond absentee ballots, bringing up again central questions about how difficult it is to receive an ID and whether anyone has really been denied the right to vote because of the requirement.
From a legal standpoint, the League of Women Voters – which challenged the law – was making a “facial challenge,” arguing the entire law is unconstitutional on its face. The court of appeals ruling focused more on how the law was applied – or, rather, not applied – to absentee voters.
