Hostettler’s Unorthodox Senate Campaign

[ccharles000]

Four years ago, Indiana Republican John Hostettler was defeated for re-election by nearly 50,000 votes and 22 points — the most lopsided defeat of a House incumbent in the 2006 cycle and the kind of drubbing that might have convinced any other departing member to exit politics for good.

But Hostettler is a quirky maverick who has never followed the traditional rules of political engagement. This year, he’s trying to restart his political career by waging a long-shot bid for the seat of retiring Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh , hoping to ride a wave of anti-Washington sentiment not unlike 1994, when Hostettler and dozens of other unlikely Republican victors were swept into office.

It’s a tall order. Political analysts and Republican officials consider Hostettler an underdog in the primary against former Sen. Dan Coats on May 4, mainly because of Coats’ big advantages in name identification, fundraising and endorsements and Hostettler’s lack of a full-fledged and statewide political network.

Yet Hostettler’s history shows that he is not to be underestimated, particularly in an anti-establishment political environment in which an unconventional candidate could thrive, and in a primary likely to draw a low turnout.

http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docid=news-000003636650

[David in Canada]

1. He'll Do Well...

I think Hostettler will perform well in the primary and will win, especially if there is rain in northern Indiana on primary day.

He is also the weakest candidate in the general, for all the reasons cited in the CQ Politics article. The strongest candidate for the GOP in the general would be the young and fresh Marlin Stutzman.

I think that Coats is pretty weak as he has been out of the Senate so long (12 years) that, frankly, many voters didn't live in Indiana or were too young to vote in his last Senate race (1992!) and that others who did vote for him are dead and unable to vote (insert cheesy Chicago election joke here). In many ways, Coats is weaker than Hostettler as he is establishment and is not extreme enough for the Teabaggers to actually go out and vote for. He's not bad enough for them to waste their vote for a fringe third party candidate, but they aren't going to crawl naked over broken glass to carry his sorry ass to victory either...

On the other hand, Ellsworth is a much stronger candidate than Bayh. He has only been in Congress for four years (and thus, not much of an insider). He also can rail against Coats for living in Virginia that Bayh couldn't have done. I think when all is said and done, Ellsworth will defeat Coats by 55-45, assuming Coats a) wins the primary and b) isn't a placeholder for the GOP party apparatus to parachute a 'better' candidate.

[LiberalFighter]

2. I disagree on the many voters didn't live in Indiana or were too young to vote concerning Coats.

Only about 55,000 die each year in Indiana. I don't know what the migration effect but doubt it has that much effect. And the young voters are still limited. So maybe about 750,000 out of 6.5 million with only 2.5 million voting in 2004. I would venture to say that there are more Republicans dying than Democrats. And the younger the voters the more likely they are voting D.

Whoever is the Republican nominee will be starting at a major disadvantage without established constituency developed as an incumbent and having to spend a lot of their finances for a primary. In addition, there will probably be some strong conflicts developed that will be difficult to heal.

Steele may effect the outcome negatively too as he used up resources unwisely.