Andre Carson, Mitch Daniels Cruising to Reelection

A new poll done by Research 2000 for CBS shows both Congressman Andre Carson and Governor Mitch Daniels cruising to large victories in their respective races next Tuesday.

Democratic Congressman Andre Carson is posting a 15 point margin against Republican social worker Gabrielle Campo, leading 53% to 38%. Carson is buoyed by near-universal support among black voters and a strong lead with independent voters. The only category Campo is leading other than Republicans is with white voters, where she has a 20-point edge.



Likewise, Governor Mitch Daniels leads former Democratic Congresswoman Jill Long-Thompson by 14 points, 54%-40%. Daniels leads among men and women, Republicans, Independents, and even takes 12% of Democratic voters. Most concerning for the Democrat are the numbers from Marion County, which show Daniels leading Long-Thompson by 8 in a county essential for a statewide Democratic victory. That's a 12 point swing downward for Long-Thompson since the last CBS poll in September. Of course we have to remember that during the last half of September and first half of October, JLT didn't even have ads on the air so it isn't shocking that her numbers cratered in Marion County. Daniels has run a positive campaign and has run some truly great advertisements. Jill was never able to cut through the clutter. To the right is one of MMM's more memorable campaign ads.

On the presidential front, the numbers tell the same story they did a month ago. Indiana is tight as a tick on a deer's behind. Democratic Senator Barack Obama and Republican Senator John McCain are tied with 47% each. This is fueled in part by Obama's performance in Marion County, where he is leading McCain by 8 points in a county that was split 50/50 between Bush and Kerry four years ago.

Interestingly, the number of ticket splitters is the key to this. Back in May, I think most observers would have said the most likely ticket split is the one that usually happens in Indiana. People will vote for the Republican presidential nominee and the Democratic candidate for governor. This year, the anecdotal evidence points to the reverse. I can't count the number of Daniels/Obama yard sign combinations I've seen here on Indy's north side.

The economy is the issue that dominates. And Obama's latest ad reminds voters of what McCain has to offer on that front:



That is probably one of my favorite Obama ads of the season.

For you junkies out there, Sarah Palin is the only candidate who has a negative favorability rating. She is seen favorably by 45% and unfavorably by 48%. The other Pres/VP candidates have a favorability of +10 or more.

Whatever the final numbers on Tuesday, Indiana will be deep purple rather than crimson.

Local Dominatrix Backs Adam Nelson for State Representative

Adam Nelson is a hard core Republican running for the state legislative seat currently held by David Orentlicher. The Indianapolis Star has endorsed Nelson's opponent, Democratic attorney Ed Delaney.


Over at Advance Indiana, Melyssa Donaghy (aka HFFT), attacked Ed Delaney as a "liar" and gave her implied support to "sweetheart" Adam Nelson. Donaghy of course is known for operating a bondage and discipline dungeon in her basement. The City of Indianapolis moved to shut that business down, along with other sexually related establishments.

Blogger HOOSIERS FOR FAIR TAX said...

Ed Delaney sent me a flyer months ago that he wanted to hear from people in his district and learn our concerns.

I called his office and emailed more than once. I still have not heard back.

As far as I'm concerned, he's a liar. If he's not going to listen to me BEFORE an election, he sure as hell won't hear me after the election.

He's a political insider elite.

Adam Nelson, on the other hand, is a sweetheart.

8:44 AM EST

Advance Indiana: Three Indianapolis House Districts Will Decide Fate Of Property Tax Caps

I have to think I'm not alone in wondering what brings HFFT to that conclusion. Was Mr. Nelson perhaps a client of hers? The good voters of the 86th district deserve to know. Does someone who pals around with a (former?) dominatrix have what it takes to represent the voters?

Call Adam Nelson and ask him about his relationship with Donaghy. Here are his contact details:

317-255-7728
adamnelson86@earthlink.net

IN-Pres Tight as a Tick. IN-Gov Not So Much

A new survey from Public Policy Polling suggests the presidential race in Indiana is tight, with Senator Barack Obama holding a statistically insignificant lead over Senator John McCain, 48%-46%. 6% of voters are still undecided or prefer another candidate. 92% of voters are "firm" in their commitment, meaning there is a very small group of 'persuadable' voters. Not a bad place to be in a pre-Powell poll.

Obama is buoyed by strong support from Democrats and a 10-point margin among Independent voters. Obama is registering only 89% of black voters, which seems relatively low given the historic nature of his candidacy, considering John Kerry and Al Gore received similar support among black voters in 2004 and 2000, respectively.

Unfortunately, the numbers for Indiana Governor are grim. Mitch Daniels is leading Jill Long-Thompson by a staggering 21 points, 57%-36%. Daniels is winning 86% of Republicans, a large majority of Independents, and even 28% of Democrats. I think this could be very true. I realize this is anecdotal evidence, but I've talked to a few people around my age who are all Obama voters. Several of them are voting for Mitch Daniels. When I ask them why they would do such a thing, they say they have no reason not to and not ONCE could anyone even name the person running against Daniels. Some of these are educated people.

This poll even looks at the two other statewide races, for Attorney General and for Superintendent of Public Education. In the AG race, Democrat Linda Pence has a statistically insignificant lead over Republican Greg Zoeller, 42%-39%. Republican Tony Bennett is leading Democrat Richard Wood by 38%-36% (read that as a tie, too). The key in these races are the undecideds. This far down the ballot, there are always a lot of undecided voters and most likely the party that can get the most straight party voters will prevail.

So, some great news, some okay news, and some really bad news.

Debate Reactions: Desperate, Angry McCain

The reviews of the final presidential debate are coming in, and they are not pretty for John McCain. McCain sneered, snarled, and grunted his way through the 90 minute match in hopes of throwing Barack Obama off his game. He failed, and miserably at that.

The snap polls conducted by CNN and CBS showed that Obama overwhelmingly “won” the debate. Here are the numbers:

CNN
Obama 58%
McCain 31%

CBS Undecided Voters
Obama 53%
McCain 22%

Snap polls have been criticized by Republicans as unreliable in the past few debates, yet they actually showed Obama underperforming compared to traditional multi-day polls. Republicans instead point to online “polls” at such places like Drudge Report, which suggest that McCain “won” the debate 73% to 25%. Gee, I wonder who is reading Drudge.

In addition to the snap polls, several networks had focus groups. All of those networks, including the Republican Fox News, had Obama as the clear winner of the debate. From the Fox News focus group:



McCain’s main problem tonight was that he was unfocused. He lashed out at Obama over everything, and didn’t even try to explain how he, John McCain, would be a better president. He pretty much called Obama a liberal tax increasing baby killer who pals around with terrorists. The reaction shots of John McCain when Obama was talking were priceless. He rolled his eyes, made strange noises, and sneered at Senator Obama. The voters, focus group members, and pundits all viewed that as desperate.

From the McCain-friendly Roger Simon at Politico:

John McCain needed a miracle in his final debate with Barack Obama on Wednesday night, a miracle that would wipe away McCain’s deficit in the polls and re-energize his flagging campaign.

He did not get one. The clouds did not part. Heavenly choirs were not heard. Instead, the American public heard angry attacks from McCain.

Sometimes McCain attacked directly, and sometimes he attacked sarcastically, but he never stopped attacking. And he never rattled Obama. Obama answered every attack and kept his cool.

Marc Ambinder at The Atlantic believes that ‘on points’ McCain may have actually “won” the debate:

But debates aren't usually won on points.

They're won on valence and visuals.

Emotions and body language.

And tonight, we saw a McXplosion. Every single attack that Sen. McCain has ever wanted to make, he took the opportunity tonight to make. Around 30 minutes in, McCain seemed to surrender the debate to his frustrations, making it seem as if he just wanted the free television.

His substance suffered; it didn't make sense at times. He seemed personally offended by negative ads; he tried to make a point about Obama's character, but all the sleight were those Obama allegedly inflicted on Obama: the town halls, campaign finance, negative ads, etc. He allowed himself to get caught up in his own grievances. It was just plain unattractive on television. He moved quickly from William Ayers to taxes without a transition. From Obama's opposition to trade agreements to taxes. No intermediate steps. Blizzards of words without unifying strings.

Ezra Klein at The American Prospect agrees with Ambinder that ‘on the points,’ McCain might have won but he lost the debate. He adds:

He was looking to land shots, and often succeeded. But the effort to find openings and vulnerabilities left him with little time to appear presidential. And if he connected with jabs, he never found his knockout blow. Worse, the attacks came at a cost: The angry energy showed on McCain's face as clearly as in his answers…

…McCain looks angrier and more petulant than any participant in any major debate I've watched. Watching him try to stay seated is like watching a furious child try and obey a timeout. He can hardly hold still.

Already, YouTube roll of McCain’s disgusted reaction shots have hit the street.



Overall, McCain may have fatally damaged himself tonight at a time when he needed to fatally damage Obama. I’m not talking about the presidential campaign, but about John McCain’s legacy. Instead of going out as the maverick straight-talker the public thought he was, he will be known as the angry old man who waged a nasty and dishonorable campaign. Nothing he does in the next 18 days will change that.

Open Comment to Advance Indiana

Today Advance Indiana suggested that gay people shouldn't support Obama because he took a trip to Kenya and did an appearance with a Kenyan politician who is a distant cousin of Obama. AI implied that Obama supports the Islamic Sharia Law which requires that gays be put to death.

Here was my response:

I watched the entire video and Obama said absolutely nothing to support Odinga. Of course on that same visit, he also met with other political leaders in Kenya but the editing job told the story it wanted to tell.

Show me some evidence that Obama actually supports Sharia Law any more than the rest of us do (every time we buy gas), then I might believe you.

Frankly, I don't know why you focus on national political issues. You don't have anything new or original to say. Your local commentary is far more interesting and I think it makes you more credible. When you try to link Obama to Sharia Law, you look like a lunatic.

Guilt by association is a terrible standard to hold people to. But I'm noticing more and more that those who oppose Barack Obama have nothing left but trying to tie him to controversial figures. Those dead-enders have lost the war of ideas. If the election were 100% about the issues, Obama would win with 60-70% of the vote. That is why this campaign (and frankly most modern campaigns) aren't about issues, they about character.

Frankly, I would rather vote for someone's tax policy than vote against them because they stood next to someone at a public rally. Oh well. It's over in 3 weeks.

A Brief History of the City of Lawrence, Indiana

Lawrence is one of the four cities within Marion County that were "excluded" under the Unigov policy in the 1960's. Under Unigov, the City of Indianapolis grew to include the entirety of Marion County, excepting only the excluded cities. Three of the cities, Lawrence, Beech Grove, and Southport elected their own mayor and council. The excluded cities also maintained their own police and fire forces as well as their own schools. The City of Lawrence is the in the Northeast corner of Marion County.

For much of my life, Lawrence continued to send one of the most corrupt and unethical men in the city to the mayor's office. Tom Schneider was a crook, a drunk, and a racist to boot. After nearly 20 years as mayor, Schneider decided to run for Marion County Sheriff in 2002. He defeated a former sheriff in the primary, a longtime friend of his named Joe McAtee.

During that campaign for sheriff against Democrat Frank Anderson, Schneider released an unusual mailer that included a blurred image of then-Congresswoman Julia Carson that was widely described as racist, or at the very least race-baiting. The image is below:

The Republican pulled the image, but it provided a narrative that Schneider was running an in-the-gutter campaign, while Anderson was playing above the fray. Frank Anderson was always going to win that election, but when Schneider's primary opponent Joe McAtee cut an ad endorsing Frank Anderson, the deal was sealed. Schneider was so ungracious he didn't even attend his party that night, didn't speak to the press, and didn't even thank his supporters.

In between his race for sheriff and his reelection campaign, Schneider thought it would be a good idea to privatize the Lawrence water company and sell it for cheap to political allies of his. In a period of months water bills in Lawrence doubled.
Voters, already embarrassed by his behavior in the race for sheriff, were pissed off about the privatization. The Democrats nominated a political neophyte, Deborah Cantwell, to challenge Schneider in the race.

I remember the election well. I thought Lawrence was so Republican that Schneider, crook or not, would have the seat for as long as he wanted it. When election returns came in showing Cantwell in the lead, I assumed they must be reporting the Democratic precincts first. But the lead never gave way, and Lawrence elected its first Democratic mayor in recent memory. Cantwell campaigned hard on the water issue, and so that was a major focus of her administration. She sued the utility company, alleging (rightly) that the deal wasn't legit and the consumers were getting screwed. At the end, she decided to settle but that made her look like a failure.

Cantwell had her own problems, too. Throughout her administration she was teased about being a body builder, she was accused of not actually living in Lawrence (her detractors said she lived in Broad Ripple), she hired bodyguards due to several "death threats," and she was allegedly romantically involved with the city attorney. Democrats on the city council voted with Republicans on big issues and Cantwell wasn't seen as being particularly effective.

In 2007, she was running against Republican Paul Ricketts, the former Lawrence Township Assessor who lost that job in 2006. Ricketts, too, was an interesting character. Ricketts admitted to trying to run over a man who allegedly hit on his wife. That man, Ron Ryker, decided to run for mayor as an independent candidate. Cantwell was soundly defeated.

Paul Ricketts has continued in the tradition of the Mayor of Lawrence being a political punchline. But that, my friends, will require another post.

IN Gov Race: Upset in the Making?

Last month, Jill Long Thompson's campaign for Indiana governor was virtually written off by most serious observers of politics. She pulled her ads, shut down field operations, spent time campaigning in previously "safe" areas, and has been virtually invisible in most of the state for the past three weeks.

The reason she took her ads down, she said, was because they were working so well that they achieved what they intended them to do. The reason they closed down field operations, she said, was because nobody anticipated that the Obama campaign would have such a strong presence in the state. Her fundraising is also going "strongly," though few major contributions have been reported recently.

Frankly, what I saw was a campaign that couldn't afford the ads, didn't have the funds or volunteers to sustain a field operation, and a campaign that is no longer getting the significant fundraising support support from groups like EMILY's List. All the while, Mitch Daniels, the corporate stooge intent upon selling our state to the lowest bidder, has been able to create memorable, folksy, positive advertisements.

The Pollster.com "poll of polls" shows the race trending to a blowout for Mitch Daniels, with JLT averaging in the mid-30's and Daniels averaging in the low-50's. The last poll to show Jill leading Daniels is a Down's Center poll from April which showed a 3 point lead.



Look at the information above, most good Democrats would ask "Is there hope?" Well, if two recent polls suggest that there is. A poll for the Indianapolis Star had JLT within striking distance of Daniels, who led 46%-42%. And now, a second independent poll from Research 2000 shows Jill in a statistical tie with Daniels:

Research 2000
600 Likely Voters -- MoE +/- 4%
Sept. 28-30

47% - Mitch Daniels
46% - Jill Long Thompson
3% - Other
4% - Undecided

The most dangerous opponent in politics is the underestimated opponent. Jill Long Thompson is very underestimated at this point in the campaign. Republicans might not feel as threatened as they would if Jill were leading, and so the "stop Jill" energy isn't really strong at this point.

We need to be clear that JLT, like any challenger, is an underdog in this race. But the pieces could be in place for a stunning upset that will have Chris Cilizza eating crow.