As a member of both the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate, Dan Coats was a leading champion for pro-life policies. Dan Coats was the author of key pro-life amendments, including a law that prevents the government from penalizing medical training programs for refusing to provide training in abortion. In addition, he was part of successful efforts to curb federal funding of abortion and an early supporter of the successful pro-life campaign to ban partial-birth abortion.
His opponent, Brad Ellsworth voted to enact President Obama’s pro-abortion health care legislation – legislation which will provide government funding for health plans that pay for abortion on demand, and also contains multiple provisions that will promote the rationing of lifesaving medical treatments.
If I was a Democrat, I might suspect that Rasmussen waited with malice aforethought to release this poll:
Two of the three top Republican hopefuls for the U.S. Senate in Indiana continue to hold double-digit leads over Democratic Congressman Brad Ellsworth. Ellsworth supported President Obama’s health care plan in a state where opposition to the legislation is higher than it is nationally.
The two candidates with double-digit leads are Dan Coats and John Hostettler. The third – Marlin Stutzman (see Erick’s endorsement here) – is up ‘merely’ seven points, and that’s apparently because of a larger block of undecideds: Ellsworth is currently looking at 32-34% support across the board. Which, probably not coincidentally, is about the percentage (35%) of Indiana voters who like the health care monstrosity that Ellsworth and his fellow-Democrats are about to wish upon us. But, supposedly, the President is going to help out there, on the campaign trail and everything. Since the Washington Post seems to have developed a sudden, fairly specific case of partial amnesia, let me refresh its institutional memory of candidates that President Obama has favored with his personal assistance: Jon Corzine, Martha Coakley – and Creigh Deeds. Surely the Washington Post remembers Creigh Deeds?
Crossposted to RedState.
Within hours of Indiana Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh’s retirement announcement last week, establishment Democrats in Indiana and Washington were signaling that Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D-Ind.) was their preferred favorite to succeed him. And by Friday, the last day to file for office, Ellsworth had announced his intention to run for the Senate seat.
It had all the makings of a neatly wrapped package, with just one exception: Rep. Baron Hill (D-Ind.) hadn’t signed off on the succession plan.
Now Hill is suggesting he’s seriously weighing a campaign — and other candidates are making calls to committee members to feel out support — and the process of choosing a Democratic Senate nominee could prove to be a lot messier than originally anticipated.
I was pleased to hear that Senator Evan Bayh had decided to not run for re-election; it meant that we’d pick up a Senate seat. I was also pleased to hear that Rep. Brad Ellsworth had decided to go for the seat; it meant that we’d pick up a Senate and a House seat. But if Baron Hill ends up being the nominee, then Bayh’s sudden retirement will mean that we will pick up a Senate and two House seats: the Democrats can’t make their Senate pick until after the primary and they’ve already picked the sacrificial victim for IN-08. And the progressive base doesn’t really like Ellsworth, anyway (NSFW language).
Some day I hope to hear just what the Obama administration specifically did to Evan Bayh, to fuel this revenge.
Crossposted to RedState.