From the Evans-Novak Political Report (via e-mail – no link):
While some discuss a fourth election contest between Rep. Baron Hill (D), and former Rep. Mike Sodrel (R), Hill may actually be preparing for a run against Gov. Mitch Daniels (R). For Hill, the equation is simple: a weakened Republican governor in a mostly conservative state, with no other obviously strong Democratic candidates in the wings. Although Republican polls smile on Daniels, nearly everyone attributes the failure of GOP congressional candidates last year to anger over some of Daniels’s official acts, such as the privatization of the state’s Northern Toll Road and the shift to Daylight Saving Time.The Democratic mayors of Fort Wayne and Indianapolis have decided against entering the race, as has Sen. Evan Bayh (D). That leaves only State Senate Minority Leader Richard Young (D).
Meanwhile, Hill’s own conservative district could give him trouble again in the presidential election year — as it did unexpectedly in 2004 — should he try to stay in the House. This will particularly be the case if someone like Hillary Clinton heads the Democratic ticket.
Should Hill decide to run for governor, Sodrel would be heavily favored to take back this seat against any comer.
One additional detail to note is that Hill had by far the weakest showing of the three Democrats who beat Republican incumbents in Indiana last year. He won with just 50% of the vote, and indeed, a Libertarian candidate took nearly 10,000 votes – just a shade more than Hill’s margin over Sodrel.
So I do agree that this might be a possible “escape route” for Hill, and that it would probably come at the cost of his current seat. However, I’m not sure Novak is right about Daniels’ current approval ratings. In November, he was 41st in net approval among all governors according to SUSA, at 43-49. And it’s worth noting that four of the guys who were less popular than Daniels no longer hold office.
On the flipside, a more recent poll puts Daniels at 57-40. But be aware that the firm that took this poll, Public Opinion Strategies, is a Republican outfit. And while Daniels didn’t commission this poll (the Indiana Association of Realtors did), he’s been a client of theirs in the recent past. I look forward to seeing SUSA’s next survey to see where things really stand.
Race Tracker pages (feel free to edit as needed): IN-GOV | IN-09.
Hill can hold this seat as long as he is prepared for a fight. He survived in 2000 as Bush swept the district than again in the 2002 Republican wave. He lost in 2004 because he was unprepared. I don’t want to risk losing this seat.
What about Roemer?
Keep in mind that Schansberg-Lbt, ran to the Left of Hill-D.
If the Lbt’s run a viable Prez Candidate I would expect that Schansberg would be likely to run again and could be a problem for Hill-D.
Yes, the top of the ticket could be of serious influence in this CD, as you mentioned.
Other than the obvious probable loss of a Congressional district, a “Hill for Governor” campaign has a lot to recommend it. He’s well known and liked among state Democrats, and would unite the various factions of the party behind him — white liberals (yeah, there are a few of us), Lake County and Indianapolis blacks, union members, rural and small town conservative Democrats, etc. In statewide elections, Democrats cannot win without a strong showing in the southern river counties (where, for example, Joe Kernan did not do nearly as well as he needed to), and Hill would bring in the vote here. The question would be how he would stack up against Daniels in places like the moderate/independent Indianapolis townships (places like Lawrence, Southport, Beech Grove, etc.) — the people that historically have been Republican, but supported Frank O’Bannon and Evan Bayh, and are generally trending Democrat.
I wouldn’t put too much stock in the widely-divergent polls. Perhaps more important for Mitch Daniels is that he has lost (and never really firmly had) the confidence of many of the most conservative elements of the party — especially the social conservatives. They may vote for him, but I wonder how many are going to do all that much more. It is still up in the air whether or not he’ll face a strong conservative challenge. Especially if he does, that will soften him up and make him even more vulnerable to the populist type of campaign Hill would be likely to run.
That said, don’t count Daniels out yet. He’s got a substantial amount of money in the bank, and here in Indiana, we tend to re-elect our incumbents more than most places. Since we allowed governors to serve two terms in the 1960s, we’ve NEVER thrown one out of office (unless you count Kernan as an incumbent. Every one of them has served two terms — O’Bannon, Bayh, Orr, Bowen — and actually have never been seriously challenged for re-election. The last time we threw a sitting Senator out of office was when Dan Quayle beat Birch Bayh in 1980. Daniels has a record of things he’s done to take to Hoosiers (some of which I agree with, most of which I don’t). If he can sell it, even to some extent, he can be re-elected.
Perhaps the best thing for our side in a Hill/Daniels match-up would be the personalities of the two candidates, and how much people can like and relate to them. Hill effectively comes off as “a regular guy”, while Daniels comes off as a stubborn, snarky multi-millionaire (probably because he is a stubborn, snarky multi-millionaire) …
Hill would make a strong candidate but having said that we need him to keep the 9th congressional district. Many affluent suburban republicans from Ohio are crossing the river and living in Indiana where land and home prices are cheaper and it is only a short commute to work. We did throw 3 incumbent congressmen out of office this past November so it can be done. Daniels is weak but at this point the Democrats have no one with any star power to run.
Baron Hill could have run statewide for Governor without running for Congress again. We spent so much money trying to just have to hand it back to Mike Sodrel again is just a disaster.
I think Hill might do better for governor. He’s run statewide before (for the Senate) and is well known. Here in the 9th he’s getting a little too well-known. Sodrel’s biggest ads stressed the Washington insider image, and Hill had to work hard against that. In addition he’s really not liberal enough for the 9th district; Nancy Pelosi got a much better crowd on a visit here four or five years ago for a Democratic fundraiser than Hill would.
Republican shills Evans/Novak say:
and Kathy Davis.
And Vi Simpson.
The piece was planted to give Sodrel supporters hope.
There is no reason for Democrats to let Evans/Novak pick the Democratic contender for Governor.
There is no reason for Baron Hill to turn his back on all the money that was spent to put him back in his Congressional seat.
There is no reason to encourage Tim Roemer, who is anti-choice, to return to public life. His shot was Lugar’s seat, and he let us down. (What if Lugar’s health had failed, during the campaign season? The ballot slot was empty.)
The only piece of interesting news in this little Republican-backed minefield (if it’s true) is that Graham Richard isn’t interested in running for Governor, and I hope that may mean that he’s having serious thoughts about a challenge for the Republican-help Congressional seat in his district, which displayed surprising softness in the 2006 cycle.
Similarly, I wonder if Bart Peterson has his fingers crossed that Julia Carson is finally ready to retire.
I think Novak is wildly optimistic about Sodrel’s chances as well. He lost the district after only one term, alienated a lot of voters by going negative heavy and early in both 2004 and 2006, and confirmed that image by his boorish post-election behavior. He has enough money of his own to try another run, but I imagine the smart Republican money will be looking for another candidate.
Even though he’s not in the race, there’s still the possibility that Bayh will be on the presidential ticket as veep. This is because the eventual nominee may find that Obama/Hillary would be too distracting, taking the attention of the campaign away from the nominee. If Bayh’s the veep, then he might be able to boost the results of democrats statewide so even if hill does run for governor, another democrat might be able to keep the seat.
I am afraid that if Bayh were on the national ticket as the Veep candidate that would draw lots of republicans voters out to vote for him and that would hurt the Dems all down the ticket.
While he might not be popular among republicans, he was still elected and re-elected by strong margins. i don’t think he’s as dangerous as you say considering he was re-elected in 2004 by 25 points, while bush won the state easily. i’d say hillary is far more dangerous in bringing out republican partisans than bayh is.