The News-Sentinel's Ryan Lengerich did a good analysis of the 3rd District congressional race between Mark Souder and Tom Hayhurst race showing that Souder lost Fort Wayne, squeaked by in Allen County because of his good showing outside the city, and beat Hayhurst comfortably in the other 3rd District counties. I don't completely buy either Souder's explanation ("Fort Wayne, even with annexation, isn't quite as Republican as people think it is" or Hayhurst's ("I think it means there are a lot of thinking voters out there that are willing to look at a candidate for either party").
I think voters here were voting for the hometown guy, a well-liked City Council member, rather than the out-of-towner, someone who used to live in this area but is now identified as a creature of the Beltway. If the Democratic opponent had been from Elkhart County or Noble County, he would have won there, for the same reason.
But Hayhurst is right that the mayor's race is up for grabs, with either the Democrat or Republican being able to win it. And we're likely to have a 5-4 council again; it's anybody's guess which party will have the majority. An interesting part of the equation next year will be all those new Aboite Township voters, when tend to be Republican. Many of them are ticked-off, didn't-want-to-be-annexed Republicans. How many will blame Democrat Mayor Graham Richard, in office when the annexation happened, and how many will blame Republican former Mayor Paul Helmke, who got the whole thing started?
Comments
That is an interesting question Leo...
My guess is that most Allen County residents associate annexation with both Democrats and Republicans. Most annexation votes are unaminmous votes of the Fort Wayne City Council.
Both Democrats and Republicans support annexation in Fort Wayne...
Mike Sylvester
I'll bet even the Hayhurst campaign would admit that they probably didn't get enough face time outside the city. I'm not saying they didn't try, but these things can take some time.
If Souder believes a Democrat has to win the city by 10pts then he's making a huge miscalculation. Many things can turn an election and I have a feeling things are going to continue to be difficult for Souder in this district...
The Democrats tried to demonize Mark Souder as wasting time on a Reagan coin; nobody believed that was all there was to the primary race or that that was a significant point to target.
It's also significant that the NRA papered gun owners' and 2nd Amendment defenders' mailboxes with letters informing us that Mr. Hayhurst's office FAILED to fill out and return his survey declaring his political convictions on supporting that particular 10th of our Bill of Rights, and the NRA gave him a low grade as a direct result of dropping that ball.
Hayhurst also tried to ride the coattails of the "Change" theme and that may not have worked in his case, since Souder has been, whatever else one may think, effective these last dozen years and expectations are that he will continue to be influential despite the shift in Congress.
When people smell change in the wind, the cautious tend to lean into it, and Souder could be counted on by voters as a well-rooted senior representative who has at least tried to maintain local ties while Hayhurst had the disadvantage of being an untested political quantity who would have been a freshman in the House and might have been induced to vote with liberal leadership rather than with the constituency.
Just a few guesses.
Seriously,
You're going to have to explain the comment that you think Souder has been "effective". I suppose you have a set a much lower standard for your representation than I have...