I moved to Indiana in 1989, and for all the years since, until a couple of months ago, Lugar had a rare reputation as a statesman and a gentleman. Some of his positions and decisions could legitimately be described as insufficiently conservative for the current political climate, but he could have found ways to remind voters of his accomplishments. Instead, almost all we saw, ad nauseum, were heavy-footed, disingenuous attack ads. You know the kind -- where the same old voice actors use the same melodramatic phrasing. To put it mildly, it does not encourage me to vote for a candidate when that candidate assumes I mindlessly respond to ominous tones and nasty adjectives. And the ads kept coming, even after their distortions were exposed.
We're all used to this approach by now, and it may not be feasible to penalize every candidate who indulges in it, short of plugging our ears and refusing to vote. But when a candidate who should know better and is assumed to know better stoops to this kind of campaign, we can hold him accountable. And we did. I've been reading the recaps, and it's clear I'm not the only one who found the tactics of Lugar et al. offensive as well as surprising.
I have my concerns about Indiana losing the benefits of Lugar's connections and seniority. My husband works at Crane, and I think it likely that Lugar has been protecting Crane effectively and would continue to do so. (FWIW, I firmly believe it's worth protecting. Crane does a great deal of valuable and high-quality work, the giggle potential of a naval base in Indiana notwithstanding.) I don't know whether Mourdock -- or, for that matter, Donnelly -- can provide comparable protection. But not only am I a small-government Independent with tea party sympathies, but I could not bring myself to reward Lugar for diving into the slime pit.
Retire in peace, Senator. I'm sorry you left this way.