Election 2008: Indiana Again Leads the Way Against GOP

A few weeks ago, the Republican Senator Lugar, of Indiana, announced on the floor of the Senate that he could no longer support Bush's policies in Iraq, and called on the President to change course. This is old news by now, but the ramifications and meaning of Senator Lugar's action could have damning consequences for the GOP in 2008. As an Indiana Democrat, allow me to postulate, for a moment, on what this action by an Indiana senator means, given the nature of the people he represents, myself among them.

Indiana has long voted Republican in presidential elections, and is casually rolled up with all the other "Red States" on the political map. However, just below the surface, the Hoosier State is shifting. I can feel and see it, because I live, play, and work here. Senator Lugar's cutting off of his support for President Bush's Iraq fallacies has had a major impact, the effects of which have not yet been fully acknowledged.

Hoosiers have supported Senator Lugar for decades; he is a long-serving senator and holds many key, powerful positions in Congress, particularly those concerned with foreign affairs. He is admired by both Republicans and Democrats in Indiana for his ability to work bipartisanly on issues, approaching them from a moderate, logical, and non-blowhard perspective. He routinely receives the votes of not only Republicans in Indiana, but also many Democrats and Independents. His shift on Iraq should be viewed as a significant barometer of things to come.

The funny thing is, this has not been the first warning sign. In the 2006 Congressional elections, Indiana led the way against the GOP, throwing out one Republican House member after another, replacing them with moderate Democrats. Mitch Daniels, the wildly unpopular GOP governor, is despised by virtually every Indiana citizen, on both sides of the political spectrum, and is widely predicted to be overthrown by an upcoming Democratic candidate. And now, one of the most influential and respected senators in Congress, from Indiana, has broken with the neo-con party line on Iraq and opposed Bush. All this, from a supposed "red state."

What does this mean for Election 2008? Well, to anyone with a shred of observation, it means extremely bad news for the GOP. Senator Lugar is not a politician fighting for his life. He has, and still does, enjoy continual and strong support from Indiana citizens across the board. He did not stand up to Bush because he is in danger of losing his Senate seat. He did so because he had to represent the demands of his constituents, the people across Indiana who are tired of George W. Bush's tirades and misadventures, and are sick of the Republican party that still supports such lunacy. Bush is past any chance for awakening or redemption, but Lugar is and was not.

Recent presidential and congressional elections have shown us that it only takes one state, or a small amount of voters within a state, to change the outcome of an entire election and, thus, the fate of a nation. Indiana may not be the only "red state" with tremors of anti-Republicanism just under the surface, and 2008 is getting closer every day. Lugar was a symptom of what is happening in America, but Bush is too far gone to see it coming. Americans written off as safely in the Republican fold are revolting against Bush's incompetence, and their malaise is spreading and becoming broad opposition to the GOP itself. When Election Day finally arrives, I wonder, just how red will that map be?