Ballard to Hold “Special Campaign Announcement” on Saturday December 11th

An email just came through from the Ballard Campaign advertising a “special campaign announcement”. 

The event will be held on Saturday, December 11th at the Indiana War Memorial.  It begins at 10 am and they are using an online rsvp.

Matthew Tully tweeted:  Ballard is having a “special campaign announcement” on Dec. 11. … Sounds like it’s time for a reelection announcement.

Sounds about right to us.


About Washington Street Politics
Covering policy and politics from end to end of Washington Street in Indianapolis

13 Responses to Ballard to Hold “Special Campaign Announcement” on Saturday December 11th

  1. The Republicans only hope to holding onto the 25th Floor is if Ballard isn’t renominated. The guy has been nothing short of an embarassment to my party.

    • Paul, we need to think of some kind of a wager on this. We think the demographics are tough but it can be won.

  2. Mr. GOP says:

    Why doesn’t Paul run for Mayor? What is that coward afraid of?

    • Matt Stone says:

      So the only people who can criticize politicians are those who also run for political office?

      • Mr. GOP says:

        What has Paul ever won? Every office he ran for he lost!

  3. Mr. GOP, will the Mayor pledge to return all campaign money from shaking down government contractors and not take any from contractors in the future? If so, I’ll consider it.

    WSP, Ballard has spent three years alienating Republicans, breaking every campaign promise he made, and creating a legacy of insider deals, ethical lapses, wreckless spending and tax/fee increases. The only way the Republicans have a chance is to renounce the Ballard “legacy.”

    • Gary, we don’t agree with really any of the things you spread around as fact.

      We’re friends with a lot of Republicans and they don’t seem to be alienated. The rank and file precinct committeemen like the Mayor. We know you, Melyssa, Welsh and Flipper are all pissed off but that group does not represent the mainstream Republican Party. Most of them speak ill of your group a whole lot more than they do the Mayor.

      Ballard said he would make decisions for the CIty based on a long term vision rather than short term fixes. He’s doing that. These infrastructure improvements have to be made and he found the money to make it happen.

      He said he would make the City more transparent and he did that. He made lobbyists register if they are lobbying the City. Doesn’t sound like a guy with ethical lapses pushing insider deals to us.

      And he just saved $740 million dollars in one move which of course you wrote off because it doesn’t go with your talking points. Give us a break.

      • Erin Rosenberg says:


        I assume you meant Paul, not Gary? I think you and Paul are both correct. I don’t think it is reasonable to argue that Ballard has not violated many of his campaign statements- certainly those that were concrete (as just one ex: lobbying for abolishing property taxes which he did not do no matter how you spin it).

        However, I also don’t think that Ballard was elected to actually carry out those specific campaign proposals, but was elected, as WSP points out, to move the city towards the general concepts he advocated. While some of his hard core supporters agreed with his concrete campaign positions and supported him because they thought he was going to carry them through to the tee, I think most voters just believed that Ballard represented a shift in priorities from BP and were not familiar at all with the specifics. Using the property tax issue, it’s fair to say that Ballard lied given his specific campaign promise and also to say that, given very few voters even knew he had proposed that, his subsequent support for the Governor’s property tax reform plan was entirely consistent with the more general themes of his campaign that voters did support.

        I think that you, WSP, could stand to acknowledge that Ballard has not carried through on many of his specific proposals from the 2007 campaign and, in some cases, has gone in a completely different direction. And, I think his hardcore 2007 supporters should acknowledge that Ballard’s election was not at all a rigid mandate from voters for much of what he campaigned on.

        Personally, as someone who loves Indy, I am glad that Ballard shifted from many of his unworkable campaign positions of 2007 to more centrist governing positions. And as a political person, I do find it annoying that Ballard was not held more accountable for much of what he said in the 2007 campaign, but that’s politics and rehashing 2007 is not a good 2011 campaign strategy. I really don’t think most voters care that Ballard did NOT do specific things he said he was going to do in the campaign, mainly because they never knew what he’d said to begin with so they aren’t invested in the way that Paul, Melyssa, Gary, etc are.

        They care about what he has done since election and will vote on that. If you start at a clean slate, which is how I think the majority of voters will see Ballard, I think Ballard’s actual record is much stronger than most Ds want to acknowledge, but also has some pretty big weaknesses that the Rs should take seriously- for example, I do think the terms of the parking meter deal will be an issue and I think that Mr. Straub is about an inch away from derailing any credit Ballard would otherwise get for IMPD reform and could become a massive liability for Ballard. When you add in the demographics of Indy, i think Ballard’s record falls short of tipping the scales for re-election, but not nearly by as much as most people seem to be predicting.

    • Mr. GOP says:

      Will you pledge to run and actually win something, loser boy?!

  4. We definitely meant Paul not Gary. Our apologies to Gary!

    Erin, you’ll notice we didn’t talk about the property taxes or some of the specific promises you referenced. We agree that moving in a different direction from Peterson is what most voters will end up caring about. We also think that those comments by candidate Ballard were made with the best of intentions but were not possible to complete given the mess that the Peterson administration left behind. Fiscally, Indianapolis was in a hole. Paul typically leaves out any accomplishments from the Ballard team though.

    The bottom line is that most people who voted for Mayor Ballard were not voting for candidate Ballard as much as they were voting against Peterson. You are correct that they will judge him with a clean slate based on the results of his time in office rather than campaign promises no one ever heard.

  5. Mr. GOP says:


    With the way the FOP has been acting and their legal defense of Bisard, I don’t think anyone has to worry about what they have to say.

    • Matt Stone says:

      But the FOP endorsement was seen as something big for Ballard back in 2007.


      “What has Paul ever won? Every office he ran for he lost!”

      Ok Anonymous, what office did you run for and win?

      • Mr. GOP says:

        I’ve never run for anything, but I don’t hold myself out as an “expert” either.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: