Texts to eighth graders. Bomb threats. Swatting attacks.

President Donald Trump’s allies, encouraged by the big man himself, tried every tool they could think of to pressure Republican state senators in Indiana to support redrawing the Hoosier State’s congressional maps before the next election.

Trump-aligned political action committees threatened to throw money into primary election races. They summoned the memory of Charlie Kirk, who publicly supported redistricting in Indiana before he was killed at a college speaking event in Utah. They threatened to revoke federal funding — a threat mirrored by Indiana Gov. Mike Braun, who supported redistricting.

All of the arm-twisting, however, was ultimately for naught.

Despite Trump winning Indiana by nearly 20 percent in 2024 and Republicans holding 40 of the 50 seats in the Indiana Senate, only 19 senators — all Republicans — voted in favor of redistricting. Trump’s attempt to redraw Indiana’s congressional map didn’t even secure a majority among state senators in his own party.

The fundamental issue was that the redistricting plan was wildly unpopular among Hoosiers. Given a choice between angering a lame-duck president during his final few years in office and angering voters who can elect someone else, many of Indiana’s Republican senators made the sensible choice to listen to their voters.

That said, more than a few senators made it plain that the offended sensibilities of their voters were only part of the problem. 

Sen. Greg Goode (R-Terre Haute), who was the victim of a swatting attack, criticized the “over-the-top pressure” and “threats of violence, acts of violence” that preceded the vote.

Sen. Mike Bohacek (R-Michiana Shores), who has a daughter with Down syndrome, took offense at Trump calling Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz “retarded” in a Thanksgiving Truth Social post. As Bohacek put it in a Facebook post, “[Trump’s] choices of words have consequences.” 

Sen. Greg Walker (R-Columbus) tearfully announced he wasn’t just opposing redistricting — he was also taking a stand against the intimidation and threats leveled against him and his colleagues by supporters of the measure. 

Sen. Sue Glick (R-LaGrange), who authored a bill that imposed a near-total abortion ban in Indiana — she’s clearly no “Republican In Name Only” by any reasonable definition of the term — told CNN after she voted to oppose redistricting that, “Hoosiers are a hardy lot, and they don’t like to be threatened. They don’t like to be intimidated. They don’t like to be bullied in any fashion. And I think a lot of them responded with, ‘That isn’t going to work.’”

In short, several of Indiana’s senators told anyone who would listen that they voted against redistricting because doing so annoyed the right people — namely, the ones threatening their careers and their families. Instead of giving something for Indiana’s senators to vote for, the bullies texting their children and calling the police to raid their homes on false pretenses gave them something to vote against.

High-pressure political gamesmanship is nothing new, of course, nor is it unique to Indiana.

Nevada’s senators, for example, complained mightily about the level of pressure they experienced before they voted against a bill that sought to drastically expand the number of transferable tax credits available to film studios. Sen. Dina Neal (D-North Las Vegas), for example, called the vote “a referendum on special interests” before she voted in favor of the bill. Sen. Robin Titus (R-Wellington), meanwhile, chastised lobbyists for bullying while other lawmakers stated for the record that they could not be bribed.

To be fair to supporters of the film tax credit bill, it must be said that there’s a substantial difference between heated lobbying during a special session and the campaigns of harassment experienced by Indiana’s senators. When a lobbyist threatens to rescind an endorsement or throw resources behind an opponent in a primary election, that’s perfectly normal and in bounds.

Even so, there are limits to what people can be pressured into, especially when the pressure is applied ham-handedly.

Supporters of the film tax credit certainly have every reason to be upset with Assm. Selena La Rue Hatch (D-Reno), who nearly succeeded in her efforts to stop the bill from being heard at all in the special session. She came one vote shy of that after Assembly leadership decided at the last second that an absent member could remotely vote in favor of hearing the bill.

Given that, it’s neither surprising nor inappropriate for supporters of the bill to vocally express their frustrations with her, especially since the bill failed. 

Even so, they should be careful how they do so. According to KUNR, one supporter described La Rue Hatch — who, in transparency, is my state assemblymember — as “the stereotypical Northern Nevada woman who is bored that just does not f— happy with life or whatever her problem is” while he and a co-host interviewed Attorney General and Democratic gubernatorial candidate Aaron Ford on a podcast.

Nevada’s Legislature is uniquely majority-female. Additionally, 2 of the 5 senators who don’t represent Clark County voted in favor of the bill even though nearly all of the benefits of the bill were focused there.

It’s one thing to express displeasure about an individual assemblymember. Before the special session, La Rue Hatch’s voting record was the furthest left of all sitting legislators and she was tied for first among Democrats in voting against her own party’s majority. Given her voting record, her popularity among even her Democratic colleagues may not have been uniformly positive.

By painting opponents with lazy stereotypes, however, supporters of the film tax credit bill risk negatively polarizing potential supporters into fervent opponents.

How does Sen. Lisa Krasner (R-Reno) now feel knowing she voted in favor of a bill that was supported by people who are so dismissive of Northern Nevada women like her? Will she be more or less likely to support such measures in the future?

As for Ford — who will likely face Northern Nevada woman Alexis Hill in the Democratic gubernatorial primary — he may remember how appearing on the podcast placed him in the same camera frame with some obvious misogyny in a race that he needs women’s support to win. If he loses the race due to depressed turnout among women voters, he and his supporters may hold a grudge.

When lobbying Indiana’s majority-Republican legislature, Trump and his supporters treated his potential allies like enemies. They bullied, harassed and attempted to intimidate legislators who had stronger personal connections with each other than they could possibly have with the president, all while Trump ran his mouth on social media and called people names. When all was said and done, Trump didn’t give legislators any reason to want to do him any favors. Instead, he gave them an endless firehose of reasons to oppose him.

Nevada’s lobbyists should learn from Trump — by taking care to ensure they don’t make the same mistakes.

David Colborne ran for public office twice. He is now an IT manager, the father of two sons, and a recurring opinion columnist for The Nevada Independent. You can follow him on Mastodon @[email protected], on Bluesky @davidcolborne.bsky.social, on Threads @davidcolbornenvor email him at [email protected]. You can also message him on Signal at dcolborne.64.