-
Website
http://capitolfax.com/ -
Original page
http://capitolfax.com/2009/08/03/gallup-has-illinois-solidly-blue/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
wordslinger
96 comments · 42 points
-
Rich Miller
147 comments · 56 points
-
LoopLady
16 comments · 6 points
-
theoriginallynns
16 comments · 2 points
-
dupage dan
28 comments · 2 points
-
-
Popular Threads
Don't give me Peter Fitzgerald from the conservatives. He ran against a terrible Senator and worse campaigner. And, don't give me Jim Edgar or Thompson or Ryan. The business guys were there because they were already going to win.
Ty Fahner and the rest of the star chamber GOP finance committee will sit on their hands when it looks like the D candidate is going to win to ensure that they keep getting their slice of the pie. It would be best if all of the GOP Guv candidates turned their backs on these blowhards; raised their own money; built a true grassroots organization around 21st Cent. technology; and didn't put up with the whining phone calls from Fahner and the rest.
Kirk is good at schmoozing insiders like Hinz.
Let's see how Kirk does when he takes questions from regular citizens (Kirk was a lying jerk to me) and reporters who aren't so much part of the establishment.
Ultimatly, in my oppinion, this stae has a large moderate base. I consider this group to be the ones who are most lielly to vote for a canidate then for a party. They also have the cross overs, i.e. moderate dems and republicans are close enough together that party affiliaition is a selected identity more then a definition that fits there positions.
This next election is ripe for a fiscal conservative who is willing to provide services to the social structure. The GOP would rather lose then select the lesser of two evils in its canidates. This philosophy will continue to be its doom. The GOP could win this election; butonly if the hard core memebrs reognize that they are going tohave to go with canidates they do not like, because ultimatly haveing a repub in office is betetr for them then a dem.
Until they learn that the world is not black and white, and get behind a few grey decisions/canidates, they will continue to be the also ran party. That conservative agenda does not get any closer pushing the fanatsy a strong right repub will win in illinois if they just tap their ruby slippers fast enough.
No more.
Hawaii is "more" blue according to that list, and they have a GOP governor.
And, apparently, magic rainbows instead of birth certificates (but that's another story). ;)
--
Has anyone else had the sense for weeks now that Proft is only in this to whine about Dillard?
Cook County has been a Democratic county since Hoover. Illinois has been a Democratic state since the northern suburban counties of Illinois went moderate, tipping the state towards the biggest voter block, Chicagoland.
The rest of the state is normal. With 11 of the 12 million Illinoians living north of I-80 and east of I-39, Illinois is a liberal Democrat state.
That isn't going to change.
Since after Hoover. Bill Thompson was a solid R.
From simple minds...
One, it's more like 9 million living north of I-80 and east of I-39, going by 2008 Census county estimates, even if you throw all counties touched by I-80 and I-39 as "in", which they aren't. Second, you can't assume all of NE IL is solid D, just like you can't assume all downstate is solid R (Madison/St. Clair counties and the college towns).
Julie Hamos, on the other hand, can stifle Kirk on the issues and gives the Democrats the best chance to retain the seat. Come on Julie, pack your carpetbag, leave the Tenth District to its citizens and serve your state. Otherwise, the Democrats may have to kiss that 60 seat majority good bye.
2. Kirk's district voted for obama 61-38, which means Kirk will face same situation he faced in district where his messages and vision worked, although Alexi's campaign will probably be more comptenant than dan's was.
3. Small time conservatives hitting Kirk isn't a bad thing, it can make him look moderate.
4. What does it say about how strong that dem support is that true democrats like jan schakowsky are too afraid to take on kirk?
5. Crain's is very pro-Kirk, he's their ideal politician.
That's the funniest thing I've read all morning. Thank you.
Expect them to make much more of the fact that Kirk has been endorsed in the past by The Sierra Club and the National Abortion Rights Action League, and supports tougher gun control laws.
I repeat - Illinois has been a Democratic state since the northern suburban counties of Illinois went moderate, tipping the state towards the biggest voter block, Chicagoland.
I didn't say anything about NE Illinois being politically solid either way. With the majority of voters in NE Illinois, and the suburbs no longer voting majority conservative, NE Illinois, along with it's majority, is making Illinois trend Democrat and liberal. See? Nothing about NE Illinois being solid Democrat. Didn't write that, did I?
You didn't explicity state it, but you inferred it. However, IMHO the northern/NW burbs have been "moderate" for a long time (think John Porter, Mark Kirk, etc.) when the ILGOP was in a more successful mode, it's just that D moderates have made inroads with these same voters, and they are not 100% political polar opposites of the people they replaced.
I don't think we are that much in disagreement here, except that there are more "downstate" voters than you gave credit for in your original post.
I agree with merrion, it's an awful field of gop candidates and it's better for the party to lose again statewide next year than have what we had with hastert in congress which is awful republicans ruining it so that when good ones come along they don't get the time of day from voters.
Interesting strategy. How does that get one to a winning plurality?
No, you assumed what I didn't write. I believe that voters are capable of making their own decisions, regardless where they live. I believe that just because a political party wins an election, they didn't win all the votes. Chicagoland isn't Cuba.
So, I won't infer what I don't believe.
Hell, what is the primary for if not for the party to figure out its nominee? You know, if its such an issue, stop having primaries that have to be paid for by taxpayers who aren't part of either party and could care less about the internecine squabbling.
OK, more correctly, as a reader digesting your comments, I took away that "11 of 12 million IL voters living north of I-80 and east of I-39" are, on balance, a little left of "liberal Democratic", being only washed out by the smidgen of 1 million downstate voters who are, on balance, more conservative, making IL a "liberal Democratic state.
Which I find a tad bit simplistic, even if the overall trend is toward the left.
Has anyone else had the sense for weeks now that Proft is only in this to whine about Dillard?
===============
No. I'm pretty certain that he's in it to win--unless there's someone coming up from behind that we don't know about yet.
And, Crain's is probably right.
But things are so bad today in Springfield and across Illinois that voters just might be willing to take another look. A unified campaign behind a common set of policies aimed at sound fiscal government, aimed at capturing votes in the Center, might make deep inroads into these numbers.
Of course, that could be quite a hurdle in the current Illinois GOP. Many in the Conservative wing find greater power in destruction rather than construction, and will follow their need for self-importance right over the electoral cliff.
What worries me is that people keep saying this, keep warning that some bend on each side is required or all will lose, but nothing is changing . . . at all.
What worries me is that people keep saying this, keep warning that some bend on each side is required or all will lose, but nothing is changing...at all.
=============
I'd argue that people are looking at this from the wrong perspective.
But then Rod was elected twice.