-
Website
http://capitolfax.com/ -
Original page
http://capitolfax.com/2007/01/11/more-on-madigans-desire-to-move-the-primary-for-obama/ -
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
Madigan needs to stop the showmanship and start working on some real problems like universal health care, school funding, fixing the pension system, fixing DCFS, dealing with the new GASB accounting regs and their impact on the state budget and so on.
I'd be excited, if this weren't a "one time only" change, as Madigan is proposing.
By moving the Primary Election six weeks earlier, Madigan will move the filing period for legislative and most other offices to October 29 thru November 5 of this year, and moves the starting date for collecting petition signatures to the first week of August (17 months before the would-be legislators can take office). I guarantee you that action will deter many a primary challenger from even bothering to make an attempt in the next election cycle.
Obama's campaign is little more than a smokescreen for Madigan.
Also, I've updated my Illinoize piece on this, and let me just say this:
If is is the case that this was done "for publicity purposes for Madigan, and to show he is reaching out to Obama for the first time," then the Speaker is showing an uncharacteristically stunning lack of political acumen. I stand behind my analysis points (that Iowa and New Hampshire voters will be insulted by the Speaker's assessment of them as 'out of the mainstream,' and Obama will have to answer for it and rebuke the state chair or his own Party; that Obama - unfair as it may be - will be slammed in other states for trying to rig the deck with a one-time-only homestate primary rescheduling; and that he stands to gain very little momentum from a win in his home state). I guess I assumed it was revenge because I gave the Speaker the benefit of the doubt. Anyone who understands the idiosyncrasies of presidential primaries would know that this could hurt Obama far more than it helps.
Having the State Party Chair formally endorse Obama would have gotten Madigan all the publicity he really needed. And if anyone in his office with 1/2 a brain thought about what this might do to Obama's campaign in the other early primary states, they'd have told him what I just did. So, I don't think it's too absurd to think that there might be much more to this than meets the eye. Either Madigan was shooting from the hip (which seems unlikely), or he intentionally (or indifferently) tried to get publicity off Obama in a way that could hurt him.
A bifurcated primary? How many millions of dollars (which, if memory serves, we don't have) might THAT cost????
Okay, if we have a FEDERAL primary (followed by a STATE primary), it ain't just for Obama, people. It's for Durbin and all the congressfolk, too.
There's a two-fer (if not a three-fer or four-fer) in that for Madigan: herd the disorganized Republicans (and unorganized Greens?) over the cliff even sooner in next year's Senate "race", and discourage challengers of all political persuasions for Congress.
But oh......two different primaries. TWO DIFFERENT PRIMARIES? Oh......uh....you'll have to... ....uhhhhhh.... .... excuse me......I think I'm going.........to..........(thud).
Oh yeah - ENVY.
Changing the primary date is a good idea - with or without Obama.
The benefit to Illinois is the state gets back in the game of having an impact on the presidential nomination scene
The benefit to Sen. Obama is that a large, diverse state takes sides early. It seems obvious, but then you guys get a little zany.
If you do the research, you'll party activists in both major parties have complained about this for years. The DNC did a national commission recently. They concluded that adding South Carolina and Utah could solve the problem...they were wrong.
No one is dissing Iowa or New Hampshire , no one can seriously argue the voters there arer representaative of the nation.
Will there be any of his old Chicago Aldermen friends? How about his great Chicago Congressmen friends? Everyone knows what a great organization the Chicago Democratic Machine is to raise a future president!
Just how far will Obama need to run from his roots? Illinoians have become pretty immuned to the Chicago Democratic scandals slithering out of the Loop daily. But what about voters outside Chicago? Will they take a look and really believe that Obama is a miraculous petunia growing in a dumpster full of rotting onions?
I'm not advising other candidates, but if I was there would be no way I would allow Obama to scrap off the filth falling off his friends in the Chicago Democratic Party. Every week I would be parading another nutcase from Obama's rolodex. Rezko will start making HUGE news. Blagojevich will continue being strip searched. Chicago aldermen with Obama connections will continue being indicted. A perfect narrative already written for any Barak opponent.
Do you really believe voters want to reach into the Chicago dumpster in 2008? Not after his opponents are through, they won't.
Madigan better get that primary date moved forward before more of Barak's old pals make news.
"The benefit to Sen. Obama is that a large, diverse state takes sides early"
Yeah....a state that he is already expected to win with about 110% of the vote. Any showing worse than that in a spotlighted Illinois primary will seen as a sign of weakness. And even if he meets expectations, it will be dismissed by pundits as not being relevant because it's his home state.
"If you do the research, you’ll party activists in both major parties have complained about this for years."
Not in Iowa and New Hampshire, they haven't. And that's my point.
If you think that saying Iowa and New Hampshire voters are not representative of mainstream America is not "dissing" them, then you obviously don't know much about early Presidential primaries. Voters in those states are VERY protective of their early primary status. In Roll Call yesterday, there was a story that talked about how many Iowa voters still haven't forgiven McCain for skipping their caucus in 2000, and thus won't support him this year.
Due respect, but I think you're wrong. I think Iowa and New Hampshire will get upset about Obama's home state party chair saying that "these states are not representative of mainstream America. They're clearly not as representative of America as Illinois would be." Petty as it may seem to us here in Illinois, that is the sort of things that can ruffle feathers there. You don't think political reporters in Iowa and New Hampshire are going to ask Obama if he agrees with that statement?
If we're going to be really fair and objective about it, why not front-load the calendar with bellweathers: Ohio, Florida, Missouri, etc.
If Obama doesn't take any hit from this, more power to him. But I can tell you this: Obama's seasoned, national level political advisors would never have suggested that he, or anyone else in Illinois, pursue this, especially in this way. And there's a darned good reason for that.
That's the last I'll say about this (here, at least).
Also even when Obama carries Illinois it would be about as important as when Tsongas carried NH in 1992. None. In both cases, they are supposed to carry them. Thats not news, and it won't help.
TWO primaries is a horrible idea, as is a one-time only move.
I also agree wholeheartedly with Vanilla Man. And you get bet Hillary, with her Illinois connections, will selectively stir the stink from behind the scenes.
From the Daily Herald article:
"Illinois Senate President Emil Jones Jr. said he wanted to talk to Obama because he’s not sure whether Madigan’s plan helps or hurts."
For what it's worth.
I'll be Secretary of..............and my daughter Governor of Illinois (yeah right)
SPRINGFIELD -- A top Illinois fundraiser for Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards says moving the state's 2008 primary election to boost U.S. Sen. Barack Obama's chances is a bad idea.
David Dorris, a trial lawyer from McLean County, said Thursday that a proposal floated Wednesday by House Speaker Michael Madigan "just doesn't sound right to me."
"There's something that just strikes me that it's not right to manipulate the date for one specific candidate," said Dorris, who has hosted a number of big-dollar fundraising events for the senator from North Carolina.
Madigan, who also is chairman of the Illinois Democratic Party, suggested that Illinois should bump its 2008 primary date from March 18 to February 5. He said the move would help Obama build momentum if he decides to run for the White House.
http://www.pantagraph.com/articles/2007/01/11/n...
I'm mad again at Madigan - The one making the laws quickly moves to break the rules like they're careless suggestions.
Napoleon Bonaparte:
“If you wish to be a success in the world, promise everything, deliver nothing.â€Â