Posted on 02/03/2010 6:54:49 AM PST by Daniel T. Zanoza
So you’re saying Scozzafava was hugely unpopular? Was that true from day one, or only after her extreme liberalism was dragged into public view? My information suggests she was doing quite well until a robust public debate ensued about her real political locus. That model still works for the (Giannoulias vs Kirk) vs (Republican X in Exile) equation.
It is not a given that Illinois’ Republican and conservative voters will support Kirk once they come to fully understand him, especially if, at the same time, they can be reassured there is a real alternative that they will be able to vote for. That’s why a broad, effective communication plan is essential to make this work. If that plan gets neutered by doubt, despair, and defeatism among those best qualified to implement it, continued failure will become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Typical Chicago style RINO. And watch the Steele types pour money into HIS campaign while ignoring actual conservatives.
1) vote for Kirk
2) vote for the dem
3) stay home
4) vote 3d party. Now, since the conservative didn't come close to winning vs. Kirk, you have a hard time convincing me that any conservative as a 3d party guy can beat Kirk. But if you think you can make that case go for it.
a conservative DID NOT win the primary---didn't come close. Why should Steele or anyone else NOT "pour money" in to Kirk if he won?
This gets to be whiny-ism in the extreme. If you can elect a conservative, I'm with you. But at some point, when a conservative can't get out of a primary---not even come close---then you have to conclude that a conservative is not going to carry that state.
Well, I think the options listed probably do cover the major possibilities, although I am open to any new ideas that might help, such as alien abduction (of Kirk, of course). I will not, however, wander too far from the more likely scenarios.
As for my case that a third party strategy can work to unseat Kirk, my primary rebuttal to your fatalistic position is that voter inclination is not static. It is a dynamic that can change with a carefully crafted public conversation. That is the whole premise of marketing. I contend that many, many votes for Kirk are based on 1) a deliberately induced Chicago Politics “sense of the inevitable,” and 2) a serious Information Deficit Disorder. Therefore, the primary numbers, daunting as they are, do not reflect how the electorate will behave if Kirk and Conservative X are fully and publically compared. That can be fixed, but it will cost us real money. The key thing is to avoid static assumptions where dynamic assumptions are closer to reality. To win the game, we have to stay in the game.
But at least we will have a different agenda.
Well, I wish you luck. Certainly a third party has to be viewed as viable. It’s not “fatalistic,” though, to think that a U.S. senate candidate backed by 50+ percent of the voters will be overcome by a third party that must draw most of its voters from that candidate’s party. If you were drawing from the OTHER party, I’d say you have a chance.
I agree, and if he’s still there in 3 more years, and a Republican gets in, you do have the judges issue to consider-—and the USSC is quite important, as we saw two weeks ago.
Corrected that.
Exactly. If Alexi is elected, he will likely be indicted and convicted before long, and if Brady is Governor, he will appoint a Republican (hopefully of a non-leftist nature). Kirk is from a corrupt political machine, and I will not endorse any damnable Combiners for ANY office, period.
I read somewhere that IL has the ‘sore loser law’ that prevents someone who ran in the primary and lost to run again under a different party. Is that right?
Looking at the election returns, I regret not voting for Judge Don Lowery yesterday. I should have taken PhilCollins advice on the Senate race. I actually hesitated in the ballot booth. I voted for Hughes because he was the only non-Kirk candidate in double digits and I thought he might pull of a miracle and beat Kirk. Hughes didn't even break 20%. Lowery himself got 9% to Hughes 19%, despite Hughes having half a million bucks to put in a professional statewide organization and spending 10X more than the other conservatives. So a guy with zero money and zero presence outside Illinois (but infinitely more qualified for the Senate) got half as many votes as Hughes. Let's face it freepers, Hughes is a good pro-life Catholic but he was a total bust as a political candidate and yet ANOTHER example in Illinois that there's NO "wealthy outsiders" fare better in elections (Do you hear that, Adam supporters?! Nah. They'll find another unknown zillionaire and proclaim he's the "best choice" in 2012, just watch...) Another Hughes means well and spent lots of his own money trying to stop Kirk, I'm glad he's prohibited from state law to run as an Indy in November because we need someone with a credible resume who knows how to campaign to take on Kirk.
Kirk's primary campaign is the first time in nine years this guy did ANYTHING remotely "Republican", so now that he doesn't have to worry about GOP voters booting him, Kirk is going to "move back to the center" for the general election campaign, which in Kirk-speak means he's going to back to being an Obama lackey and claim that voting with the Dems on EVERY major issue makes him "thoughtful", "independent", and "middle of the road".
I agree with Field that the best case scenario is Alexi winning and being indicted within a few months of taking office so a future Governor Brady could appoint a decent Republican in his place. Of course, right now we're a few hundred votes away from Dillard getting the GOP nomination, and a Governor Dillard would just appoint another combiner to the seat -- hell, Dillard might even appoint a Chicago RAT with the excuse that "he's not my personal choice, but I did it out of respect for what party the people wanted for that senate seat" Blah blah blah
Yes.
Because of that one of Kirk’s GOP opponents quit so he had the option of running as an indie if Kirk won. Eric Wallace.
He was smart and knew how to read the situation. Many of Kirk’s former opponents should have thought this when they saw that Kirk was up by more than 15-20% last week.
I would have no problem with a Kirk loss.
Well there’s only need or want for 1 conservative alternative candidate.
Wallace was who I was gotta vote for in primary before he dropped out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.