Explain to me again why the Dems would fix the election to have Kirk beat Obama's best buddy Giannoulias. Or maybe you believe Labno actually won.
I am not saying the Dems never steal elections. Of course they do and I am worried about the Walsh/Bean race northwest of Chicago. I think they are trying to steal that one. However, anyone who thinks the Dems would purposely lose Obama's old Senate seat to Kirk is just plain delusional.
Very simple.
Giannoulias is extremely damaged by the feds seizing Broadway Bank and is damaged goods. Nobody respects him and the fact he's an Obama lackey means he will have very little pull in the U.S. Senate. If Obama announces he wants amnesty, gay marriage, assault weapons ban, etc., Giannoulias pimping for that agenda will have very little weight and certainly won't sway RINOs or moderate Democrats to back something because some Chicago crook wants it.
Kirk is not damaged goods. He's a pathelogical liar but he doesn't have any criminal activity on his record (even though he's just as cozy with scumbags like Tony Rezko as Alexi is). The mainstream media LOVES Kirk. He is their "model Republican". He will be the media's go-to guy whenever they need to show Obama is "reaching out to Republicans", even when Obama is pushing a completely unacceptable socialist scheme down our throats that no Republican on earth (except Kirk!) would touch. Kirk has long considered himself a "leader" of the RINOs (he started the "moderate" Tuesday Group in the House to have regular stragedy sessions with RATs on how to pass their agenda) and will be extremely useful in swaying RINOs and Moderate Democrats into getting on board with Obama's agenda. If Obama announces he wants amnesty, gay marriage, assault weapons ban, etc., Kirk will support it just like Ginnalinas would, but he will be far more effective, making the rounds of the nightly talk shows to tell everyone how such legislation is "thoughtful" and "moderate", attacking his own party's ideas as "outside the mainstream".
Kirk will be far more useful to the socialist cause, he's in a position to do alot more damage by virtue of his status in the mainstream media (the Chicago media even refused to report the main was a pathelogical liar until the national media picked it up and forced them too) and sweetheart boyscout image. If you can't see that, you're blind.
And no I don't think Labno really won. I've said a million times that Labno was simply a protest vote against the two socialists and had no shot at winning. By your snarky comment, you must be deaf too.
Speaking of Joe Walsh, he managed to overtake Bean even though the national and state party 'wrote him off', and even many local conservatives figured he had no shot and gave up after he wouldn't withdraw from the face. But Walsh focused like a laser bean on Bean's terrible record and hypocrisy and never let up, turning the electorate against her in Lake and McHenry counties by decisive margins, and won thanks to a huge GOP push nationally. But you will notice there's one spot he lost -- the Crook County part of the district. In that spot, Bean prevailed by 54%, even though the district is in the most Republican region of Crook. So if you concede there's vote fraud, you are correct.
I suspect at least 20,000 fradulent votes were cast for Quinn & other combiners like Bean, Berrios, etc. in suburban Crook alone. Many union goons instructed their members to "cross over" for Kirk since he was in danger of losing. I was an election judge in suburban Crook that day, I would be willing to testify under oath about numerous "questionable" things that unfolded that day. But it doesn't matter, the IL GOP has folded like a cheap suit, and told Brady to concede. And the vote fraud will continue.
The combine team was Quinn/Kirk all along. How else do you explain that Brady is AHEAD by 7+ points right before election day, Kirk is TIED, but then on election day -- Kirk wins and Brady loses? There is no doubt what happened.