Posted on 09/06/2001 8:06:43 AM PDT by diotima
But he has a long fight ahead of him. Illinois is a craphole.
I did not know that....hmmmm
And I am not trouble!
Come FReep Clinton in Chicago.HERE'S how!
I am backing O'Malley for guv and Cox for Senate. I will, however, fall in line with Jim Ryan IF he wins the primary. Team Corrine must be stopped at all cost, and most pundits seem to think she can get it if O'Malley/Ryan split the conservatives. I am hoping I am right that Corrine/Ryan will split the RINOs; but, if the pundits prove correct, it will be time to make some tough pragmatic decisions.
and she smokes, too ..... hmmmm
George Ryan and Dick Durbin- Only difference is that Durbin is less corrupt!
The truth is that there have been good moderate candidates in the past (Jim Edgar) but that this has not been the case lately. Although Jim Ryan is preferable to Wood, he is very sick, I understand. If I was still registered to vote in Illinois, I would choose O'Malley in the primary.
Excuse me as I go back to working on getting Jeb re-elected in Florida.
Gee, what craphole state do you live in?
For the record, CHICAGO is a craphole ... the rest of the state is just fine thank you very much.
You cite past elections as proof that Illinois in NOT liberal, but to go back to 1952 is just not realistic. Illinois is a VERY DIFFERENT state now than it was 40, 30, or even 20 years ago. Let's focus only on the more recent elections here. Any state that could EVER elect Carol-Mosely Braun,,,, EVER,,,,BY ANYONE'S DEFINITION,,,is a liberal state. Even when she lost her reelection bid to Fitz, she just BARELY lost to him (only by 4%,,,even after all the incredibly stupid things she did,,,and the bad press accompanying her comments/actions). That incredibly SMALL margin of victory 'speaks volumes' about the state!!!
In '88, Bush BARELY beat Dukakis in Illinois (51-49),,,and, of course, Slick carried Illinois by HUGE margins in '92 and '96 (at the same time Indiana went Republican BOTH times)!! Slick carried Illinois by almost one million votes in '96 and carried the state by 17% over Dole (even more than the 15% margin he beat Bush by in '92)!!!! Both times, Slick LOST Indiana.
While Illinois is certainly NOT in the class of a Massachusetts, California or New York (as they are in their own 'dream world'), when it comes to being liberal,,,it CERTAINLY ranks in the TOP TEN!!
Maybe my perspective is skewed having come from a conservative state like Indiana,,,because again,,,Indiana has gone Republican in the Pres Elections the LAST SIX TIMES,,,even against Slick BOTH times when Illinos went for Slick but HUGE margins!!!
Again,,,in general, I agree with everything you say,,,BUT,,,,sadly (thanks to Chicago),,,,ILLINOIS IS A VERY LIBERAL STATE!!
CMB was elected in the year of the woman, and then she was ousted from office after one term. How many woman lose after one term? The reason the state looks liberal is do to the fact that Chicago turns out the Democratic vote.
The Democratic machine in Chicago is well-oiled and they turn out the votes, don't they? They even turn out the fake votes -- why else would Algore want Bill 'Bugsy' Daley heading up his Florida recount? Bugsy Daley listened well at the family dinners and can manufacture votes just like his old man.
CMB ran against Rich Williamson in 92, who I think was expecting to be a sacrificial GOP lamb for Dem Senator Alan Dixon to stomp. The minute CMB beat Senator Dixon in the primary, it opened up the race for the underfunded Williamson. CMB was little known outside Cook County at that time, and Williamson had to hustle.
Part of CMB's overall (albeit narrow) victory was partly due to Presidential politics. 1992 was a referendum on President GHWB, and Clintoon/Bore carried Illinois handily. It was a coattail effect.
Again, I think the swing votes are in the suburbs. Chicago's heavily Democrat, and downstate's heavily Republican by almost the same degree. The suburbs have their own GOP and Democratic strongholds, however I was surprised that Dubya won DuPage with only 55% -- it should have been higher for Dub (DuPage, I estimate is 2/3 Republican, if not more). There apparently was some crossover to the Democrats by voters turned off by conservative candidates.
As for conservative statewide candidates, Fitzgerald BARELY won against a corrupt, foot-always-in-the-mouth CMB. That's not impressive -- Fitzgerald and any Republican should have STOMPED CMB in 98. Jim Ryan stomped the corrupt Miriam Santos by getting 60% of the vote, making him the biggest vote-getter in the state that year.
Other conservatives in that election lost. Harry Seigle (whom I supported) lost to Chris Lauzen in the primary, but Lauzen got stomped by Dan Hynes. Al Salvi (whom I supported in the primary) won the GOP nomination, but I, like most Illinoisans, voted for Jesse White (My only defection to a Democrat that year).
I would like to see O'Malley win, but given the political nature of Illinois, I just don't see it happening. O'Malley may sweep among conservatives in the suburbs, but not the moderates who decide statewide elections.
Can Rich Williamson convince Jim Edgar to come out of retirement? Perhaps Bob Kustra can come back to Illinois?
On a lighter note -- Being of Irish descent myself, I love Pat O'Malley's very Irish name, and it's a great campaign name in Illinois. But I liked Dan McLaughlin's, too, and I still voted for Judy Topinka.
And who is a state senator from the suburbs?
What you say about CMB in '92 certainly is true.
But again,,,I cite her bid for reelection in '98 as proof that Illinois IS liberal. How else can you POSSIBLY explain how she could ALMOST WIN,,,(she ONLY lost by 4%!!!),,,at the time of Slick's impeachment AND after six years of making a complete FOOL out of herself with her comments and actions!!
After a six year 'track record' of being a 'blithering idiot' like that,,,she STILL almost gets re-elected??? SAY WHAT?
And who is a state senator from the suburbs?
O'Malley, of course. Jim Ryan's also from the suburbs (Bensenville). Did I mention Corinne Wood, too (Lake Forest)?
In general election terms, the suburban voters are more moderate than O'Malley is. In a head-to-head against Blagojevich or Burris, O'Malley would carry the suburbs, but only to the small margin that Bush carried them. O'Malley is too conservative for many suburban Republicans outside of his district, and unless the Democratic nominee is corrupt a la CMB or Santos, we're going to have a Democratic governor next year.
But again,,,I cite her bid for reelection in '98 as proof that Illinois IS liberal. How else can you POSSIBLY explain how she could ALMOST WIN,,,(she ONLY lost by 4%!!!),,,at the time of Slick's impeachment AND after six years of making a complete FOOL out of herself with her comments and actions!!
Fitzgerald wasn't a particularly good candidate, and moderate voters really had to choose between a corrupt CMB or a very conservative Fitzgerald.
If Illinois was totally liberal, we wouldn't have AG Jim Ryan in statewide office. I still say it's centrist based on my experience here.
Voters weren't particularly comfortable with Fitzgerald as their Senator, esp women voters. Many Republican women still defected to CMB in the general election over the abortion rights issue. CMB held a pretty successful rally in Elmhurst back in 98 -- in the heart of GOP country!
Moderate voters determine the elections in Illinois. If a moderate is comfortable with a conservative, they'll vote for them. If not, they'll vote for the Dem or stay home.
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.