1 But inside every sell-out RINO lurks a Purity Republican, and I am, in fact, a Purity Republican on this issue. For me, if you're voting for Cap and Tax, you're pretty much dead to me.

I see that you're one of those small tent guys. Your idea of a big tent for the GOP is a phone booth.

Unfortunately, I don't live in the state and the relatives I have there are ultra-liberal, which means I can't get useful information from except for how dreamy Obama is. I'm sure that others will weigh in.

2 The trouble is, Kirk was one of only eight Republicans to vote for... Cap and Trade.

That is a total deal breaker. There are no excuses, whatsoever, for voting for such an insane, ridiculous, stupid, and un-Consitutional bill.

3 I'm with Ace on that one.  Kirk is a naval reserve aviator and is a good interview on national security matters, but that cap-n-tax vote is pretty damn unforgivable.

4 Patrick Hughes

5 More ball dipping is on its way......... If there were an election for US House of Representatives today, and the only two candidates on the ballot were Democrat Baron Hill and Republican Mike Sodrel, who would you vote for? 41% Baron Hill (D) 49% Mike Sodrel (R) 10% Undecided

6 This is a great idea. This thread should be repeated for each and every race in the country. That way, all facts can be in one place, and people can get their information in a centralized location.

We should have some guidelines for this information. Everything should have a link. Then we can make up our mind on the veracity of the information.

7 A vote for cap & trade is a vote AGAINST fiscal conservatism and rational economic theory. Kirk must be prevented from beaming up to the Senate. See what I did there?

8 Ace, Isn't it Patrick Hughes?
http://www.patrickhughesforsenate.com/

9 and the hits keep on coming. Republican Roy Blunt now holds a six-point lead over Democrat Robin Carnahan in MissouriÂ’s race for the U.S. Senate.

10 Cap and Tax is definately a Rubicon for me.

11

Go to Hughes website--he has a comparison.

Kirk voted for Cap and Trade.  He is to the left of Scott Brown.

We call Kirk, Castle-DE, and the rest and they voted.

They need to be taught a lesson.

Go Hughes!!

P.S.  Castle is running for governor in DE.  Who is the conservative in that primary?  He needs to be taught a lesson too.

12 I see that you're one of those small tent guys. Your idea of a big tent for the GOP is a phone booth.  Posted by: physics geek

It's one thing to believe in AGW. It's another thing entirely to subject the US economy to the wood chipper of a bill like Cap and Trade.

It's not a party thing; it's a economic life and death thing.

13 There are SIX people running for the Senate slot in Illinois:

Mark Kirk, Andy Martin, Donald Lowery, Kathleeen Thomas, Patrick Hughes, and John Arrington. 

Best investigate some of the other people.  So far, Arrington looks like the best of them, but I'll get back to this thread when I've had a chance to scour all their websites. 

14 I hope Palin supports this Hughs guy.  It would be a good first step in extricating herself from the shitheap of her McCain endorsement.  I know she had to do it, but I also knew there would be a shitstorm over it.

15

The Hillbuzz guys seem to be against Kirk's primary run for a different reason.

16

well Ace, he doubledare-asked for Palin's endorsement in a bald attempt to force her to balk, thereby separating himself from the Purity Wing to "win over moderates" in the way Frum thinks we should win over moderates.

Cynical.  Yeah, we need more of that.

BTW - she balked.  So that by itself is an endorsement of Hughes.

17 4. Not an aviator - Intel weenie.

18 ace -

some stuff about Patrick Hughes that might help:

1.  appeared a semi-nekkid centerfold  in the 2Q issue of  "John Birch Women's Auxilliary Quarterly"

2.  drives a pick-em-up truck

3.  may or may not have daughters.

.

19 He's not Cap-and-Traitor Mark Kirk, which is good enough for me.  And the mildly interested in politics people I talk to at church have at least heard of him and are desperately looking for not-Mark-Kirk.

20 So have the majority of folks decided that no political or public office experience is required (or desired) of candidates? 

I think that flies ok for representatives, and even probably for governors, but I am not super comfortable with someone with no track-record of votes or public service and no political experience taking a Senate seat.  It seems to me that that person will either try to lone wolf it, unsuccessfully, or be highly dependent on (and beholden to) the Senate party leaders. 

21 Ace-- I have lived here my entire life. Illinois is NOT a liberal state. Everything south of Joliet, save a couple of pockets in Southern Illinois, much more resembles Indiana than Chicago. The Republicans in this state have conspired with the Democrats to loot the treasury since Jim Thompson took office about the same time Reagan did. This worked for a while. But in the past decade, as with the U.S. Congress, the Combine has bankrupted the state. It is much closer in analog to New York than any other despite the fact that we actually have fewer liberals here. The disparity is due to yellow dog Democrats who live in Chicago and suburban Cook. I know nothing about Hughes, but I do not believe any Republican who starts with zero name recognition can win in Illinois. The media cost of the Chicago market will make his challenge vastly more difficult than Brown's was. I really don't like Mark Kirk and will not vote for him in the primary. I am still unsure as to whether I wouldn't prefer an actual Democrat in the seat if he would do the same stupid things Kirk undoubtedly would.

22 The Force is strong in young Hughes.

23 then later admitted it was pretty much a mistake.
---------------------

Mitigation is at hand.

24 One reason to have an election is to educate people about issues.  We need to give them a real choice.  Kirk is a RINO and will bite us in the ass later.  Moreover, it keeps the other elected RINOs (McCain, Grahamesty, Snowe, etc.) in line until November.  We need a conservative candidate win or lose.  Even in a loss, you set the table for success in future elections by educating the voters about the different positions on issues.

25

I've said this enough times already but if he wins, he's going to sit with Collins and Snowe, and spend his time trashmouthing the Republicans to the media while voting with the Dems on everything important. And given a few months of good news for the Democrats, when he thinks it's safe, he'll switch to that side formally.

Add to the RINOness the certainly of personal corruption, given his home state. That "R" by his name is nothing but cover. Remember Governor Ryan.

It would not surprise me if he is already in meetings with highly-placed Illinois Democrats making deals.

No money for Kirk. Not now, not in the general.

26 hahhah rush is saying "I told you so" as regards his "I hope he fails comment"....

27

I agree; ANYONE who voted for crap and tax is not a conservative and shouldn't even be a Republican.

That bill was ALL commie ALL the way through.

The locals in IL here should way in but Kirk is a RINO and should not be supported.

 

28 weigh in...

29 P.S. If you want to help our state, get behind Dan Proft for governor. He's the only "Tea Party-quality" candidate in the race. Proft2010.com

30 Send Kirk an email telling him that support for ANYTHING remotely liberal will pry money and phone bank time from your useless carcass to insure his defeat in the primary.  He just might start to "get it".

31 It just so happens that my girlfriend & her family is a Kirk constituent, and I've met with the Congressman several times, know quite a few of his staffers, etc. 

I want to start by saying that I am biased by the fact that he is a genuinely likable guy and one hell of a constituent services Congressman - a real 'man of the people' type.  Kirk is a moderate GOP'er of the Mike Castle variety, although he's further to the right of Castle (which is a good thing).  He's not a culture warrior. he's Scott Brownian on abortion (generally pro-choice, opposed to partial birth abortion), which he has to be in his district.  The thing is, it's quite amazing that Kirk has managed to survive in his district at all, which is a Chicago suburb that went big for Obama while all the neighboring districts were wiping out GOP contenders.  That he's managed to hang on despite the huge odds is a testament to why he's such a strong contender for the Senate seat - he is absolutely the only one who can win in this state, because to win Illinois you have to keep the margin down in Chicago proper while racking up big numbers in the suburbs and exurbs -- in particular in the district he represents.

His cap & trade vote was part of that Faustian bargain.  I know from inside sources (and we're talking as inside as it's possible to get here) that, while Kirk genuinely does care about environmental issues (in the Teddy Roosevelt tradition), he only voted for C&T to keep himself alive in precisely the sorts of areas he needs to rack up vote totals in (moderate-left suburbs: Oak Brook, North Shore, Barrington/Hoffman Estates/Schaumberg). 

Given that he's not going to be a vote for such a program going forward, I don't see anything else in his record that upsets me for an Illinois GOP candidate: he's held the line vociferously on healthcare -- he was on board the "kill this shit dead" train long before it even started filling up with other moderate Republicans and wannabes -- and on taxes as well. 

I'll confess: I'm a big fan of Kirk not just for personal reasons (again: this is a guy who has a retail politicking touch not unlike Scott Brown -- people like him on a gut level, which is what he'll need when running against the Chicago Dem machine) but also because he is honestly better (not just as good as, but better) than we could have hoped for from the Republican seeking to fill Obama's seat in blue Illinois while Obama is still in office and can bring a ton of muscle to bear to keep it blue. 

Paul Hughes came to several local Chicago GOP and conservative events and tried to sell himself to us.  I only remember feeling that he was slightly oleaginous, and didn't have a good grasp of either Chicago politics or downstate concerns.  Maybe he's polished up his game since then, but still: the hardcore teaparty brand does not sell very well in this state, either up in the north or down in the midlands.

32 http://www.arringtonforsenate.com

33 Agreed with the above.  If Kirk voted for Cap and Tax, I wouldn't support him.

34 One last thing--Patrick Hughes was on Levin's show last week.  I am not sure what day, but Levin makes his past shows freely available online.

35 What going on here?

Are we actually going to have everyone bring their knowledge of the candidates to the table, in hopes of having rational, thoughtful discussions on determining the best candidate?  Without the "accidental" links to lipstick lesbian pron, beefcake for the moronettes, jihads being blown up in the air and snide remarks about President Prissypants?

THE DEUCE YOU SAY!

36

I see that you're one of those small tent guys. Your idea of a big tent for the GOP is a phone booth.

I'm sorry, but the "Big Tent" fools pull the tent poles down, and the tent collapses. Some issues are "tent poles". The Global Laming Fraud is I think one of them. If the GOP guy goes wobbly on that, s/he will go wobby everywhere else (I'm thinking of my own Governator here).

37 Michael Steele and John Cornyn both like Kirk. Strikes two and three.

38 He voted for cap and trade???

Tell Anthony his uncle Fredo can't go fishing today and have Al gas up the dingy -- He's dead to me.

39 Can anyone find Patrick Hughes' political donations?  I failed at Fundrace (unless he is licensed to practice law in Texas, which I doubt).

40 EVEN MORE DIPPIN?

Late entry Tom Campbell takes poll lead over B. Boxer in CA!

41

THE DEUCE YOU SAY!

RACISSSSST!

42 Out out, damn sockpuppet.

43 Kirk broke ranks with his party and passed a bad bill Pelosi COULD NOT HAVE PASSED without him.

44
After Massachusetts, every seat is in play no matter where.  So f*ck the Illinois machine, let's money-bomb Pat or Paul or Peter Hughes and get'r done.

45 Glad to see Mallamutt in this thread.  His views from downstate square with mine from up in Chicago.  So far it seems like we're the only two people here with any direct knowledge of the contest.

Folks, Paul Hughes would be the Doug Hoffman of the IL-Sen race: the guy outside forces are pushing for purity reasons who ends up flunking and botching a winnable race because he just doesn't connect at all with the vibe of this state.  Don't let this happen, for fuck's sake.  We have an opportunity to put a good solid anti-tax, pro-military, anti-HCR Republican in BARACK OBAMA'S FUCKING SEAT.  Don't blow it by sabotaging it with a loser like Hughes.

46

This is Illinois AND after Dems realize every seat is up for grabs and will now adjust accordingly. 

How does this effect the MoC for this particular race?

47 Oops, wrote wrong, takes poll lead vs other GOP candidates.

Balls retracted.  Nevermind (Emily Latilla moment)

48 Ditto to a lot of what was said up in 23...I no longer live in IL, but I did for my entire life until 3 years ago, and my line was always this: Illinois is not a blue state, it's a red state with one big blue city.  Unfortunately, Chicago is SO big that, most of the time, the rest of the state can't do anything about it.  However...after what's happened in Massachusetts, I just can't help shaking this feeling that the rest of the state might be able to band together this time and kick the Daley Machine right in the balls.

49 ace: Pat Hughes has a huge mountain to climb.  Here are his biggest problems running in a GOP Primary.

1) He doesn't have a history of voting in GOP primaries.
2) He's never run for elected office.  If he could self fund it would different, but without that luxury it's hard to travel statewide selling yourself as a Republican without any primary votes to show for it.
3) Mark Kirk doesn't have the open support of the RNC(RNC trying to stay out of party primaries), but the IL GOP chairman is now telling the press that the party supports Kirk(I've written to the party chairman asking him to stop this and instead promote all the Republican candidates)
4) Kirk has a giant war chest.
5) Kirk has walked back his Cap n Tax vote after a tour downstate where coal is jobs and electricity.

I do like Hughes.  I don't think he's ready for a Senate run.  He needs to dot all his 'is' and cross all his 'ts' as a Republican first.  Then he should pursue an office where he could build some name recognition.  He should run a primary challenge against Judy Biggert in 2012.

Mark Kirk is going to be a lot like Scott Brown.  He'll be a reliable Republican vote in the Senate at a time when Illinois has no Republicans elected to a state wide office.  Trying to place a first timer as teh only statewide elected Republican is a monster challenge.

50

Here's the key: support the committed conservative in the primary, but should he lose, be prepared to support the "moderate" Republican in the general election.  It's really as simple as that.

The time to "teach the RINOs a lesson" is in the primaries.

51 Late entry Tom Campbell takes poll lead over B. Boxer in CA!

Campbell is the guy you want running against Boxer: he's pro-choice and gay-friendly, so the normal blue-state scare attacks won't work against him, but meanwhile he's practically hardcore libertarian when it comes to economic issues.  In fact, if Reason were to nominate a GOP candidate against Boxer, he'd come the closest to being their guy.  Which makes him my guy as well.

52

Thank you Jeff B. for your well-argued Case For Kirk.

My post #27 was based more on my personal misanthropy than on the facts in his district. I take back & apologise for that.

53 @34

Thanks for that.  Caveats noted.  Based on that, and Hughes' lack of any public service or political track-record, in a two many primary, I'd go for Kirk if I were in Illinois. 

The purest conservative on the planet is useless in the Senate if he can't get things done... and I don't see any evidence, yet, that Hughes has a record I can assess. 

54

EVEN MORE DIPPIN?

Late entry Tom Campbell takes poll lead over B. Boxer in CA!

Talk to me when DeVore's ratings do the same. Tom Campbell is just too goshdarned nice and rolls over and goes along to get along. *Three* times (two primaries, one general) running this kind of losing campaign for the Senate has not taught him anything.

55 The trouble is, Kirk was one of only eight Republicans to vote for... Cap and Trade.

Yes, he did.  And Mallamutt is indeed correct above.  I went to my Rep's talk (Peter Roskum) and he was asked about Kirk vote here.  Roskum said that Kirk will never vote that way again--he got slaughtered.

One thing to note here though is Kirk is from a pretty leftwards tilting district, so yes he may have a leftward leaning voting record.  Roskum made the point that Kirk would indeed go more right if his constituents do.

56

...he only voted for C&T to keep himself alive in precisely the sorts of areas he needs to rack up vote totals in (moderate-left suburbs: Oak Brook, North Shore, Barrington/Hoffman Estates/Schaumberg). 

Sounds like the Olympia Snow approach to principle, which hasn't done great things for the GOP Senate caucus so far.  Is it feasible to elect a Senator in Illinois who will actually consistently stand up for conservative principles?

57

I've worked at precinct/twp level politics for thirty years in IL. Kirk represents a semi purple (red going blue) district and crafts his positions to appeal to both sides. Thus what he truly represents is himself. There is also some question as to a possible financial interest regarding his cap and trade vote.

I met him once: Bad vibe-typical arrogant pol.

58

Mallamutt- The reason the Prodigal Son was such a forceful story is that it flew in the face of excepted custom.  By the culture of the day, the younger son would only have been accepted back "as a servant" as he requested.  That particular parable is right up there with The Good Samaratan.

I'm with pretty much everyone else, here: CrapyTax is a BIG no-no for a conservative.

59 So Jeff,

       His cap & trade vote was part of that Faustian bargain

You gives us 500 words saying he should be supported because he makes deals with the devil?

Tent full - don't let flap hit you in the ass.

60

Here's the key: support the committed conservative in the primary, but should he lose, be prepared to support the "moderate" Republican in the general election.  It's really as simple as that.

The time to "teach the RINOs a lesson" is in the primaries.

Hear hear.

61 Oh, one more problem for Hughes is Kirk has won a very competitive IL congressional district 10 four times now.  He knows how to run a tight racewhere the Democrats will throw every disgusting attack at him and the #ILSEN race is going to be a tight one.

One ad already run against Kirk claimed he wants to reduce illegal immigration by buying condoms for Mexicans.

62 Folks, Paul Hughes would be the Doug Hoffman of the IL-Sen race: the guy outside forces are pushing for purity reasons who ends up flunking and botching a winnable race because he just doesn't connect at all with the vibe of this state. Don't let this happen, for fuck's sake.

Posted by: Jeff B. at January 21, 2010 01:19 PM (SmMsR)

This is nothing like NY-23. This is a primary! Hoffman got screwed because there was no primary and he had to contend with the two (effective) dems still in the race, not to mention having very little time to do it. And Hoffman was no carpet-bagger in the district - though many lefty media reports had tried to paint him as such. His home had just fallen outside of the district on the last redistricting, but he was a long-time resident of the area with a business.

63

 But inside every sell-out RINO lurks a Purity Republican sell-out RINO.

To hell with tactical, political games.  If you're not gonna tell me up front where you truly stand on the issues and then vote on those principles then you're no better than obambi who says one thing in a campaign and does another once in office.  I don't care what "side of the isle" you're on, a liar is a liar.

64 Kirk's congressional district is fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

Hughes comes from a district that is fiscally conservative and socially conservative.

65

Campbell is the guy you want running against Boxer: he's pro-choice and gay-friendly, so the normal blue-state scare attacks won't work against him, but meanwhile he's practically hardcore libertarian when it comes to economic issues.  In fact, if Reason were to nominate a GOP candidate against Boxer, he'd come the closest to being their guy.  Which makes him my guy as well.

This state still decisively said NO to "gay marriage". Nor do some core Demunist constituencies (black and brown, to use color terms) think much of it. Sorry, but Campbell is just such a wuss. A good guy personally, but not a fighter.

66

He's Oirish - there's that - and not in that "Power for power's sake" Kennedy way....

Damn those kennedys....

67 We have to be strategic - run conservatives in Red and some Purple States, and run RINOs, if you must, in states where a conservative could never get elected, like Mass. 

Ok, bad example, but the point is, I will tolerate a RINO if that is the only way to win in a state, but I HATE it when the GOP runs RINOs in solidly conservative states. 

68 White house presser on now live at Whitehouse.gov

69 Anyone who supports Crap and Trade is a commie infiltrator. He needs to be waterboarded to determine his insidious commie plans for our great nation. No more DIABLOS. I have spoken.

70 Congressional Primary Calendar
(via Insty)

71 "... he is absolutely the only one who can win in this state, because to win Illinois you have to keep the margin down in Chicago proper while racking up big numbers in the suburbs and exurbs -- in particular in the district he represents." Then don't win. Let the state go to shit under Dem rule without a bipartisan figleaf.

72 Illinois isn't as liberal as its reputation suggests.  Blago stayed popular by pushing himself as the guard against the legislature's deep desire to raise taxes.  Palatine and some of its neighbors are actively seeking to secede from Cook County to lower their taxes.  Our problem is the state Republican party is run by worthless moderates like Judy Baar Topinka who was all too eager to sell Jack Ryan down the river and open the door for Senator Barack Obama.  I can guarantee you that score has not yet been settled and a Kirk candidacy will reap a ton ot conservative votes for the Democrat.

73 I am from Illinois. I know Mark Kirk personally. He did vote for cap and trade. I have not spoken with him about this vote. His district is really purple. It is just north of Jan Schakowsky(really blue) and east of Melissa Bean (purple). His district is very wealthy. Hardly any blue collar presence. Lake Forest, Wilmette, Winnetka, Highland Park, Glencoe, Northbrook are some of the wealthiest suburbs in the nation. Lots of graduate degrees up there. Kirk has beaten Dan Seals twice, son of a former Chicago Bear and a white/black guy like our nation's savior. First time in 2006 it was close. Last time in an Obama year, Kirk pulled 60% of the vote. John Porter held the seat before him, and was similar in style. Mark is very pro-business. He is a fiscal conservative. He has reached out to many many many Representatives and Senators to educate them on the intricate financial marketplace in Chicago. CME, CBOT and CBOE are headquartered here. Drug companies reside in his district, so he won't be anti-pharma. He is against the Health bill. Kirk makes a big deal out of the fact that he is in the Naval Reserve. I don't know how close to the action he ever gets. He is in intelligence. Kirk is going through a divorce. There are rumors, unfounded, that he is gay. I don't know if he is gay or not, but it really doesn't matter to me. A gay fiscal conservative is better than a tax and spend hetero every time. It's on the Social Issues that he is in fact a RINO. He is pro-choice with a similar position to our newest Massachusetts Senator. I think Mark would vote against late term abortions, vote against fed funding for abortion-but not take away the right to choose to have an abortion. More to limit it. He is out in front on gay issues-even bringing Republicans in to caucus with gays. He has backed a lot of human rights legislation in this regard. I don't know if he has made a statement with regard to gay marriage-but Cindy McCain made an ad in support of it, and our Dark Lord Dick Cheney is for it. I don't think gay marriage is purely a liberal issue. His likely opponent Alexi Gianoullis is Obama's lackey. He has totally mismanaged the Treasury of Illinois. His no-risk college saving plan LOST 40% last year. They invested in REITS instead of U.S. Treasuries! A hedge fund manager would have been hauled into court for fraud. Gianoullis is a tool of the Chicago machine. Educated at preppy Latin High School where lots of higher ups in the machine send their kids. He worked for daddy's bank and gave out lots of questionable loans. Many to that great real estate developer, Tony Rezco. He loves unions, loves big government. He is young, so most of his life has been spent in school, or government, or working for a politically connected bank. Typical career politician. A tool, a douche. Whatever. On cap and trade one could surmise that there was still a majority of highly degreed intellectual people that thought it was man-made global warming. Since the vote, we have had the global warming science scandal-and I doubt if Kirk would vote for it again. But you'd have to ask him. I agree with ACE on global warming. I never bought into it and I know a lot of conservatives in IL that were upset with this vote. I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Let's see how the campaign goes. I would not be campaigning for him to be on the Judiciary Committee, but he would be really great on the Senate Banking Committee, Commerce Committee. Kirk would be a good Senator. Would his competitor? Sure. But Illinois hasn't elected a social conservative to statewide office since Peter Fitzgerald. He was great-but quit because he couldn't stand the corruption in Illinois from the Republicans. Dems are even worse here.

74 damn.  only read the headline before commenting.

I know I dummied up in this thread too.  We need a medical study of the side effects to ball dippin.

75

This is nothing like NY-23. This is a primary! Hoffman got screwed because there was no primary and he had to contend with the two (effective) dems still in the race, not to mention having very little time to do it. And Hoffman was no carpet-bagger in the district - though many lefty media reports had tried to paint him as such. His home had just fallen outside of the district on the last redistricting, but he was a long-time resident of the area with a business.

Here, the Purity Republicans were right, and the GOP apparatus had to be made to listen.

However, if it's a fair primary, and the RINO or less pure GOP candidate wins it, okay, s/he will get my full support in the general. Call it Principled Pragmatism or Pragmatic Purity. Whatever.

76 Then don't win. Let the state go to shit under Dem rule without a bipartisan figleaf.

Hmm...no.   Troll?

77

Cris 60, if Kirk is arrogant, then the Specter / Voinovich scenario becomes more likely.

But wtfci's comment, "Kirk has walked back his Cap n Tax vote after a tour downstate where coal is jobs and electricity." implies that Kirk is not arrogant - or at least that this question is open. Kirk does get out there and look around.

78

Mark Kirk is from a pretty ultra liberal part of Chitown if I remember correctly, and most of the folks down in my part of IL hate his guts with a passion.  Pretty sure he's a rino.  I tend to prefer Arrington, but  I think Hughes has a chance with the folks down here at least (because anyoen who would vote Repub down here hate Kirk's guts -- some atypical Cook county folks hate his guts too).  Problem is, Mark Kirk is well connected in Chitown, again if I remember correctly, and thus has the greatest chance of winning.

I hate Kirk's guts because of cap and trade and the Chitown thing, and will vote against him in the primary -- but he'll likely win and probably stands the best chance against the Dems.  I expect to see Kirk's name on the ballot this fall, and will vote for him at that point.

Either way, it's going to be tough to get a republican into those senators spots here in IL -- any Repub outside of the Chi and/or too conservative won't take this state...and Mark Kirk isn't that popular.

79 Kirk's a phony.  Yes you would think he is a naval aviator based on the commercials.  All dolled up with his helmet and LPA.  Bullshit, he's an intel geek in the reserves.  He is also anti-gun, which doesn't work outside of Cook County.  He's coming off a divorce (sound familiar?) and of course the cap and trade vote.  If you read Hillbuzz, you'll see how the Dems are planning to blow this guy up after the primary, just like Obama did when he won.

80

The only thing sweter than seeing Brown in Kennedy's seat would be seeing a conservative in Obama's.

The hope exists that Boxer could go down in CA, too?  Amazing.

81 I recommend post #79 (the other guy named Jeff...funny how they seem to cluster around the Northwest Chicago suburbs?) to everyone, as it tracks with my understanding as well.  I do like the fact that Kirk is gay-friendly as well: good branding for a GOP that needs to downplay culture warrior religious conservatism and emphasize economic conservatism. 

82 Kirk may have any number of problems, but "arrogance" is most certainly not one of them.  At least not as far as I've ever seen.  Just doesn't square with my interactions with him.

83
"Kirk has walked back his Cap n Tax vote after a tour downstate where coal is jobs and electricity."

So he goes whichever way the wind blows.  Great. 

84 Jeff B.-- You make good points. I am more likely to support him in the general based upon your statements. However, I have seen Kirk quoted multiple times as saying he voted for Crap & Charade because they "promised" me it wouldn't increase the energy costs in my district. This kind of gullibility, while not noteworthy in the Upper Chamber of Congress, is nonetheless pitifully disqualifying for a supposedly free-thinking conservative.

85

Sounds like a tough call- voting for the "cap and trade" bullshit borders on the unforgiveable, but Kirk did hold the line on Obamacare apparently.

Given what little I know, I'd rather win with Kirk than lose with Hughes.  Were it an open seat I'd be more inclined to say screw it and go with Hughes, but an incumbent that's already being targeted by the Dems as vulnerable?  Might just be the wrong place at the wrong time to go pushing for an unknown conservative in a blue-leaning district.

Wouldn't hurt to have a close race in the primary though.  Might help remind Kirk that voting for the likes of cap and trade could have consequences.

 

86 Just check and see if Kirk is supported by Commonwealth Edison/Exelon.  Commonwealth Edison supports cap and trade and Obama.

87 So he goes whichever way the wind blows.  Great.

He represents his constituents.  Great.

88 Oh, and I don't trust Mark Kirk to tow any party line once he gets elected -- from what I've seen of him he's an opportunist, just as likely to bash his own party as the opposition and more than willing to sell out his constituents if his own agenda doesn't jibe.

89 I'm not convinced that Brown is a RINO. What fascinates me about Brown is that even though he had a liberal voting record, he turned to the Right during the actual campaign. About the only point where he might have annoyed some people here is when he said "I believe in evolution" (I'm not counting his aversion to the "Republican" label). In short, Brown owes his election to conservatives. This frees him up to vote more alongside Judd Gregg than alongside Susan Collins.

90

The Hillbuzzers claim that Kirk is in the closet and are warning Republicans not to nominate him unless he comes out, because they say the Democrats are waiting to leak this info at just the right time to maximize the impact.

I don't know if he is teh ghey or not and don't really care, but I do care if he's a liar and I don't want to see a nomination process go to waste if it could have been avoided.

91 @79, and addendum. Parts of Kirk's district are also highly Jewish-as much as 95%. They have voted to put him in.

92

How many past Governors have gone to prison or should have gone to prison?  In Illinois both parties are corrupt as hell.

All I should have to do to convince you is to suggest Patrick Hughes is not corrupt.

93 One can NOT be a fiscal conservative and vote for crap and tax.

94 Kirk is supposedly in favor of gun control, getting a D from the NRA, and is reliably pro-abortion too, getting a 100% rating from NARAL.  He is wishy-washy on free-trade, and on energy independence, but good for the most part on a strong defense.  His voting on health care seems to indicate that he would vote against a public option.

He did vote for cap-and-trade, which means he's an idiot.

Kirk might be the best Illinois can hope to do, in which case, you should throw us out of the Union.

95 I sent him 50.00 last night.

96 It's on the Social Issues that he is in fact a RINO. He is pro-choice with a similar position to our newest Massachusetts Senator. I think Mark would vote against late term abortions, vote against fed funding for abortion-but not take away the right to choose to have an abortion. More to limit it.

Kirk voted against a  ban on Partial Birth Abortion.  He proposed the inclusion of an amendment with language drafted by Planned Parenthood.  This language is problematic because they call it the "health exception", but it includes physical health, mental health, and ECONOMIC health.  It's an amendment that drives a truck sized hole in the bill.  That amendment was defeated and I'm pretty sure that Kirk then voted against the PBA ban.

I think Kirk can be walked back from that amendment.  I don't think he was really informed on the issues and was really just trying to cast a vote protecting him in his district.

Kirk was a "yay" for the Stupak-Pittts amendment to Pelosicare so I'm confident Kirk is a solid "no" against taxpayer subsidy for elective abortion.

Kirk is a "yes" vote on taxpayer funded embryonic stem cell research.

97 However, if it's a fair primary, and the RINO or less pure GOP candidate wins it, okay, s/he will get my full support in the general. Call it Principled Pragmatism or Pragmatic Purity. Whatever.

Posted by: Curmudgeon at January 21, 2010 01:31 PM (ujg0T)

No argument from me, though the candidate must still be made to know that Crap&Trade was an unforgivable vote. But the question in the case of a RINO winning the primary will be whether s/he can get the vote out in the state, which I tend to doubt. You know, like the fact that we voted for McCain, anyway, but knew that his candidacy kept many others (not even purity conservatives, but just ticked off normal people) at home and cost the whole shebang.

And I would be very adamant about keeping RINOs off of any important committees in the Senate. That's a big one. No RINOs on Judiciciary, for sure, since there is a micro-filibuster in that committee in that at least one vote is necessary from the minority caucus in order to bring nominations to a committee vote and get them to the floor - something that should have been exercised with the Sotomayor fiasco; the wise Latina should STILL be sitting in judiciary waiting for a vote and Graham should be tied up in the closet.

98 @94

Maybe I'm missing something, but where do you see evidence that he sells out his constituents?  If we're to believe that he tried to cut a deal (to keep rates down) on C&T, then that wasn't a sell out.  And, if his district is socially lib, but fiscally conservative, then that seems consistent with his record. 

It's all academic in my case since I no longer live in Illinois, but I don't understand the enthusiasm for a guy who apparently didn't vote (or donate?) in recent primaries, who's a lawyer turned real estate developer with no track-record in the public arena to hold a Senate seat. 

99
One can NOT be a fiscal conservative and vote for crap and tax.

Thank you.  I dont' give a rat f*ck if he's gay, straight, or vegetarian.  That was the biggest piece of shit marxist crap legislation ever produced.  If he's going to get in the Senate and f*ck the chicken, just elect a dem so we aren't giving them cover with his vote.

100 #96-- Well, he looks like he could be a little light in the loafers, but he does have a family, right? I've never really gotten how you're supposed to make these charges stick with family men. They tried the same thing for years with Jim Thompson and it never stuck. I think the Hillbuzz guys, though well-meaning, are a bit over the top sometimes. If they've got some pictures, they should put them out there now.

101 The Hillbuzzers claim that Kirk is in the closet and are warning Republicans not to nominate him unless he comes out, because they say the Democrats are waiting to leak this info at just the right time to maximize the impact.

Ugh.  I was afraid there's a playbook out there to smear Kirk with this.  Is it the same people that have been doing the same to Charlie Crist?

102 The Hillbuzzers claim that Kirk is in the closet and are warning Republicans not to nominate him unless he comes out, because they say the Democrats are waiting to leak this info at just the right time to maximize the impact.

Meh. I can't see that anyone would care if he's gay or not. It's his voting record and positions that are the problems. Whether he's gay is neither here nor there.

103 Kirk was married.  He just got divorced.

104 Kirk was one of only eight Republicans to vote for... Cap and Trade.

That's a show stopper for me. 

105 @32 When Kirk offers to eat pig slop, then we'll think about killing the fatted calf.

106 Gee, there couldn't possibly be a motivation by the Hillboyz to have another politician come out of the closet, right? 

Sorry.  I don't think that the gay thing matters.  Yes, if he's gay he's probably (probably) been lying to his wife, but *shocka* lots of people lie about their sexual preferences.  I can't see that keeping him out of the Senate. 

107 I do like the fact that Kirk is gay-friendly as well: good branding for a GOP that needs to downplay culture warrior religious conservatism and emphasize economic conservatism.

Ah, I see Jeff B. agrees with me that Kirk will generate a strong ant-RINO backlash.

108 Methos,
Are you saying anyone who isn't socially conservative is a RINO?

109

104 -- I'm saying the downstate (at least here) will never trust him, and some folks up in his district who have business ties to downstate farming/industry can't stand his guts either.  The only thing that comes up in any discussion of Mark Kirk is (and I quote verbatim) "how to get that rotten m()))er out of his representative seat". 

He really screwed the pooch with that cap and trade vote -- and he isn't doing so well with his stance on gun control. And yes, people do remember the situation with Barr Topinka/Ryan/Obama. If you add a "he's gay!!!" bombshell from the Dems, you can kiss his win goodbye...unfortunately, he's probably the best the IL GOP can field right now, as far as winnablity.

Honestly, I think IL may be one place where an third party canidate might have a shot at winning -- neither of the two major parties are respected, nor liked in this state.

110

This story comes from the fact that one of his primary opponets (and I can't remember which one, sorry) has been running radio ads on Rush show claiming that Kirk is a closet homosexual. This same clown claims Kirk is a "de facto" pediphile because he did nothing about Mark Foley's pedaphillia.

The problem is that I think those guys have claimed to have seen him in Chicago gay bars numerous times.

111

I've actually already voted early for Mark Kirk in the primaries.  I'm a BIG Mark Kirk fan.  Yes, he's a squish on enivornmental issues, but he's good on national defense and has been excellent on the stimulus and healthcare.  This is a case where you cannot get everything that you want.  Kirk had to vote for cap and trade to remain viable in the IL 10th, which is a very "White Person District."  However, being a bit squishy has helped him keep his seat, and having him in that district is a heck of alot better than the Obama-lite idiot who keeps running.  (Dan Seals is half-African American and thinks that he's Obama).  Kirk is also really good on a personal level: very good retail politician who understands how to work a crowd on a very Scott Brown level and can raise ridiculous amounts of money. 

On the other hand, Pat Hughes comes off very flat in his commercials and just doesn't connect.   He really is the new Al Salvi and would guarantee that Obama bestie and mob banker Lexie wins the seat.  (On a sidenote, I went to high school with Salvi's nephew, who was a complete tool).  Also, running against gay marriage and abortion and for Republican orthodox isn't going to work in Illinois.  The Republicans best chance is to run a Scott Brown campaign and reel in some of the nervous suburbanites on economic issues and health care.  People in some of the wealthier IL suburbs (i.e. the IL 10th) are generally very socially liberal, but could be swayed on pocketbook issues.  I don't think that people working for the big pharmacy and insurance companies in Lake and Cook counties are big fans of the health care bill. 

112 Honestly, I think IL may be one place where an third party canidate might have a shot at winning -- neither of the two major parties are respected, nor liked in this state.

The senate seat?  There.  Is.  No.  Way.  Just hand the seat over the Dem machine candidate at that point.  More than enough votes in Cook County alone with the downstate votes split between the Rep and 3^rd party.

113 Mark Kirk, 100% rating from the ghouls at NARAL, D rating from the NRA, and is a member of the Main Street Partnership, which is a Soros funded operation.

114 Michelle Malkin is anti-Kirk.  Good enough for me.

115 My suggestion:  Outsiders really should stay out of this one.  Mark Kirk actually has a chance of winning this.  Let the Dems have a bloody primary and be forced to spend their money before Kirk has had to spend his first dollar.

Mark Kirk comes from one of the most liberal districts in the midwest.  He's had to walk the fence on a lot of issues.

It's hard to vote for him after the cap and trade vote, but he's been a lone voice speaking of the perils if we continue to borrow and spend.

116 @122

Well, I hope Michelle Malkin is prepared to give up her paying gig to work as a staffer for neophyte Hughes, 'cause with his background, he'll be a lamb amongst wolves in the Senate. 

117 Kirk keeps trying to bring back the "assault weapons" ban which even most Dems don't want to touch with a 10 foot pole.  Between that and cap and tax he's quite a bit to the left of a lot of blue dogs.  With Republicans like that, who needs Democrats?

118

119 -- The environmental issues are another thing that's killing him down here; a lot of wealthy Chicagoans own farm ground down here and farming is the big thing.  He's not at all popular.  I agree he's the best chance the GOP has, but I will not campaign for him, I will not donate to him, and I'll vote for him only because he's the lesser of two evils (I really hate who the Dems are running).  I'm not alone in my thinking down here -- and if a third party canidate runs who's more attractive to many of the voters like myself, that canidate will pull votes away from him. 

Kirk needs to do a hell of a lot of image damage control.  And the GOP better run their own version of "not Bush" in this senate race -- it's going to be that sort of situation imho.  Don't expect high voter turnout for this one unless something changes.

119 My suggestion:  Outsiders really should stay out of this one.  Mark Kirk actually has a chance of winning this.  Let the Dems have a bloody primary and be forced to spend their money before Kirk has had to spend his first dollar.

Absolutely.  Don't give the RINO statist ghoul a fucking penny or word of support.

120

"The problem is that I think those guys have claimed to have seen him in Chicago gay bars numerous times."

Apparently that is Schock, not Kirk.  If Kirk was hiding something, I'd think that it would have come out in the last few elections, which were pretty close and nasty, especially the 2008 one.

121 117

Honestly, I think IL may be one place where an third party canidate might have a shot at winning -- neither of the two major parties are respected, nor liked in this state.

Posted by: unknown jane



No.  The Democratic machine  will guarantee every Dem vote goes to a Dem.  A third party candidate only splits Repub votes.

So, I don't even wanna hear crap about third parties.

122

My suggestion:  Outsiders really should stay out of this one. -

Outsiders?  Let's see.  He's running for a US Senate seat.  Sorry, but we've all got a dog in this hunt.  And it sounds like a number of you "insiders" want to send us a pro-abortion, anti-gun, pro-gay "rights" senator and call him a conservative.  Just what the hell does it take to be called a liberal up there?

123

Not a chance. Not one chance in hell.

THANK YOU. The only thing worse than swallowing hard and voting for the RINO over the Commiecrat is taking the 3rd party LSD trip.

124 Kirk keeps trying to bring back the "assault weapons" ban which even most Dems don't want to touch with a 10 foot pole.  Between that and cap and tax he's quite a bit to the left of a lot of blue dogs.  With Republicans like that, who needs Democrats?

Anyone who would actively pursue a new AWB after the shellacking the Democrats took in '94 for it is permanently stuck on full retard.

125 Honestly, I think IL may be one place where an third party canidate might have a shot at winning -- neither of the two major parties are respected, nor liked in this state.

See, a statement like this makes me wonder whether you actually live in this state.  Because nobody who does would say that.  Not a chance in hell.

126 That's just it -- the Dem already has his votes accounted for, but Kirk is iffy.  However, there is enough voter dissatisfaction with both parties here that whichever party breaks away from the same old same old here stands a very good chance of winning.

127

Voting for Cap and Trade is like voting for Adolph Shickelgruber.

Fuck him.

The anti-Second Amendment votes earns him an additional hard kick in the nutsack.

He probably voted for Obama.

128 13 -- oh, I do live in IL.  I live in downstate-downstate -- trust me, nobody around here is very happy with either party.

129 The purest conservative on the planet is useless in the Senate if he can't get things done

The idea of NOT getting thing done in the senate gives me a tingle up my leg.

130 132

My suggestion:  Outsiders really should stay out of this one. -

Outsiders?  Let's see.  He's running for a US Senate seat.  Sorry, but we've all got a dog in this hunt.  And it sounds like a number of you "insiders" want to send us a pro-abortion, anti-gun, pro-gay "rights" senator and call him a conservative.  Just what the hell does it take to be called a liberal up there?

Fine.  Then you get Alexei Giannoulias.  You're not listening.  Hughes is a nobody.  He can never win the Senate seat in Illinois.  I teally really don't want Giannoulias (I hate the prick), and I don't want outsiders hell bent on purity coming in and fucking things up because they think they know better. 

131 It is a regional thing, but it's a pretty big region.  No, right now there are no viable third party canidates, but if there was...

132 That pudding video was fing hilarious.

133

I'm in Chicago, grew up in the suburbs, spent 7 years in central Illinois at the U of I, and had a brother who was in southern Illinois at SIU for 5 years.  Here's my back of the envelope analysis of Illinois politics and electoral geography.

The Illinois GOP is a mess.  It's a dysfunctional three-legged stool of hard-core purity test activist types, vanilla corporate Eisenhower types, and ladder-climbing machine hacks.  It's totally forgotten how to plaster together a winning coalition.  And the last time it did produced a quiet, competent, generally decent governor (Edgar) who wasn't anyone's idea of a standard-bearer.  

Illinois has four or so cultural geographies that a winning GOP candidate has to play in. 

Chicago/Greater Cook County is guaranteed blue.  It's as machine Dem as it gets.  The GOP organization is vestigial at best.  

The suburbs and collar counties further out (professional and union middle class), used to be reliably Main Street Republican when it was Greatest Generation (e.g., Henry Hyde in the past) and still offer reps like Peter Roskum, but they've trended liberal with the generational cohort switching to Baby Boomers and now Gen X. So the suburbs and collar counties could come back to red with a traditional Main Street, fiscal conservative, competent (but not necessarily smaller) government message.  But red meat conservatism won't play.  Forget it. 

Moving out to farm - light industry country in northern, northwestern, western, and central Illinois, that's still pretty reliably traditional, midwestern GOP - quietly conservative but not in your face about it.  Fiscal conservatism, smaller government, a little more social conservatism, that'll play here.  Northwestern Illinois might resonate with WOT stuff more than other parts of the state given the Thomson Prison flap.  

Southern Illinois is its own world.  Originally settled by Jacksonian Appalachians.  Heritage of populist farm and mining activism which translated to Jacksonian populist Democrat.  Very evangelical.  Definitely the most socially conservative part of the state.  Pro-military.  But since Jacksonian-populist-Evangelical Democrats everywhere in the true south have gone over to the GOP it's happening in southern Illinois (e.g., the only counties Alan Keyes won against Obama were down here).  The last Dem gubernatorial candidate (Poshard) from southern Illinois was as socially conservative and good government as you could hope for.  So northern social liberal Dems abstained and machine Dems like Daley went behind the scenes for the machine Repub they could do business with (George Ryan).

So a staunch conservative would play well in southern, central, western, and northern Illinois - basically everywhere except the greater Chicago metro area.  And that's where the center of gravity for votes still lies.   

Kirk seems to have the best chance of doing well statewide.  He represents a very wealthy district that's schizophrenic between the stereotype of the upper middle and upper class Republican and the limousine liberal.  So yeah, he represents his district and a lot of those votes won't pass a national or outsider's conservative purity test.  But he's got an organization and money and he's media savvy (regular appearances on the biggest talk radio station in Chicago). 

Hughes is a youngish lawyer and real estate developer who's never run for office before (less experience than Scott Brown).  The Illinois GOP's last senate candidate (against Dick Durbin) was a suburban family physician who also never ran for anything before.  The GOP Senate candidate before that?  Alan Keyes.  Peter Fitzgerald was a blip: as a true conservative he won because Carol Mosely Braun had become an embarrassment and then he quit because the state party hacks didn't find his personal integrity agreeable anymore and were willing to let him lose. 

So the Illinois GOP's recent Senate history has been a freaking embarrassment, and I for one would cry tears of joy if a RINO was elected.  Baby steps.  But I'm just not feeling any chance for a Scott Brown WTF just happened opportunity here.

 

134

141 -- That's why the best strategy would be to campaign (at least where I'm at) with a "not Giannoulias" strategy.  He is a first class piece of shit -- there's the angle (down here at least).

And no, much as Hughes might be really popular with a fair few here, he doesn't stand a chance...it's probably that %$^er Kirk or nobody.  I really would like to secede from Cook County.

135

Fine.  Then you get Alexei Giannoulias.  You're not listening.  Hughes is a nobody.  He can never win the Senate seat in Illinois.  I teally really don't want Giannoulias (I hate the prick), and I don't want outsiders hell bent on purity coming in and fucking things up because they think they know better. 

What you don't like obnoxious trust fund brats who are using their families' mob tainted money to buy a political career??  What the hell is wrong with you?  sarc off//

136

 and I don't want outsiders hell bent on purity coming in and fucking things up because they think they know better -

You might feel differently if you were hell bent on purity.  I just love social libs who want to call themselves conservatives because they care about money issues.  Especially the ones who think they strengthen their arguments by using words derived from Latin.

137 If you read Hillbuzz, you'll see how the Dems are planning to blow this guy up after the primary, just like Obama did when he won.

Well, the Hillbuzzers were gung-ho that Roland Burris, that man of immense integrity, was going to save us all from Obamacare with his vote.

I think it took less than 48 hrs for Burris to sell his vote in exchange for mo' money for ACORN.

138 Local word is that Kirk voted for Cap n Tax because he knew he'd be running and he didn't want the Dems to say he belongs to the party of "No" or votes straight line.

139 Fine.  Then you get Alexei Giannoulias.  You're not listening.  Hughes is a nobody.  He can never win the Senate seat in Illinois.  I teally really don't want Giannoulias (I hate the prick), and I don't want outsiders hell bent on purity coming in and fucking things up because they think they know better.

By all means, we'll keep our money and time and give it to candidates who aren't complete statist retards.

140

144 -- You also have to take into account the college towns that are scattered throughout the downstate -- they're pretty schizo too.  Pretty hardcore liberal, but there are some conservative factions...and right now there are some wavering libs on some of the campuses.

If Kirk gets a bit more pro 2nd in his stance, backs off the environmental stuff that really kicks this area right in the balls, then he stands a chance, come off as a little more reliable (I'd say Jim Edgarish -- this area loved Jim Edgar, because he was seen as "safe", they trusted him), he'd stand a chance.  Oh, and Kirk might want to be seen as a bit more friendly to ADM, mining, manufacturing. and ag, and tread lightly on the FutureGen thing -- that's a really big issue down here.  Folks are really hurting for jobs, but they're also thinking this is just a big old pile of stinking horseshit (literally) that Chicago/Washington is throwing at us to keep us shut up and voting like good little cattle -- it's almost as big as healthcare, and just about as touchy a topic.

141 Just having Obama's seat competitive will captivate the media.

142 Thanks Sarge, I concur.  I was born and raised in Chicago, my sibs and mom still live there, went to college downstate (it's a great day to be a Leatherneck) and now live in Roskum's district, straight south of Woodfield and straight west of O'Hare.  What you say is pretty much what I've seen.  Kirk really is the best chance of sending an 'R' to Congress.

143 Local word is that Kirk voted for Cap n Tax because he knew he'd be running and he didn't want the Dems to say he belongs to the party of "No" or votes straight line.

Exactly.  He needs -- absolutely needs -- to be able to market himself with that sort of reputation to be able to get the collar county vote out, keep the margin somewhat less insane in Chicago/Cook (think getting 20% of the vote there -- seriously, that's the best case scenario a GOP candidate can hope for), and still clean up downstate and North/Northwest.

144 Methos,
Are you saying anyone who isn't socially conservative is a RINO?

In a word yes.  Pro-gun, pro-life, pro-traditional marriage are major parts of the national platform.  In particular though, I am I am saying that anyone who is in-your-face-anti-social-conservative is a RINO.  It's one thing to be mute on social issues.  It's something entirely different to be touted for social liberalism, which as we have often discussed will always lead to fiscal liberalism to pay for the consequences.  This is augmented by the Illinois specific issue of the party's wanton disloyalty to its voters as exemplified by their handling of the Jack Ryan debacle.

If you've been watching, there are plenty of voices warning that Scott Brown is going to be such.  I have no idea because he didn't make it an issue in his campaign.  More importantly, we were desperate for that 41st vote in a way that we are not in this discussion.  We may be looking at the 51st vote, by the time we get to November in which case I'd change my mind, but if we're talking about having 45 or 46 Senators, I'm not going to support the guy we know is going to stab us in the back anytime the issue matters.

145 It's just a question of numbers. You need to hold down totals in suburban Cook and get out the vote in the collar counties. I can do a county-by-county breakdown of Downstate, too. But the total of all 80 counties or whatever it is below Joliet will not offset Cook. I think electorally Kirk has a very strong chance. The question for me is whether he will further degrade the Republican brand in Illinois.

146 More thoughts on the Chicago aspect of this race, for outsiders:

To contrast the difference between the Chicago "machine" and the Boston "machine":  as I said above, the best Kirk (or any GOP candidate) could hope for in Chicago/Cook is losing 80% to 20%.  By contrast, Scott Brown only lost Boston by 63%-37% or whereabouts.  (This, incidentally, is what made Brown a winner in MA -- he replicated margins like that in the other big Dem towns of MA like Worcester and Springfield, an overperformance which made his gangbusters performance in the suburbs stick.).  If Kirk can get 20%, I'm pretty sure he actually wins this.  And he's the only candidate with a chance in hell.

147

@156 - Posted by: Methos at January 21, 2010 02:25 PM (Xsi7M)

+ !!eleventy!!

_{sorry Methos, I know you hate it when I take your side} 

148

I can speak with some authority, so please hear me out.  Kirk has been my congressman for several terms in a blue district that went for Obama last election.  Yet, Kirk won over his democrat opponent handily in 2008 as he has in all past elections.  Kirk has been a terrific congressman.  He has been responsive and respectful even under conditions where I have written via email or gone to town halls to disagree or ask questions.  In addition to being an effective congressman he is a good campaigner.  He is as good at connecting with voters in small farming communities as he is in the city. He is very smart and quick on his feet and will totally dominate ANY of the current senate candidates of either party in a debate.

Kirk is very very fiscally conservative as his record in congress shows. His lone misstep, IMO, cap and trade, is a vote he now admits looks like a mistake, yet even then he knew with confidence that it was an empty vote-- the bill would never end up being passed in the senate.  Yes, he is moderate on some social issues.  He has to be, because this is suburban Chicago and the vast majority of the voters here are moderate and expect that position from their representatives.

He is powerful on national security issues both at home and abroad and knows what he is talking about.  From day one he fought tooth and nail over the closing of Gitmo and has been very vocal both in Illinois and in Washington about the stupidity of bringing Gitmo prisoners to Thomson Illinois. It infuriates me when people flat out  lie and call him a RINO.  I know RINOs and he ain't one.

He is miles ahead in endorsements and polls and fundraising.  Many independents support Kirk and some democrats will vote for him due to the obvious inferiority of their candidate. The Democrat party in Illinois right now is weak and screwed up after Blago and the machine is under scrutiny.  Kirk IS going to  be the next US Senator from Illinois unless some incredibly stupid people  who should be on "our side" screw it up by continuing to paint him differently than he is. (We have a good shot at taking the governorship from the Dems, too.)

Pat Hughes seems like a nice guy and I think he may well have a long term political future.  I encourage him to continue to work his way up in experience and name recognition.  Hughes is not ready to be a  US senator, however, and he cannot be elected statewide in Illinois at this time, although who knows---after a few more years of Obama maybe he can!

 I beg you all to please, please trust me on this. Please do not let the democrats take this very winnable seat by helping to weaken a strong candidate through lies and inter-party purity warfare.  Please accept that maybe the tent needs to be a little bit bigger in Illinois than in some other states.   Mark Kirk IS a conservative and votes that way.  I believe Kirk's policy positions match very well with Scott Brown's winning campaign in MA. Brown won and so can Mark Kirk.  We need that to happen.

 

149 Jack Ryan debacle.

Don't even get me fucking started.

We may be looking at the 51st vote, by the time we get to November in which case I'd change my mind, but if we're talking about having 45 or 46 Senators

We can't get to the 51^st vote until we pass the 42^nd.  This is a really good chance to steal a D seat.  Kirk--I understand--may have a hard sell downstate, but it is a sale he can make.  I don't see anyone in the primaries anywhere close to him.

150 In a word yes.

In a word, no.  That is the wave of the past, so to speak.  The future of GOP is in being friendly and accomodating to social values conservatives, yes, but kicking their asses out of the drivers seat (since they were all-too-willing to sellout economic conservatism when they had the stick) and letting the economic conservatives take over.  Now THAT's a brand that can roll up Reaganesque margins across the nation.

151 But of all things to vote "yes" for, why the hell vote yes for cap and trade?  I mean really, that's just shoving a large segment of this state down in the pig shit and then rubbing their faces around in it.  He wouldn't have made a worse decision voting for freaking healthcare in the case of IL. Cap and trade is definitely the hot topic at least in my area -- everybody knows we're royally frakked if cap and trade passes; if it does pass, then we'll all be on welfare at the rate the economy is going down here so healthcare will be a moot point -- or at least that's what is keeping a lot of folks up at night, including yours truly.

152 Jack Ryan debacle.

Don't even get me fucking started.

Aw man...I hadn't even moved to Chicago yet before that clusterfuck and it still started hurting like a sucking chest-wound the minute I got there.  That's how awful that was.

153 I would agree with unknown jane on the third party thing as a replacement for the state Illinois party.  So a new second party.  The problem is it would be stuck at second with Topinka's RINO party playing spoiler for the forseeable future.

154 Can we cut the 'outside forces' bushwah? Unless Kirk is only going to legislate for his own state what he does affects all of us nationally and we are entitled to a say in it. Or does he plan on not soliciting for our 'outside forces' money when he runs?

155 degrade the Republican brand in Illinois.

Ha.  Already degraded to a pile of dirt.

156

So a staunch conservative would play well in southern, central, western, and northern Illinois - basically everywhere except the greater Chicago metro area.  And that's where the center of gravity for votes still lies.   

I may be an outsider from Cali, but this is just so damn familiar. Where I live, we call it the "Atom Bomb" situation. Two small atomic bombs on SF and West Hollywood would shift the state to neutral, and two more on Oakland/Berkeley and South Central LA would make it a West Coast Texas. I shit you not.

157 You can only get away with going against a certain number of planks in the GOP platform and expect to get support from the base, even if you're in the Soviet of Illinois.  You can get a 100% from the ghouls of NARAL, but you better at least pull a B- from the NRA and chill with the envirowhackoism and crap-and-trade at least a little.  I get that you need to be something of a RINO to survive in Soviet states, but there's a point to where they hit Chafee level and it's time to dismiss them.

158 Unless Kirk is only going to legislate for his own state what he does affects all of us nationally and we are entitled to a say in it.

However, only citizens of Illinois have a vote.

159

Lived in IL my whole life.  I am sick and tired of voting for people just because they are better than the Democrat.  I am not doing it anymore.  Cap and trade = dumbass vote,  don't care why.  Let the democrat screw it all up as usual in this state.  I am sick of not beleiving in who I am voting for so I will vote for who I want that is in line with how I feel,  not who can possibly "win".... 

This is really simple.... Don't spend  my money on crap,  strong military, lower taxes.  I am pro life,  but will vote with a pro choice if they have the other three things,  stay out of the social arguments and do the top three and you get my vote and my money..

 

160

Fine.  Then you get Alexei Giannoulias. 

If he votes for crap and tax and is pro gun control then there really isn't much difference.

The idea we need to go for a real conservative in the primary is the right one.  the argument of voting for who ever the media thinks is the more likely winner is what gave us McCain.

161

In a word, no.  That is the wave of the past, so to speak.  The future of GOP is in being friendly and accomodating to social values conservatives, yes, but kicking their asses out of the drivers seat (since they were all-too-willing to sellout economic conservatism when they had the stick) and letting the economic conservatives take over. -

And 52 of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence start spinning in their graves.

162

If he votes for crap and tax and is pro gun control then there really isn't much difference.

The idea we need to go for a real conservative in the primary is the right one.  the argument of voting for who ever the media thinks is the more likely winner is what gave us McCain

McCain would have been a heck of alot better than Obama... No stimulus, no health care debacle, no terrorism debacle, no Afghanistan dithering.

163

 (moderate-left suburbs: Oak Brook, North Shore, Barrington/Hoffman Estates/Schaumberg). 

I live in Oak Brook, and I would not consider it 'moderate-left'; seems pretty center-right to me. Hinsdale, on the other hand, has been getting pretty squishy of late. Too many stay-at-home soccer moms voting against their husband's economic interests 'cause Oprah told them so, is what I hear.

And as far as Kirk is concerned; yeah, he's the most electable R on the primary list, but he's no good on guns and the cap&trade fiasco sinks him as my first choice. If he gets the nomination, though, I'm voting for him. His Democrat opponent will be a lot worse.

I suspect the Hillbuzz bunch have voted for these people in the past: Barack Obama for US Senator, Rod Blagojevich for Governor, Richard M Daley for Mayor, Carol Mosely Braun for US Senator (remember her????) Dick Durbin for US Senator; their opinion doesn't mean a whole hell of a lot to me.

164 No hope on Ditka or other media personality jumping in?

165

The future of GOP is in being friendly and accomodating to social values conservatives, yes, but kicking their asses out of the drivers seat (since they were all-too-willing to sellout economic conservatism when they had the stick) and letting the economic conservatives take over. -

I have lost count of the number of "economic conservative, social liberals" who proved to be economic liberals and social commie leftists. Sorry, but in this world the "social" issues increasingly have hardcore bottom-line fiscal impacts, on issues from immigration to sexuality. I wasn't happy with Bushyrovie or Jack Kempy "bleeding heart conservatism" either, but if you claim to be an economic conservative, you had better really mean it....

166 No hope on Ditka or other media personality jumping in?

Jim Belushi for senate!!!!  C'mon, he's gotta be smarter than Franken.

/snarc

167

Another Illinois conservative chiming in.

Hughes is probably doomed because 1) the primary is just over a week away and 2) there are 4 other candidates in the field splitting the "anybody but Kirk" vote. So, vote for Hughes to send a message, but unless you've got extra money burning a hole in your pocket you might want to hang on to it.

Jeff B, jeff, and Chris have done a pretty good covering Kirk's record and positions. But I think Jeff B might be a little too close to Kirk to evaluate how he is perceived outside his district. The hatred that conservatives feel toward Kirk is visceral. He is a weasel, and obviously so. Voting for Kirk because he is more electable is a mistake because Kirk is not more electable. He will lose because too many people despise the man. Unless the indictment on Alexi comes down before the election, Kirk has no better chance than Hughes does.

Just another piece of information: if you're pissed that we're not drilling in ANWR you can thank Mark Kirk for that. After years of it being held up in the Senate the GOP finally got enough votes to get it through and then Kirk and his Main Street Republicans killed it in the House. We're not drilling in that barren wasteland because Kirk doesn't have the balls to go back to his North Shore lib consituents and show them a picture of the barren wasteland and make the case. Or because he's a liberal.

 

 

168 In the current environment, how many social issues are coming up?  The most pressing issues in the next congress are (still) going to be the fiscally conservative ones.  We need to win those battles first.

169 168 -- yeah, I really don't think either party, but especially the GOP, could be more unpopular than here.  The Dems are viewed as a bunch of crooked, socialist pigs, but the Repubs are seen as incompetent, crooked, socialist pigs who backstab any member of their own party that actually stands up for the little guy.  MA it is not.  Plus, you have the huge disconnect -- I'm sitting here right now and realizing that my area of IL, once again, is worth crap on both a state and national level.  Folks here could lose everything (and they do -- unemployment, losing their homes, their farms, their kids -- you know how many troops come from downstate IL? you know how many people have been forced, forced on welfare around here? they don't want it, but there's nothing around here), and it doesn't really matter.  There's a lot of pent up anger in my area -- if the downstate votes ever (emphasis on "ever") come into play in an election, look out.  This is really tar, feather, and pitchfork area; people have been pissed off for a very long time.

170

  Unless the indictment on Alexi comes down before the election, Kirk has no better chance than Hughes does.

I just love Illinois politics! 'Vote for me, I'm not currently under indictment!'

171 182
I know--I lived in Macomb for 4 years.

172 We can't get to the 51^st vote until we pass the 42^nd.  This is a really good chance to steal a D seat.  Kirk--I understand--may have a hard sell downstate, but it is a sale he can make.  I don't see anyone in the primaries anywhere close to him.

CUS, was this response deliberately stupid, or did you intend to mock.  I can't really tell.  This isn't a special election, it'll be in November with all the other races.  There will either be ten more potential R pickups to get us the Senate, or there won't be.  Chances are there won't be.  In that case, why would the base of the party waste any resources on a vanity race in Illinois when there will be candidates that are fiscal and social conservatives elsewhere in the country we could be helping?

I'm really uninterested in giving the IL state GOP squishes a win until they demonstrate some loyalty to the base of the party.  There are going to be enough Republican Senators after November (there are enough now) to stop Obama's spending, if Senate Republicans muster the will to do so.  Mark Kirk's presence or absense adds nothing to the equation and subtracts quite a bit on every other issue that matters.

173 Kirk believes the Constitution is a piece of paper in which you can wipe your ass with. 

174  It's not a party thing; it's a economic life and death thing.
Posted by: Iskandar

Sigh. I guess I shouldn't bother sarcasm. If my followup comment about my arch-liberal relatives didn't give it away, I really suck at it. Anyway, I'm with Ace on this. Also, Eric Cantor in Virginia needs to go. He voted for unconstitutionally taking away the AIG bonuses via a bill of attainder. I actually plan to contribute money to whoever opposes, regardless of party. Little bastard is actually in a GOP leadership position and voted for that piece of shit? Screw him.

175 Make that WITH sarcasm. Urk.

176

184 -- lol!  Dude, Macomb's the "big city" compared to where I'm at!  Y'all are a bunch of city folks!

 

**yeah, I'm giving you shit -- because got to lighten the mood of the situation somehow

177 The Cap'n'Tax vote will be a hard pill to swallow, but there's another that will be even harder: "Sen. Alexi Giannoulias (D-IL)." Until the Illinois GOP gets back on its feet and until the Republican vote in Chicago goes up a bit, Republicans are going to have a tough time statewide. But, like in Massachusetts, this could be a perfect storm for another Senate seat pickup. After the Blagojevich circus (and the fact that Roland Burris is a senator--good God) and the continued refusal of Democrat-controlled Springfield to end corruption in the state, Democrats aren't in great shape. The national momentum is against the Democrats. And Kirk is likeable, while (in my opinion) Giannoulias comes off as supremely slimy.

Here's another little perk: Giannoulias has rested his entire case--his very worthiness to represent the state of Illinois--on how effin' awesome Barack Obama is. He even tries to talk like him. Just look at this interview. See around 4:00 when he starts on about The One. My roommate, a staunch lefty, interned for that show over the summer and was there when young Alexi was. He says Giannoulias is a first-class "douche."

If Kirk can win Obama's seat (!), I can reluctantly look the other way on Cap'n'Tax.

178 Kirk is the worst of what the GOP offers, end of story.

179 Look, our experience with Lindsey Graham should make any closet case, no matter what the state, absolutely out of the question.

No to Crist, no to Kirk.  Ever.

180

McCain would have been a heck of alot better than Obama... No stimulus, no health care debacle, no terrorism debacle, no Afghanistan dithering.

The point is MCCAIN LOST! Voting for the one thought to be the big tent and who would bring in the more liberal States resulted not only in still losing the more liberal States but also losing formerly Red States because the base stayed at home.

Do you think the people inj the Ghettos of Chicago will vote for a liberal Repub?  Not a freaking chance.

And;

People who somehow want to just blow off crap and tax as just another liberal bill that RINOs somehow had to accept in order to maintain their seat so it can be excused obviously have not read the bill.

Hell, even the environmentlists said the bill would do NOTHING for the environment! I read that bill and it is a total communist/fascist POS which does nothing but place nearly everyting in the U.S. under government control in the name of a fake crisis.

Voting for that bill was tatamount to voting to elliminate the Constitution (in an above board manner).

181

190 -- Yeah, I plan on spitting and voting for that piece of crap Kirk, for the very reason mentioned.  At least Kirk is a turd sundae; Giannoulias is a crap sandwich with no freaking condiments to wash it down with.

But somebody better get ahold of that little rat bastard Kirk, and shake/kick some sense into him concerning some of his pet squish stances...or the Republican brand is cooked even more than it is now...at least in my area.

182

Here's another little perk: Giannoulias has rested his entire case--his very worthiness to represent the state of Illinois--on how effin' awesome Barack Obama is.

 

See, that's the Illinois Republican voter's quandry in a nutshell; vote for some squishy RINO, or live under some O-Bot like Giannoulias, who thinks he's entitled to the damn seat (ala Coakley).

183 "Is it the same people that have been doing the same to Charlie Crist?"

If you actually believe Crist isn't a closet case, that makes one person.

In the country.

184 Re the gun control stuff:  Is Winnetka in or adjacent to Kirk's district?  'Cause if it is, I would certainly understand him voting for gun control. 

As for the litmus test issues, I know many people whose opinions on abortion, gun control, and gay marriage don't fall in sync with the Party platform, but who are strong on defense, terrorism, immigration, and taxes.  I consider those folks to be better Republicans than many of our elected officials are once the election is over and they have a chance to put their hands in our pockets.

185 No Methos, it's meant as a one seat at a time thing.  The chances of the Repub getting a majority is scant at best.  But you have to start somewhere.

Macomb is a big city?  Maybe when schoolis in session, know the population doubles. Where you at jane.

186

@181 - Posted by: CUS at January 21, 2010 02:49 PM (wOGfT) -

So, whether the issues come up or not, you want me to trust someone who is okay with the murder of unborn children and wants to take away my "means of last resort" to defend myself against a tyrannical govt.  Hmmm, not today. 

187 Let the Dems in IL own this mess.  I watched the Dem debate on WTTW and I have this analysis:  Hoffman is so out of touch with reality, he'll wind up as an embarrassment to all politicians.  Giannoulias, was looking around to see if he could steal whatever wasnt nailed down, but Cheryle Jackson actually seemed like a common sense moderate. 

I'll vote Jackson if Hughes doesn't win the primary.  If I can't get that, I'd throw my vote away on Mickey Mouse.  There is no way in hell I will vote for Kirk.

188 @197

And I meant to add that I don't think someone's positions on abortion dictates in any way how they would come down on guns and gay marriage.  The former is really not a social issue.   In my experience, opinions on guns and gay marriage are highly influenced by their work and home lives; abortion stances (at the ballot box) tend to be much more based on abstract principles. 

Case in point.  My dad is really conservative. Really really really conservative.  But he worked in the D.C. Superior Court system as a probation officer and I am confident he is for some measure of gun control.

189

What are Kirk's strengths? Is he attractive and appealing? Is he a solid Republican on other matters?

I got one:  His name is "Kirk."

190

But somebody better get ahold of that little rat bastard Kirk, and shake/kick some sense into him concerning some of his pet squish stances...or the Republican brand is cooked even more than it is now...at least in my area.

I'm wondering if guys like Kirk listen to the same news media that all those 'out-of-touch' Democrats sweating their jobs do. Could be a large part of his problem.

191 198 -- Let's say, I'm waaaay south and east of you; and Effingham, Decatur, CU are like booming metropolis of economic advantage and big city delights.  You is a northerner up there in Macomb buddy boy-o.

192

Yes, Y-Not, Winnetka is inthe 10th (Kirk's) district.

 

Also have yto say I am stunned that so few anti-Kirk posters here seem to give a whit about a really key conservative plank, National Security, which is one of Kirk's strong suits.  

193 I will never vote for Kirk.

194 I'm really uninterested in giving the IL state GOP squishes a win until they demonstrate some loyalty to the base of the party.  There are going to be enough Republican Senators after November (there are enough now) to stop Obama's spending, if Senate Republicans muster the will to do so.  Mark Kirk's presence or absense adds nothing to the equation and subtracts quite a bit on every other issue that matters.
Posted by: Methos

Well, it's nice to see all of this interest in who the Illinois GOP  runs in the primary 2 freakin' weeks before the vote!  If there was such interest in running a more pure candidate here in Illinois, the time to build that was 6 months ago.

195 At least if it's a Kirk-Giannoulias race it won't be the agony of the George Ryan-Glenn Poshard governor race. I couldn't vote for either of those two cockknockers.

196 I don't know what the ILGOP could have done bout Jack Ryan.  They asked Ryan if there was anything in the sealed court records that would hurt Ryan.  Ryan said "no".

The party still fought to keep the records sealed.  It was freaking family court and they were sealed to protect Ryan's son.  I don't think I'll ever forgive the press for trying to unseal those records.

However, Ryan did lie to people that supported him.  It's how Keyes ended up being the candidate.

197

Closeted con deep in the Chi machine here. I'm torn on this one. I hate Kirk, but Giannoulias is an evil, slimy, many-tentacled kraken. I'm going to have to cross my fingers and hope Kirk will be forced to listen to a wider conservative constituency.

I loathe his second amendment stance, but I understand its local communal origins.  He's got the ghost of Lori Dann to contend with.

198

200 -- Forgot about Cherlye Jackson -- if she wins then Kirk is in trouble down here, big trouble, unless something can be found out about her.

I think the thing that has to be kept in mind is that there is really no party loyalty to be found in IL outside of the major metro areas (and that is usually Dem) and even in the metro areas I think that loyalty is pretty dicey.  Most of the people in IL will vote whoever they think will give them the best break and party be damned, at least at this point.  They are so used to corruption from both sides, so used to essentially a one party rule (there really isn't much difference at all between the parties here), and so suspicious of politicians (down to the local dog catcher).  I think it would be worthwhile to show some interest in the senate race just for the psychological effect of a Repub winning Obama's seat and to keep Gino out, but this would be for national politics -- the residents of the state don't really care because they have known for a long time that they don't really count.  Don't expect any great standard bearing charge coming from here (maybe riots, you might get riots later on if things keep going to crap).

199 205 -- national security isn't foremost in most Illinoisians minds right now; hell, a lot of people want the damn terrorists here because they hope (vainly) that there might be a job in it; that's how bad things are here.

200 I'm back by Chicago now Jane.  I spent 4 years of my life going to school in Macomb.

201 CUS@198
That's completely wrong as I pointed out before.  We are not going to pick up "one seat at a time," we are going to pick up a bunch in November.  Which means the base of the party has to make decisions about where to pay attention and spend its money (We all know the RNC will happily throw away whatever donations it can muster on the likes of Kirk).  Which means prioritizing.  The value of "Obama's seat" is artificial.  It is but one seat.  The priority has to be for candidates elsewhere who are both fiscal and social conservatives, who are certain to be around in the coming wave.

202 Cheryle Jackson?  Blago's former spokeswoman?

She's even using her middle name to try to get the female vote.  Cheryle Robinson(Michelle-a-rama) Jackson.

Jackson needs Hoffman to implode to have a shot.

203

"Also have yto say I am stunned that so few anti-Kirk posters here seem to give a whit about a really key conservative plank, National Security, which is one of Kirk's strong suits."

I'll take that one, ratskeller. Kirk voted against the surge in Iraq. I can understand being against that war from the start for any number of legitimate reasons. But voting for the war but against doing what it takes to win because of political difficulties doesn't quite make one a stalwart on national defense.

204 ChiTown Jerry, we are discussing this today because ace put a post up about it today.  The anti-Kirk tone of the comments is in response to Kirk supporters hijacking what was clearly a post about Hughes, not Kirk.

205

215 -- Yep, she'd stand a good chance against Kirk.  Why?  Because she isn't a name recognition canidate; that's the only reason -- that's proably the reason Hughes and others like him will pick up votes down here, and why a third party canidate would too -- it comes down to "who do I know (and then of course don't trust) and hate the most?".  I told you it was bad here!

 

CUS -- I like Macomb, somewhat, used to go up there for FFA and 4-H stuff as a kid; it was an all day trip, so you got a whole day away from school (does that tell you anything about where I'm from).

206 No to Crist, no to Kirk.  Ever.

Florida doesn't equate to Illinois. Opposed to Crist, we have a likable, and electable, conservative Hispanic candidate, Rubio, in a national toss-up state. We're no where near Illinois, geographically, or politically.

207 I am not a Kirk supporter. 

What has Hughes done that warrants confidence in his ability to be an effective senator?  For which candidates has he campaigned or even voted in the past?  Where is his track-record that backs up whatever promises he is making? 

208 @211  If I am going to play the lesser-of-evils game, I'd take her over Kirk. If Jackson is a rubber stamp, she's doing a decent job of hiding it.  If it came down to Giannoulias and Kirk, I'll throw my vote at an independent or Libertarian.

209 Snarlen Arlen begone!

I think it's relevant to hear from Kirk supporters, particularly those who are from his district and/or who have met him, absent concrete information from Illinoisans who are knowledgeable about Hughes' qualifications. 

210 On the other hand-for Governor of IL I am supporting this guy http://adamforillinois.com/

211 The only thing Kirk supporters tell me is that they are voting for him because they think he can win statewide.  That's all he's got.  He's evaded debates and townhalls statewide and refuses to meet with Tea Party groups, some of which are among the largest in the country. 

212 Ok.  I've said about all I'm gonna say on the subject anyway.

213

Folks, if you want to see what the attitude of a lot of Illinois voters is, then I suggest you look at post 221.  That is pretty much the way most of the people around here think, and the reason why you have so many independent voters across this state.

I think the GOP would probably be better served (and even the Dems) if they threw their money into local elections and raised up a new crop of untainted politicians in this state -- the major national elections for here are pretty much not going to get much voter passion; both parties pretty much suck ass here.  It's probably the worst state in the union as far as voter apathy.

214 "

The point is MCCAIN LOST! Voting for the one thought to be the big tent and who would bring in the more liberal States resulted not only in still losing the more liberal States but also losing formerly Red States because the base stayed at home.

Do you think the people inj the Ghettos of Chicago will vote for a liberal Repub?  Not a freaking chance."

McCain lost because the economy imploded in September and he reacted poorly to that issue.  After the bank failures, there was no way that McCain was going to win. 

As for a Republican winning in IL, they aren't going to get votes on the South Side, but they better win suburban Cook County and the collar counties and get at least some votes in places like Evanston and the North side of Chicago.  If you've ever been on I-57, you'd understand that there's nothing to south of Chicago.  If southern IL wants to secede and become the new Nebraska so it can elect Pat Hughes Senator, then that is fine with me but until they do, then the social-cons are going to have to deal with the fact that an orthodox Republican isn't going to win in IL. 

"200 -- Forgot about Cherlye Jackson -- if she wins then Kirk is in trouble down here, big trouble, unless something can be found out about her."

Yes.. she's such a common sense moderate.  I especially liked the argument that I heard from her about how she's running for the Senate because she's black like Obama and it's now officially the black seat.  She was very vocal about this at a lunch I went to last spring before she even announced.  I'm also totally impressed by her deep ties to the Chicago machine and the Blago administration.... sarc off//

215 Why do you humans go for the squishy RINO?  It is not rational.  I am the supremely logical candidate.

216 That's interesting jeff.  The signs I see around town haven't mention a party affiliation.  Maybe they do now, but some of those signs were out in summer.

217 227 -- but she doesn't have name recognition like some of the people running (and name recognition in IL is NOT an advantage)...that's the reason people would vote for her.  Hey, just the messenger here.

218

I've hooked the warp drive directly into the campaign machine, Captain, but I don't know how much more she can take!

219 232 -- yay...

220 Well I'm certainly not voting for Kirk.

221 Blago's trial starts in September.

All popcorned out.  Hey.  Anyone remember Screaming Yellow Zonkers?

222 jeff - I'm voting for Dan Proft for Gov.  He has little to no chance in winnning, but I like his style.

223

 he is for some measure of gun control.

So am I.  the kind that "Captain Kirk" demonstrated on that lawyer show he's on.  Saw a you tube type clip of it. Funny stuff.

224 100% NARAL? D from NRA? Divorcing? Possibly closeted gay?
For Cap and Tax?

The guy should be in therapy, not running for Senate.
Not from Ill myself but Kirk's a No for me.
If Alexei is sure to get the Dem nod then the Repubs can run anyone  because Alexei will get skewered in the General election. There is no reason to settle on a big Maybe here....and Kirk is a BIG Maybe about most issues.

225

....there was no way that McCain was going to win. 

There was never ANY chance that McCain would win regardless of what the economy did. If he had not pulled Palin in he would have lost in 49 States.  He was a darlin' of the press and the Party establishment.

The same thing will happen in IL. Nominate a liberal RINO squish and not only will you not get the northern part of the State but you will lose a lot of the Southern as well.

It has been proven over and over and over in the last 12 years when the Republicans nominate a squish they lose. The lose the base and they do not pick up the liberals. A socialist can not out liberal a communist.

From what I have heard today about this Kirk guy if it is a choice between him and the Democrap you have already lost and may as well stay at home.  Or better yet, move to a State that isn't run lock stock and barrel by the Daly machine out of Chicago.

And if you are going to bail, better do it sooner rather than later so at least you can get 50 cents on the dollar for your house.

 

226

Always glad when Vic shows up with the happy thoughts.

LOL, been here since 4 this morning.

227

"227 -- but she doesn't have name recognition like some of the people running (and name recognition in IL is NOT an advantage)...that's the reason people would vote for her.  Hey, just the messenger here."

Hey... You're the one who argued that she was a moderate.  I was just pointing out the obvious. 

As for people winning with no recognition, a Dem. cannot win in IL without the full backing of the Chicago machine and the machine's candidate is Lexie because he has ties to the people who really run Chicago (aka the mob).  Jackson's also a machine pol, but not as connected as Lexie.  If you must vote for a Dem., at least vote for Hoffman.  At least he's squeaky clean. 

228 I've lived in Illinois for most of the last 34 years: in Chicago West Side, the Peoples' Soviet Conclave of Hyde Park, the Peoples' Soviet Conclave of Oak Park, and now just east of Joliet. I concur with #144, #160 and #180. Outsiders do not understand how badly Illinois is run by the Combine -- the Dems and Pubs who together cut deals, suckle the public teat and play footsie with the Mob. The Combine will absolutely turn on any politician who doesn't cooperate, which is the reason why Peter Fitzgerald, a very decent guy, walked away. They tolerated Edgar because while Edgar is decent enough, he made clear he wouldn't clamp down on the extracurriculars. They loved George Ryan and tried to get him sprung -- he was one of theirs. Kirk is a squish but I'll vote for him. He's soft on social issues and goofy-stupid on guns, but reasonable on business, finance and the military. Hell, I voted for McCain to try and avoid Obama, so Kirk is easy for me. Hughes is a neophyte. He has no business running for Senate and he needs to be educated on that point. He wants to run for something, okay, run for the House or for a state district. He has no experience, no resume, and no real ideas other than the basic, generic tea-party style conservatism. Sure fine, we all like that, but he's a deer in the headlights and he'll be eaten for breakfast. He'll absolutely get 30% of the vote in a general election but won't crack 40%. Feh. I don't mind losing in a good cause but Hughes isn't the good cause that Scott Brown was/is. Now, some absolutely scary words: Senator Alexi Giannoulias (D-IL). Say that a few times. Giannoulias is a fool, a moron, likely a crook and is 'connected'. His family owned a mobbed-up bank, Broadway Bank, that the FDIC had to close. He's tight with Rezko. He's a total pinhead as state treasurer. He exists to live on the public teat, make deals in the Combine, and advance himself. He's the perfect jackass apparatchik. Good God, people, if you can't swallow your bile and vote for Kirk against a douche like Giannoulias, there's something wrong with your morality meter. A vote for Hughes is a vote for Giannoulias. Say that a few times.

229

but reasonable on business.....

Go back and read crap and tax and say that with a straight face.

230 Oddly there are quite a few conservatives running in the primary including people like Dan Proft and Andy something. As a lax Illinois resident planning on moving south next summer I'm waiting till the weekend to do the research on the nearly dozen contenders. But Kirk is already out in my book. He's a huge RINO who not only voted for Cap-and-Trade, but is endorsed by the Chicago Tribune which only backs the Republican sure to lose in the general election. Of course Crook County started the "rig the primary" thing. But the democrats is like a roster of supervillians. The likely frontrunner Gianoulias is an Obama clone who stole college funds from the state investment fund. The DNC roster is so shocking I'd probably volunteer for Kirk who I despise if he won the primary.

231

Stop!  As a resident of IL-10 (Mark Kirk's current US House district), let me tell you about this district and the tightrope that Mark Kirk has to walk to stay in office.  This is one of the most LIBERAL districts in Illinois, which is saying a lot. 

The village of Wilmette is in this district, Wilmette is the hometown of Rahm Emmanual, and it is where David Axelrod lived when he was still here in Illinois.  The number of democrats and their operatives here in the 10th is astonishing, the fact that Mark Kirk continues to be a republican in the US House representing them drives them nuts.  Mark Kirk beat Dan Seals twice, including when Obama was on the ballot.  For all I know, democrats are funding Pat Hughes, that's how much local democrats hate Mark Kirk. 

There's a great local blog that's been covering local politics, it's Team America's 10th district blog

http://teamamerica10th.blogspot.com/

The blog proprieter was a law student or law firm buddy of Pat Hughes, I forget which. He is supporting Mark Kirk, and he knows Hughes better than anybody here.  Hughes has never held office, and has zero personality, he would be making the Marth Coakley retail politics mistakes.  Hell, Pat Hughes has never even voted in a primary, he parachuted into this race out of nowhere, which really makes me suspicious of his motives.  Don't put it past Axelrod & Emmanual to field a false flag candidate in their own hometown!!!

If we want a republican victory here in Illinois, how sweet would that be to take Obama's Senate seat, we need Mark Kirk.

One other thing, the "gay" thing was a charge made by candidate Andy Martin in a radio ad.  Google Andy Martin, the guy is a perennial nutcase, has been running for office for years, and was a clown (literal clown, from the circus).  He's on the Lyndon LaRouche end of politics.  No credibility.

232

242 n-- I didn't argue that she was a moderate; that was somebody else.  I just said if she keeps up with the moderate talk and due to  not being an incredibly recognizable name, there's a strong chance people would vote for her here due to the "not Kirk" vibe. 

I get it, you like Kirk, ok.  I hate his freaking guts, but I'll vote for him in the general because I hate Gino's guts even more.  But don't expect me to go all out for that frakker.

233

Campbell is the guy you want running against Boxer:

I was disappointed that Campbell switched from the governor to the senate race. If he became the Republican candidate for governor here in CA, he would easily beat the current democratic favorite Moonbeam Brown. The problems is Campbell will not win the Republican nomination because of the two wealthy Republican candidates, Meg Whitman and Steve Poizner.

Campbell figures he will only have to beat one billionaire (Carly Fiorina) for the Republican side of the senate race instead of one billionare (Whitman) and one millionare (Poizner) in the governor race.

Campbell is the right guy that can solve California's budget problems since he was Director of Dept of Finance when California was still in the surplus. His academic credentials are not bad either. Harvard Law graduate, PhD in Economics, and was dean of Haas School of Business at Cal. We need someone like him to be the next governor of California.

Beating Babs Boxer is not bad though.

234 Giannoulias is a fool, a moron, likely a crook and is 'connected'

OTOH, in three years, once we have a Republican President and Fitz goes back to work, that's a good recipe for indictment and another appointment.  Which is good for some popcorn at least.

Steve White is partially right in that a vote for Kirk could well be rationalized as less to swallow than a vote for McCain was, except that there's less return for the effort.  In any case Kirk supporters might want to figure out a better reason for his candidacy than "Let's stick it to social conservatives!" if they want him to have any shot in November.

235 @246
"Don't vote for Hughes because he's a Dem plant!  Vote for Kirk who is an across the board Dem anyway!"  That's you're argument, really?

236

Actually, the most passionate vote I could make as a lifelong Illinoisian would be a vote to have Texas (or some other reasonable state, I'm not picky) mount an overland invasion of my area of IL, hook up with the "Rebel Alliance" here, and annex us and leave the greater Chicago and St. Lois metro areas to their own devices...and shitty politicians) -- please! 

There's a reason why the tea parties are so numerous and popular here.

237

If Kirk would give us a supermajority, then I say back him because he's got the best chance of winning.  Who knows how much better his chances are than Hughes's, but let's say the odds are significant enough.

But are we really thinking Kirk would get us that supermajority?  If not, then selling our souls to back a Cap & Trade traitor isn't worth it.  We can make a principled stand -- you know, like the Tea Partiers are -- by supporting a guy like Hughes who stands on principle (until we find out otherwise) for the stuff we stand for.  Supporing Kirk would leave a bad taste in our mouths (spare me the jokes, here), and how many more unlikely races do we need to witness before we start reconsidering what we normally would lable "unlikely" isn't so unlikely? 

Balls deep, I say!

238

He's very electable, speaks well, career Naval officer.  He held open town halls by teleconference several times, in which I thought he performed well (some of the callers had views that were... interesting, as will happen in these things, but he didn't get rattled).  His staffers were quite responsive to requests and actually called me back when I left a long message about funding Polywell fusion that got cut off.
 
He's fairly solid Republican, fiscal conservative, yes a bit RINO (he voted for cap and trade, albeit with an apology later) but the best you're going to do statewide in the PRI (People's Republic of Illinois).
 

239

More at his wiki.  

http://tinyurl.com/yby3vkr

I'd forgotten he was still serving -- he shares that distinction with Scott Brown, iirc.  And I didn't know he was recently deployed to Afghanistan.
 
I'm not opposed to ideological purity for the most part, but otoh we're also the party that <i>actually cares</I> about military service, as opposed to Dems who just think it's a nice trick to fool the rubes.

240

Pat Hughes will lose the general election if he wins the primary.  The Mob will drink his milkshake.

He has never held any elective office.  He doesn't VOTE in elections, that's public information because trust me Illinois keeps track of when citizens show up to vote.  He's an opportunistic lawyer who wants to be a Senator and has latched onto the tea party sentiment to trick people out of state into giving him money. 

If anybody would be a turncoat go-along-to-get-along in office, it would be Hughes.  He's just another smarmy lawyer who wants to join the ruling elite.

241

Sounds like you have some personal experience with Hughes.  I'm not saying you do or don't -- perhaps you can tell us as much, but your comments amount to: "he's a lawyer; therefore, he's not to be trusted." 

242 I'm in Chicago and I will say it HAS to be Kirk.   We've already had the GOP completely fall apart once and get further kicked into oblivion for a generation by running Alan Keyes on "principle."  We already had Keyes running and quoting scripture and all that.  It's NOT ENOUGH.

I, too, consider Cap'n'Tax a nearly unforgivable sin of Kirk's.  Yes, I too heard him on WLS a few days later saying that he regretted voting for it.  Let's be honest -- it was politics.  He probably knew it likely wouldn't pass, but probably was told by his advisers that this particular bill would at least look good to his constituents who are all suburban hybrid-driving, four-flushing, Gaia-worshipping enviro-squishes.  He gets to say he has voted consistently for the environment and gives a gentlemanly lob for the Dems.

Now that there is real teeth to the argument that AGW is a fraud, look to him to stand a bit stronger on the issue.  The worm has turned and the suburban douchebags in his district are no longer trusting "the experts" like they used to.   (Sorry for being vicious on this subject -- I grew up in the suburbs.  People, you have no idea -- the public school system is hard-core brainwashing children into spouting environmental doom-and-gloom.)

By the way, Kirk has a good record on the environment as well as far the real issues go regarding clean water and fishing and all that.  He is the right guy for an Illinois republican.  He's conservative, but urbane.  Yes, he's not someone used to posing in hunting orange downstate, but he's an honest-to-God veteran, which will translate well downstate.

Yes, everyone, vote for Kirk.  Please.  He's the best candidate for the job.  We CAN'T afford another Alinsky epigone elected in this state.

I know this is appearing way down in this thread.  Ace, posting on your board is always like being the last guy at a gang bang.

243 Also,

How bad is the Republican party in this state?  I admit that I voted for Blagojevich for governor and I'm very glad I did.  The Republican candidate, Topinka, was so wrapped up in the scandal of the past Ryan administration that she was tainted as far as I was concerned.

Even though I agreed with Topinka on more issues, I voted for Blagojevich because I knew he was hated and despised by the mainstream Democrats.  That's the kind of asinine math we have to do in this state.

I'm very happy I voted for Blago, too, because the "popcorn" factor has worked out wonderfully and the Democrats are turning on each other like dogs in a pit.  It's the best we can hope for.  Now, conditions are excellent for a new, untainted Republican to possibly win the governor seat.

We've done the popcorn factor.  No more Alinskyites, please.

244

197 Re the gun control stuff:  Is Winnetka in or adjacent to Kirk's district?  'Cause if it is, I would certainly understand him voting for gun control. 

Yes Winnetka is in Kirk's IL-10 district.  As is Wilmette, which had an equally insane gun ban in force, when Wilmette resident Mr. Hale DeMar came face to face with an intruder in his home, and shot him.  End of story?  No!

Mr. DeMar was charged with a gun offense under Wilmette's gun ban.  That's right, man defends his own two small children from an intruder and is charged by local authorities for violating the gun ban.

That is the kind of liberal-crazy that lives in IL-10.  That's why Mark Kirk might seem a tad liberal to outsiders.  Those of us who live here have a much better understanding of why he voted the way he did on some controversial issues.

In IL-9 right next door is US Rep. Jan Schakowsky.  I believe Nancy Pelosi is to the right of Jan Schakowsky.  Kirk is the only republican running in this race who can take on the Combine and win. 

245

@243 Steve White, you said you concur with my post but you pretty much came to the opposite conclusion to mine. Probably because I was approaching from a different direction. I opened up by trying to address Ace's "Sell Me on Patrick Hughes!" proposition. My answer is that Hughes will get my vote but not my money because the primary is just too early to whittle the anti-Kirk candidates to just one so that vote is split and it's too much of a longshot for me to use up any of my donation budget. (IL moved up the primary like lots of other states in order to still be relevant in choosing the presidential candidates. But I think it's also an ingenius strategy for incumbent pols to make primary insurgencies that much harder.)

So I'm voting for Hughes in the primary, and will leave the ballot blank or vote for myself in the general. No, I don't think I'm throwing my vote away because Kirk can't win. The only way I see a Republican winning statewide in IL is to run a solid conservative (to fire up the base and attract some independents) against a weak Democrat (who depresses their base and repels independents). The Dems will cooperate by offering the mobbed-up Giannoulias who's bad enough that even the corrupt/incompetent Chicago news media can't completely cover for him. The Republican establishment is in turn responding with someone who will have almost the same voting record as Giannoulias, but probably not the inevitable indictment. I'd rather wait for the mobster to go to jail and take another crack at the seat at that time than vote for Captain Cap'n'Trade.

What I think the Big Tent people are missing is that you win elections by keeping your base happy and convincing the non-aligned that your side has the better answers. The Republicans need to persuade that portion of independents who are conservative by nature to get excited enough about their candidates to overcome the media onslaught of racist/bigot/fat-cat propaganda. Instead the Republicans have been operating on a stratgey of buying off segments of the independents though me-too liberalism and losing conservative votes for every independent they pick up. They gave up on persuasion. Long story short, I think this was actually a rare chance to get a semi-decent conservative in that seat, but I think it's too late and it will remain in the crooked Dem column.

 

246 We've already had the GOP completely fall apart once and get further kicked into oblivion for a generation by running Alan Keyes on "principle.

Utter horseshit.  Ryan got in trouble for, um, wanting to have sex with his wife, and Judy Topinka couldn't get in front of cameras fast enough to withdraw support for the primary voter's choice.  They tried to salvage the race by begging Ditka to run, and we never got much idea about his political views beyond a statement that 'people are a lot less liberal than everyone thinks.'  Keyes got the nod because literally no one else would do it, and after the behavior of the shitheads running the party, that was no surprise.

"Principle" was never any part of it.

247

A couple other things about Kirk -

When all our democratic leaders were in hiding this summer refusing to meet with citizens on healthcare, Kirk had open town-hall meetings in person and via teleconference.    

He authored the ammendment to kill the bridge to nowhere

He is the only member of the house appropriations committee to swear off earmarks

He wrote the republican alternative to obama care.

And about Pat Hughes -

The first time he voted was in the 2008 general election. He has never voted as a republican in an illinois primary - EVER. 

248 He's urbane and not posing in blaze orange with some hunters in a IL field...wow, keep going, I can't think of a better way to make him more popular with me and other like minded folks.

249 @263 

Being serious for a minute -- does that offend you?  If so, are we honestly facing a permanent urban/rural split here?  Is it going to be henceforth that there is no such thing as a "real" republican unless he or she owns a pickup truck?

250 ace, I'm pretty sure we've given you a clear picture of Illinois politics this afternoon.  The squishes will not support Hughes (even floating the notion that he's a Dem moby?!?) and the across the board conservatives have no love, and mostly open contempt for Kirk.

It's probably best to stay far away from the Illinois Senate race.

251 dandox, there is a serious feeling that urban 'Republicans' cannot be trusted and it runs deeper in Illinois than most places.  I write this from suburban Cook County and most of the people I know have jobs in the city, but would have no part of it if there was another choice.

252 @261

Utter horseshit.  Ryan got in trouble for, um, wanting to have sex with his wife, and Judy Topinka couldn't get in front of cameras fast enough to withdraw support for the primary voter's choice.

Sorry, my bad.  I was referring to GEORGE Ryan, the corrupt governor who went to jail.  Topinka was tainted by involvement with him.

Although, you are correct.  Jack Ryan was forced out of the Senate race for having sex with his own wife.  It was a horseshit scandal that proved the Republican leadership in this state couldn't lead their own way out of a paper bag.  Parachuting Alan Keyes to take his place was just another proof of bad judgement of The Party's part.

253 Kirk is one of the Cap N Trade 8. That's all you need to know. He's a piece of shit.

254 I think the takeaway from all this is: 1. Kirk has no credible opposition, and he is going to walk away with the primary. 2. In the general election, Kirk is going to run as the candidate of greater Illinois against the Combine. He has to. Plus, we can probably troll Obama into campaigning against him, which will alienate him from the nationwide Democrats.

Spending your money on more outspoken conservatives, especially that empty suit Hughes, will just serve to piss Kirk off. You want to get Kirk more pissed off at Democrats.

In the meantime, Jerry #207 has it nailed; it's too late now, we're stuck with Kirk. The "tea party" activists should concentrate on the downticket races, so they can get less-equivocal conservatives in the US House and State congress.

255 That said, it's not worth it to donate any monies to Kirk just yet. I'd wait 'til the RNC starts begging for it. Then send the money to Club For Growth so they can make Kirk roll over and do some tricks first.

256

SteveN, @ #260 I think I understand your position because you articulated your thoughts very well.  However I have to disagree with your conclusions and here's why.  You said "you win elections by keeping your base happy and convincing the unaligned....."  That is spot on.  But with caveats. This senate seat is not a presidential election so who really is "the base" you're keeping happy as a candidate?  As a candidate is your base the actual, real live electorate whose vote you seek and whom you will represent in our representative democracy warts and all-- or is the "base" only the people who think exactly like you do and so screw everybody else in the district? I would argue that knowing who you are, what you believe, and how that fits into who your electoral base is, is really how you win elections.  You may call it squish.  I call it smart and good politics--as long as you are honest with the voters--and yourself-- about where you stand and why. 

I see quite a few people with some experience with Illinois politics have attempted to describe the climate and situation here, today. Mark Kirk's core conservative values are solid and he is a proven legislator.  I do worry that there are some nefarious Axelrod astroturf -type maneuverings and activities and accusations going on behind the scenes in Il and god only knows who's funding them.  I also think that people should be very careful about supporting candidates who came out of nowhere, have really no voting record to vet, or experience to analyze, no matter how appealing they sound on paper.  That's asking for trouble. 

257 @266

I agree in that the "combine" in Illinois frustrates everyone.  It has cost us dearly in discrediting anyone conservative in Illinois between corruption (G. Ryan) and incompetence (J.Ryan being replaced by Keyes.)

Hey, I live and work in the city.  I was kicked out of my relatives' house in Evanston during Christmas for supporting the war.  I know all about the Leftist insanity up here. 

@262 - These are excellent reasons why Kirk is the best candidate out there.

258 If that punk crook Alexi Giannoulias ends up as the dem. nominee, Satan could run as a Republican and probably win. Check out how Big Daddy G. died. He's sleeping with the fishes off the coast of Greece. Nobodies nobody heard of did the dirty deed and have never been fingered.

259 264 -- In Illinois? Yes, there is a permanent urban-rural split, and I don't consider Mark Kirk a "real" Republican if by Republican you mean conservative.  As for "he's personable, I know him..": well, my family happens to personally know Ray LaHood.  Heck of a nice, personable chap is ol Ray -- great guy when it comes to having a beer and shooting the bull...doesn't mean I would support him or vote for him, because personable on a one on one basis as he may be with me and mine, I don't care for his politics.  Maybe that's a bit odd, but there you have it; I don't really care how nice a guy Kirk is personally; I do care about how he votes, and he isn't impressing me so far.  I'll vote for him over Gino, but don't expect any more than that.

260 1) If Kirk had made the votes that some of you wish he had, we wouldn't be having this conversation, because Kirk wouldn't be in office. We would probably be trying to figure out how to get a R in the 10th district, and then deciding it was too impossible to consider. 2) Even if he's the squishiest guy around, that's still - at least procedurally and tactically - a million times better than a D in the seat. It moves Republicans closer to a majority. 3) Last time I checked, being pro-business, anti-defecit, and strong on defense were all pretty important to being a "conservative". If it means more to y'all to elect a democratic machine politician than getting someone who is strong on these issues, then that's your call, not mine. 4) Knowing Kirk, he'll almost certainly tack further to the right once he's statewide, rather than trying to stay above water in the 10th.

261 @274 - LaHood! Are you freakin' kidding, petunia? What, you in the concrete or asphalt business? Make sure to tell Jimmy D. that everyone wants to know "How he's doin'." What a bunch of bums. Wise up.

262 276 -- I just said we knew the guy personally, and no I'm not kidding, we know him personally.  Did I say I supported him?  No.  In fact, I think I pretty much said I didn't support him at all because I don't like his politics.   Just making the very true point that a person can be damn personable...and still be a crooked, rotten politician.

263 276 - You better find out who is Ray's "Chinaman" and stay as far away as possible. Just a tip.

264 278 -- Oh, I'm just a little person, and I've always been wise enough to not get into any sort of political or business sort of thing on that score.  Pays to be a little, inconsequential person of no account.  I know a lot of interesting people, but I know better than to know them on any more than a "how ya doing?" basis.

265 Just a reality refresher, no matter who we elect, we will still have Durbin as the other Senator.   Durbin

Let me echo Rush and say, for those of you who believe that there is "no difference" between the two parties,

I say go into the voting booth and pull the lever for Kirk.  Close your eyes and think of Durbin.

266 280  Oh, I'm on a personal mission as far as Durbin is concerned, but Kirk isn't running against Durbin.

267 Check out Don Lowery.  You'll like him.

268 BravoRomeoDelta- I couldn't have said it better.  Kirk will move right as a Senator. 

Anyone that thinks Giannoulias is better than Kirk ought to come to Illinois and live with the shame of having a Senator (Durbin) liken our troops to Nazis and Gitmo to the prisons of Pol Pot.  And anyone that thinks that in the eleventh hour, introducing  outside influence to this race against Kirk will do anything but guarantee Giannoulias's win has no idea what Illinois politics is like.  There are a lot of other races you might want to influence across the nation.. stay the fuck away from this race.

269 >>>"your comments amount to: "he's a lawyer; therefore, he's not to be trusted." "<<<

Works for me.

270

I'm downstate Il for 35 years and we are nothing like Chicago. Chicago is a blight on Illinois.

I'll vote Hughes in the primary and for Kirk(for whom I have great disdain) against the gangster dem Giannoulias in the general. 

271

Chitown-Jerry at January 21, 2010 08:55 PM (Do52

Mass said the same thing and look what happened..... it could happen.

The more people that realize what a clusterstuup Illinois politics are the better I think. 

They can't vote but they can have opinions...  look what "handling" it with RINO's has done for IL .... oh yeah nothing...let's vote for cap and trade..

 

 

272 I live in Illinois and there is no fucking way I'm voting for Kirk in the primary.  He voted for C&T.  He was endorsed by McCain.  What more do you need, his signature on the Stimuli-Are-Good certificate?

Illinois is the land of RINOs -- so bad you end up voting for Dems.  George Ryan?  Abortion loving, tax loving, gun hating RINO?  Fuck, I voted for Glen Poshard.

Patrick Hughes is real.

Please, people.  Stop trying to game it.  Vote for the best guy in the primary.  Then vote for the best guy in the general.  That's your job.  Your job is not to strategize 8 moves ahead.  Just vote for the best fucking guy every time they give you your meager chance to vote.

273 Illinois resident here. Kirk is a RINO. CAPITAL letters. Not only Crap & Tax, but he's a BIG anti-2A. I HATE that. Not only did he oppose the expiration of Clintoon's AWB, but he SPONSORED the Bill HR6257 to REAUTHORIZE the AWB! Now, he represents a VERY Blue suburb just north of the city. So part of the issue is that he would never get re-elected there if he was more Conservative. Statewide, he is the ONLY one with any name recognition. It would be a long shot for ANYONE ELSE to beat the very popular, very congenial, photogenic, YOUNG (presumed) Dem candidate - Alexi Giannoulias, the current IL Treasurer, and "Dem machine" hand-picked candidate. I am torn, but I think Kirk is the only R that can win in IL. I won't vote for him in the Primary, but will in the General, assuming he wins the primary. SUCKS, but that's the way it is in IL. Unfortunately, I don't think Hughes has what Brownie had in MA. Despite his Crap and Tax vote, Kirk is a Fiscal Moderate, leaning towards conservative, if we end up with Cannolious, we have a far, FAR lefty like Durbin. Lesser of 2 evils, get the R's the majority, etc, etc. Illinois State Rifle Assoc, did not endorse ANY candidate in the US Senate primary race.

274 Do you stupid Kirk lovers remember Fitzgerald?

Do you remember George Ryan?

Give the people of Illinios an unapologetic Republican who can match verb with subject, and they will vote for him.  Give us some guy who seems ashamed to admit he's from the same party as Bush and Palin, and we'll lose.

Wait until the general election to figure out who you'll vote for in the general election.  The primary is about picking the best guy in your party.  You are stupid if you think you are smart enough to know which Republican stands the best chance in the general.

Keep it simple.  Vote for the best candidate among the choices provided.  It ain't rocket science or brain surgery.  Stop trying to make it hard.

275 Way late stumbling into this.  I no longer live in Illinois, now live in St. Louis county, but I lived there for the first 27 years of my life and still have some fairly strong relationships with some politically active people there.  First off, I think one key consideration is that Kirk is probably going to win the primary.  After that he is going to have some problems, I think.  The big plus is that he is going to do better than the average republican in the suburbs, which is necessary.  He's going to have a lot of work to do downstate.....not that they are going to vote democratic on the whole, but he's going to have some challenges getting the turnout and margin where it needs to be.   He's not in line with most of them socially, which in this climate is not a dealbreaker.  Cap and trade is a killer though.  To get over the finish line, I think he's going to need some big name outside help downstate.  Of course, this incompetent democratic leadership (and Blago) might help too. 

One additional consideration on this Cap and Trade vote....it really screws with a few of the house races.  I know Adam Kinzinger a little bit.  I like him.  He's a solid conservative running for a house seat against Halvorson.  Halvorson hemmed and hawed on Cap and Trade (and health care) until the 11th hour.  She said she would vote no on CnT until a meeting with Obama and then still said undecided up to the minute the vote happened.  Having a senatorial candidate like Kirk gives her some level of cover that she wouldn't (and shouldn't) have otherwise.  Kinzinger will bring up this vote in a district where the vote won't play particular well, but now she can say that she is in line with the republican candidate for senator on this issue.   This has potential to divide the ticket.  It should be a slam dunk no brainer to hang her head over this, but thanks to Kirk it is not.  

That vote just wasn't about Kirk himself.  He hurt some very viable downticket races with that vote too.

276

"Do you stupid Kirk lovers remember Fitzgerald?"

Yes.  He ran a self-financed stealth campaign while his opponent publicly self-destructed. 

George Ryan cut a deal with the Machine.  Look where it got him -- federal prison.

 

277

Here's what Fitzgerald got us:

Citing problems dealing with the state party leadership and family issues, Fitzgerald retired from the Senate at the end of his first and only term. He was succeeded by Barack Obama, who went on to be elected President of the United States.

Gee, thanks.

278 There is no chance that Pat Hughes is some "dem Moby".  He's already spent 300K of his own money.

Axelrod's old political outfit is still alive and kicking.  DKPD Media recruited David Hoffman to run in the Dem primary.  This is Axelrod's old outfit.  He liquidated his shares to work in the White House.

Jacob Meister is another candidate in the Dem primary.  He's a self funding candidate.  His big sell is he's gay.  He's betting big that gays will turn out and vote for him.  He has no chance of winning.  I think he's on the ticket just to keep gay voters from asking for a GOP ballot.

279 We have Professional Technicians, Equipments, Production Lines, Professional Quality Control Personnel, so our capability to produce Straight Grinder is great and strong. We promise competitive prices for best quality Straight Grinder and duly delivery.

280

I need a new hobby, I can't believe we are still debating this topic.  Rahm Emmanuel grew up in the 10th district of Illinois, currently represented by Mark Kirk.  Kirk has survived several close races here in a very blue district.  Anyone further to Kirk's right would never get elected in this district.  I believe it galls Rahm to no end that his own hometown is still represented by a republican, and he would do anything to get even with Kirk for being that republican. 

I have no idea where Hughes' money is coming from, but there's something odd about a guy who has never voted, especially a guy who has never voted in a republican primary, and suddenly he appears out of nowhere as the great conservative hope.  With lots of money. 

Michelle Malkin and the other out of town conservatives should just mind their own business.  I'm having visions of Rahm & Axelrod laughing about how they've duped the out of towners into supporting the guy they want to damage Kirk.  Illinois politics is dirty, complicated, corrupt, and mobbed up. 

Maybe they didn't put him up to it, but they could very well be behind Mr. Hughes sudden popularity and money.  Axelrod is a genius at axel-turfing.

281 Kirk has been a squish for years. Furthermore, he was chief of staff for his predecessor, John Porter - that is, a career DC insider.

Also, for all the talk of his soundness on defense/terrorism: he not only voted against the "surge", he organized an "anti-surge caucus" in the House. IOW, he deserted under fire.

I don't like his 2nd Amendment or pro-abortion positions. He's been not just moderate but hard-left on these issues. An "F" from the NRA in 2006 and 2008. He didn't sign the pro-incorporation amicus brief in McDonald v. Chicago, which 251 other Representatives signed. (That includes eight from Illinois, two of them Democrats). He got a 100% rating from NARAL for years - until he finally broke ranks on the Stupak amendment to Obamacare.

"Pro-business"? As has been pointed out, conservatives are pro-freedom, pro-free markets, anti-rent-seeking, anti-subsidies. Not "pro-business".

And I don't like it when a candidate (or his proxy) goes around dismissing the people that feel strongly about those issues. Kirk had a representative at a conservative meet-up Tuesday who did just that. It's one thing to say "We can't win on that issue." It's another to say "We must take the other side on that issue."

Having said all that: there doesn't seem to be much in favor of Hughes, except that he's not Kirk. Social conservative purity is not going to win by itself in Illinois. Neither is a novice candidate running a vanity campaign.

OYAH, Giannoulias is a crook, a douche, a tool, and mobbed-up to boot. Loathsome.

But then I look at Kirk's voting record, as rated by the ACU and ADA. With the exception of 2002 and 2003, his ACU rating has never exceeded his ADA rating by 25; not even by 10 in the last four years.  In 2008 he was -7 (ADA 55, ACU 4 . And isn't even a good centrist - his 2005 ratings were 30/36, his 2007 ratings were 40/40.

Would he be better than Obama was, or Burris, or Giannoulias? Yes, but that's damning with faint praise.

I'll vote for Hughes in the primary, if only to "send a message" to Kirk. In November I'll hold my nose and vote for Kirk.

282 Fixing that unintentional smiley...

 In 2008 he was -7 (ADA 55, ACU 4 .

283 .  In 2008 he was -7 (ADA 55, ACU 48 ).

284 There are a lot of other races you might want to influence across the nation.. stay the fuck away from this race.

Fair enough.  As it's clear you can't find any reason for a real conservative to take an interest in this race, you've cemented my vote against Kirk in the general, should he make it that far.  There are worthy candidates to be elected elsewhere.

285

One more thing:

He probably voted for Obama.

Posted by: TexasJew at January 21, 2010

 

Kirk did not vote for Obama, BUT there is a republican on the 2010 Illinois primary ballot who did, in fact Kirk Dillard even cut a TV commercial for Obama in the 2008 presidential race.  Some great republican he is. Dillard is running for governor, and is from the Hinsdale area (same as Pat Hughes).

 

 

286 Uffdah.  Out, sockpuppet.  Anyway, there are worthy candidates who are not pushing the left's agenda of marginalizing conservatives to be elected elsewhere.

287 Patrick Hughes is real.

Hey!  I'm just as REAL and as CONSERVATIVE as Patrick Hughes!

Vote for me!

288 I have no idea where Hughes' money is coming from,

It's his own money.  He made a big deal out of going to see Demint twice and came back empty handed.

What does that tell you?

289 There is no chance that Pat Hughes is some "dem Moby".  He's already spent 300K of his own money.

He's a "US Senate Wannabe" with a huge ego who suddenly appeared out of NO WHERE.  Too busy to vote let alone to have supported Republicans for any thing in any way prior to this.

The choice is easy:  Hughes or Kirk, who's been serving his country in various capacities, including the Military, for decades now.

Check out some of the vids on Hughes on youtube to see who he really is...

...and why he's not getting any financial backing.

290
I hadn't heard that Kirk voted against the surge.  That's pretty inexcusable, as is his "F" from the NRA. 

I would consider him very much like John McCain.  I can't get too bothered by people who consider this a mark against him.  Yeah, McCain did some lousy things and was a lousy candidate and I wouldn't want him running things.  But McCain has still been far more right as a Senator than he has been wrong.  I'd rather have another McCain than another Durbin, that's for sure.

291 Ace---Mark Kirk epitomizes the word RINO.  He is pro gun control---he introduced a bill to reauthorize the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban (HR 6257).  And he is more pro abortion than he is pro gun control.  And he was one of eight Republicans to vote for cap-and-trade.  And he is not a naval aviator---he's an intel weenie---a REMF.  The guy's scum of the first degree.

292 ThatsRIGHT-LetObamaKeepHisSeat: I made the same points earlier in this post.

I like Hughes, but he's not ready to run against a Democratic Party that is going to throw everything at him right after the primary.  Kirk is a weathered candidate with the right demeanor to take the hits.

I'll be casting my ballot for Mark Kirk.

293 I am a fifth generation rural Illinois resident. Both my grandfathers were Republicans as was my dad. I am a Goldwater/Reagan Republican who opens his office to the Republican party at election time to become the Republican county headquarters. My brother is the precinct committeman for our precinct. All of that notwithstanding, I have to agree with the posters here who have revealed the reality of one party (with two names) rule here in Illinois. Locally we do OK and keep a pretty close eye on our county officials. Beyond that, it is pretty ugly. Every once in a while there is a bit of light (Peter Fitzgerald) but the scales are so weighted by the corruption and deadbeats in Springfield/Cook county it is difficult to see any hope. I agree with the lady that said the Illinois might be fertile ground for a third party, but it would have to be built around a Ditka type celebrity and would probably die with the celebrities passing. More than likely it would simply split the downstate vote and guarantee a dim win. In any case I am leaning toward voting for Kirk simply because he seems to pay attention to his constituents (unlike Durbin). I get as upset with Rinos as anyone, but you have to admit that Collins and Snowe held the line against the Obamacare disaster. Without them the bill would be on the presidents desk, , , just saying. . . .

294

HE'S A RHINO!!!!!!  IN THE JOHN MCCAIN MODEL!

He's been endorsed and financed with a one half million dollar grant from John

McCain.  See Politico article of October 2, 2009--McCain trying to remold

GOP into moderate, centrist party.

295 The culture and political issues in Illinois track much more like they do in New England or Pennsylvania than they do for Southern States.  Would you rather have a RINO like John McCain or another Durbin epigone?

I agree that voting for the gun bans is inexcusable.  Gun bans are unpopular even among Dems in Illinois.  They are fairly unpopular in the city of Chicago itself.

The problem, here, is that Pat Hughes isn't a viable alternative.  Illinois hasn't built a base up of electable, solid conservatives, largely because the real RINOs -- George Ryan and friends -- were part of the "combine" of both parties getting favors from the state.

This is not the time for an inexperienced Quixote candidate, nor for a 3rd party.   I've voted Libertarian in Illinois several times because either the Republican was loony (as in Alan Keyes) or the Dems ran uncontested.

The key is get Kirk elected to the Senate and get real conservatives elected to the Illinois House and get a real Conservative governor.  I'm voting for Profft unless someone can convince me of someone better.

296

I like Proftt too, he's the most media savvy of the bunch and really knows how to articulate the conservative point of view clearly. 

 Kirk Dillard is one of his republican opponents for gov and he cut a TV commercial for Obama in 2008 - how can he still call himself a republican after doing that?  Not to mention Dillard grew up in well-to-do suburban Hinsdale, yet all of his commercials show him riding around on a tractor downstate, yeah right.  About as believable as Dukakis in a tank.

297 McCain trying to remold GOP into moderate, centrist party bring the Country back to at least center.

Now, now.  No need to get hasty and jump to conclusions that anyone in the GOP would actually be able to do something that stupid.

After all, look at all the time and effort Axelrod and I spent swinging it to the far left where every knows it should stay.

298 Boots and Dandoz---I'm voting Proft for Illinois Governor, also!

299 This thread may be played out, but this has been sticking in my craw for a day or so. And it should factor into every Republicans' thinking up here in the Northern District and all the way Downstate. Senator Alexei Giannoulias. Paired up with Senator Dick Durbin. With Senator's privilege to recommend US Attorneys. With Obama, Emmanuel, and Axelrod in the White House. And Daley in the Mayor's Office. And the usual predictable hacks on the Cook County Board and running Springfield. So. Anyone in Illinois, especially up North, want to put the US Attorneys' offices in play? Heckuva job, Pat Fitzgerald. But maybe it's time for new blood. I'll take Senator Mark Kirk just on that prospect alone.

300 Great interviews with Hughes. First Mark Levin: http://is.gd/6UBSC The Laura Ingram: http://is.gd/6UBkc

301 Let's be honest. Mark Kirk , politically speaking, is about as red as a smurf. ...... But blue is a nice color for those who serve in the reserves......so Why is it that Alexi Giannoulias is running ads about his support for military families and our Republican sitting congressman who was deployed to Afghanistan for 3 weeks can't ? Because Mark Kirk voted against our troops!! REPEAT Mark Kirk voted against our troops. He voted against military commanders who advised Pres. Bush that an increase in boots on the ground would save the lives of both Americans and their allies. Kirk sided with Move.On.org HE voted against the surge. The surge that was successful in saving US soldiers and Marines. I have no idea how he can face military families on the campaign trail. The families I come in contact with are very anti-kirk. To end on a more pleasant note. I want to say something positive about Mark Kirk. If Illinois sends either Mark Kirk or Alexi Giannoulias to Washington I'm sure Harry Reid will be happy. Since they're practically interchangeable on. a) Cap & Trade b) gun control c) late term abortions d) global footprints. Scott Brown aligned the stars for a political upset and Illinois is going to blow it by putting Kirk on the November ballot. As for myself. I'M VOTING FOR MARK HUGHES

302 If Scott Brown identifies himself as a "Brown Republican" and Patrick Hughes identifies himself as a "Reagan Republican" What do you call Mark Kirk? a Pelosi Republican.

303 I have lived in the 10th congressional district for all but 2 of my 33 years.  Others that have posted here are grossly overestimating the purple nature of the north shore of Chicago.  When my parents moved here the rep was democratic judge Abner Mikva, who was a decent man, however ever since it has solidly been held in the Republican column by John Porter and Mark Kirk.  That is not a byproduct of their moderate natures, but the demographics which will always lean right.  The GOP establishment is pushing Beth Coulson, but I highly recommend Bob Dold, who is staunchly against Cap & Tax, as are most residents.  Only green freaks are willing to pay ridiculously more for natural gas to heat our homes in the brutal winters. 

As an unabashed beltway mis-appropriator he may be qualified to join the gentleman's club in the Senate, but he won't be receiving my vote.  I am supporting Patrick Hughes.  There is a tremendous wave of anti-incumbent sentiment in the country that can be harnessed.  Kirk has pissed off the conservative base in the state and will not get the ground game required to defeat the lousy dem nominee.  Chuck DeVore in California will have an easier time beating Boxer than Kirk will have here.  Nominate a conservative like Hughes or lose. 

304

Mark Kirk *sponsered* a bill to reauthorize the Assault Weapon Ban.  So he's a complete no-go right there.  Add his cap&trade vote and only in IL would he be able to run as a R.

305 yes,you are all right. chi hair iron are precious possession for not only women but men also. you may have a try make everyone in your family fashionable.