Monday, March 27, 2006

That's a Wrap, Folks

With the dust beginning to settle on the primaries, a few observations post-mortem...

Bill Brady: Going into the fall last year, no one had run a crisper campaign than Brady. He made more with less than any candidate in the race. Inexplicably, from Labor Day through the end of the year his campaign just stopped. It became utterly invisible. In mid-January, someone there figured out they had not won this thing after all and got their heads back in the game. But it was too little, too late. With no significant ground game outside central Illinois, a comeback was not in the cards. Some conspiracy theorists are suggesting Brady made a deal with Judy Baar Topinka to stop Jim Oberweis. Nonsense. Brady allowed his fast start to lull him into a false sense of security. Once he realized his mistake, he hoped his charisma would be sufficient to save the day. It was a poorly executed campaign, not a conspiracy. Having gone through it, I suspect he will be a much more formidable candidate the next time around - and if he has learned from it, I am convinced there will be a next time. Next time, I expect the middle of the campaign to be as clean and crisp as the beginning and end were this time.

Ron Gidwitz: Though he did not capture the public imagination, Gidwitz was probably the best-prepared to take on the state's financial woes and turn them around. Though usually an engaging man in person, Gidwitz always appeared awkward on television. His commercials were uniformly bland. No particular flaws, no hard edges, but nothing much to distinguish them from a furniture commercial, either. Still, Gidwitz' candidacy may have the most far-reaching effect on the Republican Party of anything this cycle. Previously a somewhat distracted power-broker for the establishment, Gidwitz shows signs of a conversion experience. I think he is an honest-to-goodness born-again reformer. He will remain one of the top power-brokers in the GOP, but his experience this race may, indeed, make him a foe of the old-line establishment. If so, they will tremble, because he will not stamp his feet and ineffectively wave a broad-axe while shouting insults. He will wield an epee with subtlety and aplomb. His enemies will be mortally wounded before they even know they have been struck.

Jim Oberweis: Okay, I made my worst prediction ever a few months back, projecting Oberweis to come from behind and win. I based this on the belief he had learned from his previous two races and would not start swinging wildly at the end of this one. I was wrong. I have developed a lot of affection for Oberweis. In person he is charming, funny and gentlemanly. I don't know; something weird happens to him in the heat of battle. His "Pay-to-Play Polka" ad was funny, memorable, and hard-hitting. If the entire last six weeks had been cut from the same cloth, he would be the nominee. But it wasn't. As fond as I am of him, and as admiring of his genuine talents, I have concluded that he has some temperamental flaw that precludes him from being effective at high-stakes politics.

Judy Topinka: She is the nominee and the question on everyone's mind is whether she can unite the party. She's made a good start, committing to sign bills banning partial-birth abortion and enacting parental notification laws. I suspect she still underestimates how important right-of-conscience exemptions for pharmacists are. But she is genuinely working at finding out what the deal-breakers for sympathetic conservatives are. If she gets those right, and banishes the words 'nutjobs, crazies, kooks and morons' from hers and her staff's public and private vocabularies, she'll do fine.

Rod Blagojevich: If utter shamelessness wins elections, the guy's a shoo-in. His marvelous commercials, after four years of pay-to-play nonsense that would make George Ryan blush, brought to mind Groucho Marx' old question: "Who are you going to believe; me or your own eyes?"

Ed Eisendrath: What exactly was that all about? After huffing and puffing and promising to blow the house down, he did not run a bad campaign. He ran no campaign. He did run some commercials at the end, demonstrating he had the reassuring sense not to juggle chain-saws. I was wondering if Blagojevich might call his bluff. Had the guv promised to juggle chain-saws, that might have been just the thing to bring disaffected downstate Democrats back into the fold. In the end, Eisendrath had all the elements of a mortgage-blowing binge except the party and the hangover.

23 comments:

Pat Collins 10:16 AM  

It will take her a lot more than that to get my vote.

Anonymous,  10:56 AM  

I guess what you are trying to say in a nutshell, is that you prefer candidates that go harshly negative like your candidate/client McSweeney.

Charlie Johnston 11:16 AM  

Anon 10:56, give it a rest. We did not go harshly negative. We hammered away on lawsuit reform. That's called an 'issue differential.' And yes, you have and will continue to see tough issue differentials in campaigns I am involved with, but you won't see nasty personal attacks. Politics ain't beanbag and - contrary to people who would like see issueless popularity contests, that ain't it either.

It was a tough campaign with hard licks being given by both top contenders. Kathy Salvi, God bless her, is fully united behind David McSweeney and is committed to taking this seat back. I chatted with her Thursday afternoon just before she left on vacation. She told me as soon as she is back we will get together and she wants to get her "marching orders" on what to do to help win this.

Kathy is not going anywhere - and I look forward to campaigning on her behalf in the next few years.

Anonymous,  12:05 PM  

As far as Brady goes I disagree with your statement he didn't cost Oberweis the election. But its time to move on now.

I think Brady, if he runs statewide (I think he will run for Congress), will need to patch things up with Oberweis supporters. I know a lot of them that are very angry with him. He will need Oberweis supporters if he every wants to run for Senate or Governor in the future. If he can end the split between conservatives he has a HUGE future in Illinois.

Gidwitz has a future in politics, but he will not win Senator or Governor until he moves more to the pro-life side of things. Why? I think that is holding him back with the Base and you need your base. I do think he has a bright future in the party however and will be a force to be dealt with.

Topinka will get killed in the general election. I am going to get yelled at and called all kinds of names for this, but its just my prediction. I don't find her push for parental notification to be sincere and she is way off on traditional marriage. Sorry to make all the Republican no matter what people mad, but Topinka is not moving social conservatives with her promises. She also is weak on taxes and that will come back to bite her.

But more importantly then that was her behavior in the primary, she dodged most of the debates, came off horrible when she did go, and don't get me started on her commercials. She seemed generally intimidated in the primary by the rest of the field. Rod is going to eat her alive.

Is it possible Topinka is better then Rod...Yes...she is better on guns and the minimum wage, at least it appears that way right now. But I don't think token promises to the right and a few issues will be enough to excited her base.

The first rule of politics is you must get your base out! Topinka's base, much of it, thinks she is the worst possible person to run. Even if she gets some of the base on the "she is better then Rod" arguement, the base is not going to come out and work hard for her. You need your base fired up to go campaigning for you, get their friend and families to the polls, put out signs, and argue on your behalf. The base will not do this.

I predict that Topinka is a John Kerry canidate with less appeal. She will run on how she is the only electable person to beat Rod (sound familiar to 2004) and just like 2004 she will lose, but by a larger margin. In John Kerry's case his base (most of it) at least somewhat liked him.

Oberweis is done. Its a shame. He was a flawed man, but a real reformer. I think he could have gone a real way to end the stigma of the George Ryan days. But the same party that loved George Ryan, hated Oberweis and he probably never really had a chance against the corrupt illinois machine. A pity for all Republicans who want reform in our party.

Rod is going to win I am afraid. I really wish this wasn't the case, but I don't believe our Topinka can beat him. I think anyone else could have, but I think she will lose. Rod is stronger then everyone is giving him credit for with Norhern Democrats and without a strong support from Topinka's base, Rod will win most democrats with more empty promises.

However the future looks bright for Republicans, four more years of Rod will only continue the damage to the democrat party and make more and more people look at the conservative states next door that are kicking our butts economically and socially. I think four more years of Rod may actually prove to be a benifit in the long term for Illinois. After four more years of Rod maybe the State will finally be ready for real reform and conservative values. (after all 4 years of Clinton wasn't enough to bring us to a Republican sweep, but 8 was)

Randy Stufflebeam (Constitution Party) is going to do well if he get on the ballet. I support him now. He is the only Conservative option. He needs to quickly get conservatives on his side to make a protest to Topinka. He has to battle the "Topinka is better then Rod" argument, which he can do by using the argument that four more years of Rod will only futher push Illinois toward a right swing and that he can take a real percentage of the vote (between 5-15%) if he can get on the ballet. If he gets even 3% the Republican party better take notice. I predict right now Stufflebeam gets on the ballet and pulls at least 3%. Maybe be a long shot perdiction, but I think Stufflebeam may be stronger then everyone is thinking right now. The Oberweis and Brady Conservative Voters are in limbo right now looking for someone to represent them. Stufflebeam has a real chance if he gets moving soon.

Pat Collins 12:55 PM  

Actually, 2 years of Clinton were enough to give us a Republican congress.

Seems to me that his platform even less conservative than the one on which Judy Baar Topinka is currently running

Well, I think I would have believed Romney didn't really mean it. JBT does. I am open to see what she says/does, but right now I am not voting forGov or I'm doing the shuffle, if he gets on the ballot.

And count me as a "pissed at Brady until he mollifies me".

grand old partisan 12:58 PM  

CP, in a comment on an earlier post, you cited Governor Romney of Massachusetts as an example of a conservative Republican being able to win in a blue state (“Mass. governor is conservative as well. A conservative can win in this state if the message is good and focused”).

I have since pointed out that when Romney campaigned for his office in 2002, he specifically promised not to change the status of state abortion policies, stated that "all citizens deserve equal rights, regardless of sexual orientation,” supported the federal assault weapons bans and an increase in the minimum wage, and refused to sign a no-tax increase pledge.

Would you please tell whether – if you were a registered Massachusetts voter in 2002 – you would have supported and/or voted for Mr. Romney. Was his a good, focused, conservative message? Seems to me that his platform even less conservative than the one on which Judy Baar Topinka is currently running. She, after all, is willing to sign into law some changes in Illinois’s current abortion-on-demand policies. She is opposed to an assault rifle ban. She is against a minimum wage increase.


What say you, good sir?

grand old partisan 12:59 PM  

sorry for the confusion, I deleted and then reposted my comment after Pat already referenced it.

CP....your thoughts?

grand old partisan 1:04 PM  

"Well, I think I would have believed Romney didn't really mean it. JBT does."

- so you'd rather have a politician lie to get elected and then enact the agenda you support? Wow.....

Has Judy ever flip-flopped on an issue before. Has she ever done anything to make you believe that what she is saying on the campaign trail won't be what she sticks to after the election?

Anonymous,  1:17 PM  

I was under the impression that from a friend who supports Mr. Romney that he was more conservative then that, after reading what you just posted...No I would not have support him. I am a principle voter. I will vote for someone who disagrees with me on some issues, but again I don't believe Topinka is sincere on her pledges on the pro-life issues or on the assualt weapons ban. For example I believe Mr. Gidwitz is sincere on his williness to ban the partial birth abortion and give right to faith decision in pharmacy's. And yes I would have voted for Mr. Gidwitz, not excited mind you, but I would have voted for him.

On Mr. Romney I did a check on this site which says he took a no tax pledge in 1994 and he doesn't support gay marriage (2002) However you are correct on his stance on abortion.

http://www.issues2000.org/Mitt_Romney.htm

I was mistaken about Mr. Romney and would withdraw Mr. Romney as an example. You will find I am not afraid to admit when I make a mistake. I would encourage Conservatives not support him. Actually I thank you for the information on his record so me and principled social conservatives can knock him off our list of President options in 2008.

Anonymous,  1:45 PM  

GOP-I understand your opinion on this and you want Rod out, but I think that sometimes you have to be able to look beyond this election and into future elections. I think Topinka, even if she could win, would do little to improve the state, setting the Democrats up for a big win in the next election. By allowing Rod four more years, as much as that makes me want to choke, we set ourselves up for a big win in the next election. I want a Republican governor, but I want a real Republican governor who wins on our values and I still think that is possible in Illinois. If all I can get is Liberal light then why even stay in this state?

I believe conservatism can win, and we have seen a real push nation wide toward conservatism. It can and will happen in Illinois in time. I think we had a real shot in this election, however, we gave that up for Topinka...a marginal improvement at best. Sorry that is not good enough for me. I will wait until a real conservative runs and take my chances with the real thing.

Vote Stufflebeam, vote for real conservatism.

Anonymous,  2:01 PM  

You can sugarcoat all you want, but David's campaign and the all the campaigns went negative except for Churchill's (a former client yours and who David went negative on regarding two votes taking 15yrs ago) and Lincoln's campaign.

As for Salvi (who's husband is a former client of yours) saying she's on board and others saying their on board. I'm reminded of a saying "you friends close, but your enemy’s closer." Kind of like how you treat your ex-clients.

Pat Collins 2:06 PM  

- so you'd rather have a politician lie to get elected and then enact the agenda you support? Wow.....

I am reminded about what Vespasian said about collecting taxes on public urinals. He pulled a gold coin out of his pocket and said "I can't smell anything".

Same for getting a good politician elected..... I guess I am "growing".

Pat Collins 2:07 PM  

anon 2.01 - with regard to "going negative", let me put on my toga.

"I can't smell anything".

Besides, since WHEN is discussing how a politician VOTES or PLANS to vote going negative? It's what a campaign OUGHT to discuss.

grand old partisan 2:30 PM  

“By allowing Rod four more years, as much as that makes me want to choke, we set ourselves up for a big win in the next election.”

- So 4 years of him wasn’t enough to make people accept a conservative Governor, but you'r SO sure that 8 years is? I don’t understand the logic behind such misplaced optimism.

I admire your faith….but remember what that is: evidence of things not seen. This state has never seen a truly, socially conservative governor. And despite the national trend to the right, this state has trended more and more to the left every election cycle.

Think about it: Judy and Oberweis each received the same amount of support among Republicans in every match-up poll against Rod. But Rod’s lead among Democrats and Independants got bigger and bigger over Oberweis with each passing poll. Hard-line conservatives scare the heck out of Democrats and independants in this state (which, combined, FAR outnumber Republicans), increasing the likelyhood they’d come out and support a Democratic governor that – were the opposition more moderate – they might not. Every poll showed that. Why do you think that, after just one more term of this, this trend will reverse?

Daniel Darling 3:27 PM  

All I can say is, "Watch out for Meeks." I think he can not only win, but bring together disaffected conservatives and disaffected liberals.

Anonymous,  3:28 PM  

CP

You said something about having to have your base fired up and working for you to win a governor's race in Illinois.

Would that be like Thompson, Edgar and George Ryan fired up the conservative base? you know.....seein' as how they won and all.

Anonymous,  3:57 PM  

Anon.-That is my point conservatives came out for Thompson, Edgar, and Ryan and look what we got for our effort! That isn't going to happen this time. We are feed up.

GOP-I do believe this state can and will go conservative. If you would have asked the democrat south if they would one day be the republican south they would have laughed at you. We don't succeed in pushing our agenda by giving up and saying I guess we have to be liberal. You fight each election and prove you are right and in time you get your chance. Conservatism will have its chance, not by selling out, but by sticking to our guns and following through on our principles.

grand old partisan 4:16 PM  

Yes, that's right. the democrat south was pro-choice, pro-gay rights until the Republicans - by sticking to their guns on those issues - won them over and made them conservative.

Want to try that one again?

Anonymous,  4:43 PM  

Yes GOP I do.

Anonymous,  5:00 PM  

You seem to think once someone is pro-choice that its final...I am living breathing evidence that is not true. I used to be pro-choice. I used to be a liberal as well. I was persuaded to change my mind by the conservative arguements. Illinois is not is some void where people can be persuaded to move to the right.

I am sorry GOP, but you sound to much like a defeatest to me. Republican no matter what. I didn't leave the liberal view and become a republican just to have the republicans become liberal. Forget that.

I am a conservative first and republican second. Illinois can and will move on these issues if we fight to persuade the people of this state.

If I take your arguement I should just give up conviencing people, be liberal, but call myself a republican, just so Chicago doesn't have power. Sorry I don't care if its a liberal in Chicago or a liberal in Southern Illinois I rejected those beliefs. Topinka is a marginal improvement at best.

The pro-life movement is growing in this country and Illinois is behind the game, but that isn't always going to be the case. This is the state of Phyllis Schafly and Jill Stanek! This state has a strong pro-life movement and we vote! Illinois is not beyond our reach.

You may choose to give up, but I don't. If people in the past had taken your view, Ronald Reagan would have never been president, John Kerry couldn't be beat, and republicans wouldn't have control over congress.

There is still hope for Illinois. However if the Republican party doesn't think they need us anymore I would love to see them win without us.

Anonymous,  5:03 PM  

And by the way it was the rejection of family values including pro-life and marriage issues that caused the Democrats to lose alot of support in the South. The republicans sticking to their guns on these issues did bring in many supporters.

In Illinois the pro-life issues isn't at the top because our economy sucks and we are full of corruption. If the pro-choicers are so confident lets put this stuff up to a vote of the people and lets see who wins. We will clean the pro-abortion supporters clocks.

Jonah 5:48 PM  

I think somebody should take notice of how well Ron Gidwitz did in Cook County. Comparatively, Cook County was one of Gidwitz's best counties. Other Republicans should take note and try campaigning a little in Chicago.

Anonymous,  10:26 PM  

CP-

I think you show a pretty substantial misunderstanding of southern politics. I am not going to take the time to explain my reasoning, but suffice it to say that party positions in the south are quite a bit different.

Also, I have commented on the Stufflebeam thing before...great guy it seems, but we need to be realistic about his qualifications. As for Illinois needing to unite behind a conservative due to issues such as abortion and the assault weapons ban...

1. As of right now, the Governor of Illinois can do nothing about abortion in this state. That being the case, we need to look beyond the issue in the campaign because it is nothing more than rhetoric since there is NOTHING that the elected governor can do.

2. The NRA/pro-gun rights groups showed their strength in this primary, and it was relative weakness. Brady was their choice, and Brady was in third. The point is, don't overstate the minority view as carrying great support in Illinois.

  © Blogger template The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP