Democrats Have 2008 Green Problem
It looks like the Democrats will have a 2008 presidential problem in Illinois.
The Chicago Tribune actually put everyone on the ballot in its most recent 600-person poll.
That’s as opposed to leaving one who was in disfavor off its poll ballot, as the Tribune did for this spring’s Republican primary election. Then, Andy Martin was not included until he sued the paper.
“…and another 1% for another unidentified candidate.”
That unidentified candidate could, of course, have been identified by the Tribune. 
The front page Tribune graphic ignores the Green Party’s strength. That would have given Whitney too much prominence.
But getting over 5% of the vote means that a party becomes “established.” That, in turn, means that its candidates don’t have to get 25,000 signatures to get on the ballot.
3-5,000 will do quite nicely, thank you.
So, expect a Green Party presidential candidate on the Illinois ballot in 2008.
Not a word about that in the Tribune, however.
Disaffected Republicans might even help make that a reality by voting for Whitney.
For more McHenry County Blog, click here.
19 comments:
I wouldn't consider a green party presidential candidate on the ballot to be much of a threat.
We had one in 2000 and he got 2% of the vote.
Having the Green Party on the ballot will have a much bigger impact on statewide and local races, but given the expansive gap between self-declared Democrats and Republicans in Illinois, I would not expect the Greens to have much impact on the outcome of elections.
They would, however, have an impact on policy. And Green Party primaries will eventually produce stronger candidates.
Interesting.
I hear that Illinois Republicans will have a major problem also: They believe that the party should be run by right wing nut cases who think that Alan Keyes is the solution for Illinois.
As long as the ILGOP keeps going farther and farther to the right, the party will be remain irrelevant.
Check Whitney on guns Skeeter... your right wing nut cases might find some sympathy with the greens...
Both parties will go through upheveal between 06 and 08 but it will be more devastating for the Dems... I don't think they'll survive as the party we've known..
I wouldn't be suprized to see a green/libertarian/isolationist alternative.... that takes a big chunk of today's Dems.
Okay it's a tangent but why not... What '06-08 upheaval could possibly be more devastating for Dems than Republicans? Even if Dems do worse than expected in November, public anti-war sentiment is only going grow during the rest of Bush's term, and the Republican party will continue to suffer because of it. Or do you think we've turned the corner in Iraq?
From where I sit the Dems look pretty unified--it's the Republican coalition that's tearing apart at the seams.
It was just time for Baar's once weekly "the sky is falling on the Dems" uninformed, wishful thinking.
There is no reason why the Democrats shouldn't split...
No reason for the Republicans either but...
...read Marc Ambinder, Republicans and Evangelicals: Yes, this marriage can be saved.
Ambinder concludes,
A final misunderstanding: Some secular intellectuals believe that social issues are what drive evangelicals to the polls, or that Republicans have mastered the art of using class resentments to delude working class whites into voting against their economic interests.
But internal polling conducted for the Republican National Committee shows that evangelicals who support President Bush today are motivated principally by his administration's national security policies. Sure, the targeted political messages they'll see in late September and October will mention judicial nominations, but even more, the political ads will draw a sharp contrast with Democrats on national security.
Unless this were so, elite conservative activists in early primary states wouldn't be seen flirting with a Republican presidential bid by the former mayor of New York, Rudy Giuliani. Because Giuliani is the potential nominee who most closely shares their values on national security, these activists are quick to excuse or forgive his two divorces. They must believe many evangelical voters can be persuaded to do the same.
We might well find our politics going into 2008 with a Democratic Party splitting off to a incoherent Green/Libertarin/Isolationist party with depleted Democrats and Republicans united around Giuliani... a guy who after his divorce moved in with a same sex couple... Check what Tom Roeser has to say about him.
Following up on Rob's comment:
Today in Rhode Island the Republican Senator is facing an extremely tight battle against a right wing nut job. The GOP has already conceded the seat if Laffley wins.
The GOP already lost one incumbent to the far right (Michigan) and now they may well lose another.
Meanwhile, the Dems knocked off a far left liberal in Georgia replacing her with a moderate, while in Conn. an anti-war moderate knocked off the Dem. incumbent.
Looks like the Dems are moving to the center and against Iraq -- good places to be -- while the GOP goes far right.
Soap Blox Chicago on the Democrats vs Greens,
As a uniting force SoapBlox/Chicago seems to be a failure. There has been the Zamora versus Laesch war. There has been the Duckworth versus Cegelis war. Now we seem to be setting up for the Democrats versus the Greens war. The wars have been ugly affairs. The name calling has been extreme and vociferous.
It was just time for Baar's once weekly "the sky is falling on the Dems" uninformed, wishful thinking.
The sky fell.
We don't notice it as much in Illinois.
That Dems can put it together again is what I seriously doubt...
In my 50 plus years it's been Carter, and Clinton...
Carville said if they can't do something in 2006 you really have to question the whole premise of the party.
``We have to go back to 1974 (during Watergate) to find such a favorable environment,'' says James Carville, who ran Bill Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign. ``If we can't win in this environment, we have to question the whole premise of the party.''
If the can't pull it off in 2006, the questioning gets ugly.... maybe it will get postponed until 2008... but I wouldn't be optimistic...
Right now Giuliani looks real good to me.
As opposed to the "get along" Republicans like Oberweis and his crew, and all the right wingers who voted to let Blago win rather than vote for JBT?
Blago may well be indicted before November, but the ILGOP is still in such a war with itself that he will still probably be re-elected by a comfortable margin.
Cal, no wonder you lost. 5% 8 weeks out is a mile away from 5% on election day. Not saying it won't happen, just saying don't count your chickens before they hatch Socks.
You can cherry pick any fact, any comment and try to make it true as a prediction for the entire party, but that is an appeal to probability; the logic of morons. Just as it would be crazy to say that the Norquist backed mope Laffey in Rhode Island or the Keyes insanity here is indicative of the coming collapse of the GOP. As it's been pointed out the Dems are actually getting more electable candidates through primaries this year than the GOP.
Applying Baar's faulty logic the collapse of the GOP is right around the corner.
Hard to see how Giuliani gets through a Republican primary, especially with McCain in the race.
McCain -- Where do I know that name from?
Oh, yeah. He is the guy the Bush team claimed was insane back in 2000.
But those Republicans, according to Baar, know how to place nice unlike the darn mean Democrats.
...indicative of the coming collapse of the GOP...
You call the ILL GOP healthy?
The sky fell on the National Dems.
It fell on the State Republicans.
Neither haver revived very well far's I can tell.
Baar:
The Illinois GOP not being healthy because the party has been highjacked for the time being by the wing-nuts such as yourself is not an indication of the sky falling, and is just as asinine as you saying "I don't think they'll survive as the party we've known," about the Democrats.
And while one can make the case that the Dem's nationally are much healthier than the GOP in Illinois, to say either is dead, dying or changing beyond recognition is just stupid.
These things ebb and flow and always will. As much as your little chicken-hawk heart hopes your ranting about the end of Democrats is true, it's not going to happen.
The sky fell on the national dems?
The GOP has won a majority of the popular vote for President in one of the last four elections.
In 2004, the Dems came within a few thousand votes in Ohio of winning the Oval Office.
In 2004 the Dems had a net gain of state legislative seats nationwide.
Pretty good for a party in the shape that you allege.
A Green Party presidential candidate is going to do MUCH better in Illinois if the party doesn't need to spend so many resources simply to get on the ballot.
Oh, one other thing... It's going to be MUCH easier for the Green Party once they become established, because then they'll be competing on a level playing field, which means lots and lots of advantages--things like getting free voter data that they now have to buy.
Post a Comment