The cycle’s first primaries have come and gone - and so much for surprises, at least on the Democratic side. After weeks of brutal campaigning, Illinois voters chose their general election candidates. In the Senate race, Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias held on to his position as the early front-runner. In the Governor’s race, it appears that incumbent Pat Quinn will be able to hold on since he leads by one percentage point with just 0.8% still to report, though the contest might still head to a recount.
Yet, it is the Republican side that makes for a study of contrasts as to whether GOP primaries might knock the wind out of the party’s wave prospects. In the Senate race, a moderate Republican who just last June was one of conservative groups’ ultimate persona non grata coasted to an easy victory while in heavily blue IL-10, a conservative businessman upset a moderate state legislator that would have been better positioned to defend the open seat.
Republicans nominate Kirk for Senate, Dold for House
On June 27th, Rep. Mark Kirk was one of just 8 House Republicans to support the cap-and-trade bill; these congressmen provided the winning margin, since the legislation passed by a narrow 219-212 margin. Conservatives immediately vowed to punish the culprits. Yet, Kirk coasted to the GOP’s Senate nomination last night. While the 58% he received is thoroughly unimpressive given the caliber of his opponents, the silence of conservative groups and figures who were all over NY-23 and are now going all-out in the Crist-Rubio contest was deafening. After all, Kirk’s main challenger (businessman Pat Hughes) was no less credible than Doug Hoffman and he did reach out to politicians like Senator Jim DeMint.
There are obviously very good reasons for conservatives to give Kirk a pass: His candidacy is the main reason this Senate race is considered competitive. Kirk was able to survive in tough cycles in his blue-leaning district, so his ability to appeal to centrist voters and even some Democrats has been proven. Illinois is no Florida and Hughes is no Rubio, so working to defeat the congressman was a much graver blow to Republican electability.
Such considerations hardly stopped conservatives in NY-23, where many activists were quoted as saying they did not mind Bill Owens’s victory as long as Dede Scozzafava was defeated. Yet, Kirk is the second Republican in a row to benefit from a party-over-ideology reflex (conservatives rallied around Scott Brown despite the likelihood that he will position himself as a moderate senator), which could help reassure the GOP that the rise of Tea Partiers will not lead their candidates to be systematically Scozzafavad.
And yet, Republican voters also complicated their party’s hope of defending IL-10, the blue-leaning district Kirk is vacating to run for Senate.
IL-10 voted for Kerry by 6% and for Obama by 23%. To prevail, the Republican nominee looks he would need to duplicate Kirk’s ability to appeal to voters who typically vote Democratic and the GOP thought it had found such a contender in state Rep. Beth Coulson, who has a moderate reputation. Yet, businessman Bob Dold went after Coulson from the right and last night won by a surprisingly decisive margin.
Given the district’s leanings, this leaves Republicans at a disadvantage. Whether or not a red wave submerges Democrats elsewhere, Dold does not look like a good fit for this suburban Chicago district. Yet, the NRCC might ultimately be saved by the result of the Democratic primary, in which voters also chose their weaker general election candidate - albeit this is far more debatable and minor a point than the one regarding Dold’s victory over Coulson.
Indeed, IL-10’s Democratic nominee will be the party’s failed candidate against Kirk in the 2006 and 2008 cycles: Dan Seals beat out state Rep. Hamos by a narrow 49% t0 48% margin. While countless of Republicans in far more marginal districts fell, Kirk pulled it off on both occasions while Seals massively underperformed relatively to Barack Obama last year, leading to obvious questions as to whether nominating him for a third consecutive time might not cause the party trouble; whatever Seals’s qualifications, the bottom-line is that voters twice rejected him and that these defeats left him with far high negatives than Dold starts with.
A Coulson-Seals match-up might have been a carbon copy of the Kirk-Seals races, with the disappearance of the GOP’s incumbency advantage compensated with the shift in the national environment. But against Dold, Seals starts as the slight favorite. Needless to say, Democrats need this seat as a cushion against the GOP’s probably big gains elsewhere.
Democrats choose Giannoulias
Chicago Inspector General Dave Hoffman started his relentless attacks Giannoulias back in the fall and he was helped last week by reports that federal regulations were clamping down on Broadway Bank, the bank owned by Giannoulias’s family at which he himself worked as a manager. Yet, it did not prove enough to bloody the state’s Treasurer: He prevailed 39% to 34%, a narrower margin than was expected last fall but enough to move him to the general election.
Cheryle Jackson received a decent 20%, but her defeat eliminates one of the only candidates who could have ensured that the Senate contains at least one African-American come 2011. The maintenance of just that minimal level of diversity in the Senate now rests on the shoulders of Rep. Kendrick Meek.
In recent weeks, the conventional wisdom has been that Giannoulias could be Democrats’ weaker general election contender given the ethical questions that surround him. I wasn’t convinced Democrats had much to lose by nominating him until these questions took on a new dimension last week, though I still think that the state Treasurer is (very) arguably better positioned than Hoffman to ensure the Democratic base and minority voters turn out.
In any case, I suspect that the general election result is far more likely to depend on the national environment than on the identity of the Democratic nominee: Since we already knew there will be no incumbent, Republicans will not be able to turn the spotlight solely on an unpopular opponent and will have to hope that independents and moderate Democrats are willing to turn their back to Barack Obama. Can the president carry Giannoulias across the finish line in his home-state?
GOP also chooses its challengers in IL-8, IL-11 and IL-14
All eyes were also on IL-14, where Ethan Hastert was looking to take on Rep. Bill Foster. Yet, the former Speaker’s son fell 4% short against state Senator Randall Hultgren. My debatable sense is that this is the better result for the GOP since Hastert’s family ties opened him to obvious Democratic attacks while Hultgren already has a base and electoral experience. Yet, it remains to be seen how much the NRCC prioritizes IL-14 (the district did vote for Obama) so Hastert’s ties to national Republicans could have been helpful to the GOP. Overall, IL-14 is probably Democrats’ most (only?) endangered Illinois seat.
In IL-11, freshman Rep. Debbie Halvorson might have found herself in a tougher race if the state’s filing deadline was not so early but Republicans were left with an underwhelming list of candidates. Yet, the winner of yesterday’s 5-way primary is the one candidate who seemed to at least attract the NRCC’s attention: Air Force veteran Adam Kinzinger. His fundraising strength also suggests that Republicans are paying attention to the district; Halvorson enters the general election favored, but we’ll keep an eye on this race.
IL-08 is another district in which Republicans failed to recruit a candidate capable to take advantage of a red wave and the GOP nomination yielded a candidate who is even more of a question mark than was expected; in a recent overview of the race by The Daily Herald, Joe Walsh chose to highlight primarily his desire to reform “ill-conceived” Medicare and Social Security, which is hardly a winning issue. For him to defeat Rep. Melissa Bean would require a red wave so huge that it remains at this point hard to envision.
Since both gubernatorial primaries are too close to call, it would be futile to analyze the results before knowing for sure who the nominees will be. While Governor Pat Quinn seems likely to hold on to his lead over Treasurer Dan Hynes on the Democratic side, state Senator Bill Brady’s 500-vote lead (with 99% precincts reporting) in the GOP primary is very fragile since the remaining votes were cast in Cook County, where Brady is very weak.
Interesting that the Conservative activists opted for pragmistism in not challenging Kirk. This is at odds with their lack of moderation or professed goal of punishing moderates.
We will see if this is a one off. Makes me wonder why Crist, who is more Conservative than Kirk is so hated by those people.
I’m not totally convinced that Dold is a strictly speaking weaker candidate then Coulson. I supported Coulson and thought she’d be a strong nominee, but she DOES scream “establishment” when the public is in a non-establishment mood. Springfield might be the only city that’s less popular for it’s constituency then DC is for it’s constituency.
Dold’s business cred, along with his ties as working in Washington as a staffer, could give him the outsider cred along with Washington connections, could make him a strong candidate.
I’m not saying he’s stronger or as strong, I’m saying he has potential and we’ll see. And I do think the fact that Seals has lost twice, both during great D years, means this seat is winnable for Dold, especially with Kirk at the top of the ticket.
Anon,
The difference is that:
A. Kirk didn’t back the stimulus plan, which is frankly symbolic for everything that fiscal conservatives don’t like about the Obama administration.
B. Florida is not Illinois. It’s a swing state that leans R, not a heavily D state where R’s are heavily disadvantaged.
C. None of Kirk’s opponents are Marco Rubio. Contrary to popular belief, all but a tiny fraction of conservatives are pragmatic. Rubio is the former Speaker of the Florida State House, a charismatic, attractive, educated, experienced candidate. He’d be a strong candidate in any year, let alone this year. Having Kirk lose the primary would have been tatamount to throwing away the seat, and most conservatives knew it, and a lot voted for him because of it.
I’m not a big fan of Kirk, more because I think he’s a hopeless political hack then I think he’s too moderate, but I’d have voted for him in the primary and the general because he’s more in line with my issues then any Democrat likely to win and he’s got a real shot of winning.
“Contrary to popular belief, all but a tiny fraction of conservatives are pragmatic.”
You might want to check out the Research 2000 poll that just came out. It interviewed 2000+ self ID’d Republicans and asked some fairly straightforward questions. The answers they got were shockingly to the far right and in some cases not based in reality.
Three examples:
Do you think your state should secede from the US? Yes 23%, Not Sure 19% & No 58%
Do you think Obama wants the terrorists to succeed? Yes 24%, Not Sure 33% & No 43%
Do you think Acorn stole the 2008 election? Yes 21%, Not Sure 55% & No 24%
This shows the Republican base is not just conservative but much of it is on the farthest far right fringe where reality is not an option.
Here’s a link.
http://www.dailykos.com/statepoll/2010/1/31/us/437
Let’s see, what do I trust: one poll done by the Daily Kos, or actual occurances on the ground.
Hmmm…tough decision.
BTW, if someone asked me a question that stupid, I’d give them the worst answer I could possibly give them. If you’re dumb enough to ask me if I think Washington State should secede from the union, you’d get a dumb answer, yes.
The poll wasn’t done by the Daily Kos it was done by Research 2000 a legitimate polling organization as considered by all unbiased poll rating groups.
But then when conservatives don’t like the message they just attack the messenger as a left winger even when they know they are blowing smoke.
The questions weren’t stupid just the answers and that’s a fact.
Fritz, actually the Daily Kos poll has little (if any) to do with the pragmatism vs. purity Cliff was referencing about who conservatives are willing to vote for under electorally difficult races. But thanks for the red herring.
Cliff, you have no evidence that only a tiny handful of Conservative activists are not pragmatic. Please provide evidence.
Second Conservatives didn`t like the stimulus package even though the vast majority of the plan is popular such as the income tax cut, the home buyer tax credit (extended by GOP senators as well as Dems), unemployment and COBRA help. Sure some wasteful spending but trivial compared to the deficit and current debt.
TJ, the poll was by a legit company and I agree with Gritz that when you get an answer you don`t like you shot the messenger. Why did Rick Perry play to the gallery with the Texas can secede ploy last year. Surely it wasn`t because of the “tiny” handful of dogmatic conservatives. I think he knows the lay of the land better than you or Cliff.
Crist may have supported the stimulus package but he was doing his job as Governor. He has to balance his state budget and if the Federal government says “hey here is $1 billion” is he goimng to say no forget it I want to raise taxes by that amount of fire teachers, policemen and others in his state.
What would you do? Be dogmatic or pragmatic?
TJ: Cliff didn’t make a reference to purity or pragmatism in commenting on the poll; just a snarky comment.
The Research 2000 poll does show why Republicans like McCain & Hutchinson are racing to the far right extremes of their party and not just the normal conservative right. Don’t forget this was a poll of only self identified Republicans not the even more extreme Tea Party types. You can dismiss it as not relevant, if you want, but it’s obvious that Republican Senators and Congressmen aren’t doing that.
Anonymous, I didn’t argue against the legitimacy of the poll (yet another red herring, thanks again!) just that fritz don’t see an obvious difference between what someone believes and who they are willing to vote for under tough circumstances. When the messenger is wrong, criticism is appropriate.
TJ, I don`t care about the poll. The questions or comment was about ideological purity and many Republican politicians have shown by their actions that they believe showing any moderation or pragmatism is a bad thing to do now. Since their careers are on the line they are probably better than you or I at reading the mood of their supporters. Therefore Cliff was wrong to say only a tiny handful of Conservative activists are dogmatic and not pragmatic. Just a fact, not a insult.
Deleted,
many Republican politicians have shown by their actions that they believe showing any moderation or pragmatism is a bad thing to do now.
The fact that you think this is a “fact” is comical.
Fritz, you are correct, it was not Cliff, but the Anonymous-12:06. My apologies. Mistaken ID aside, my comment still stands.
“TJ, I don`t care about the poll. The questions or comment was about ideological purity and many Republican politicians…”
- That’s where you’re wrong. The original comment was about Republican VOTERS.
“…all but a tiny fraction of conservatives are pragmatic…Having Kirk lose the primary would have been tatamount to throwing away the seat, and most conservatives knew it, and a lot voted for him because of it.”
Seems pretty straightforward. The voters were in a tough spot recognizing their only chance to win back a Senate seat, but which would require voting for someone who does not share all their conservative views. Texas Republicans are in a totally different situation. They know they can win with a very conservative candidate.
I’m not a big fan of polls asking questions like “Do you think that Obama wants terrorists to succeed?” or “Do you think Acorn stole the election?” These questions are fairly broad. I could see someone answering “yes” to the first question if they felt that Obama wasn’t paying close attention to National Security and instead were focusing on Health Care. These same questions, although worded differently, were done against Bush in 2000 and 2004. A poll worded as simple as this is not really a gauge of pragmatism either. I say we all just move on.
Kirk is probably as strong a candidate as the Illinois GOP could offer. Truth be told, I can see where he would attract more Democrats to his plank than he will lose Republicans because of any moderate image. Now that Kirk is in the general election, it will be interesting on how this contest will unfold. I think the Democrats will have a slight edge because Illinois being a strong blue state will probably trump voter disastifaction and the fact Alexi Giannoulias’s families alleged ethical problems. This is one race where the Republicans should allow Kirk to be his own man and not try to tie him to any purity tests.
Purity tests…something I really despise. It used to be that both parties had a liberal wing, a moderate wing, and a conservative wing. Not any more. Until both parties dump this ideology and allow their candidates to campaign their conscience, the US will suffer.
Cliff it is comical that you think that only a tiny number of Conservative activists are hardline and not pragmatic. Surely you and TJ are not so blinkered that you do not see the tea-party movement, NY23 and Hoffman, Rubio and others of evidence that there is a litmus test. Two sitting US senators for your party are routinely called RINO’s. It is just a straightforward fact, comical or otherwise, that the GOP caucus in the House and Senate are more ideologically pure than the Democrats. That comes from only having 40% of the seats I suppose.
Nice dodge again Cliff around the initial question I posed of you being wrong that only a tiny minority are ideological. Why do you seem incapable of accepting you might be wrong, or does that dent your all knowing persona?
I also see no-one has explained why Crist is a supposed moderate when he merely appeared with the President once. Whereas Kirk voted for cap and trade? Yes I know FL is a swing state and IL more Democratic.
Back to the original topic of the Illinois election…
As the kids say: OMG! IL Democratic voters just nominated for Lt Gov some maniac arrested in 2005 for beating and threatening his girlfriend with a knife. First Blair Hull, then Bill Foster, now Scott Cohen. What’s up with IL Democratic officials/candidates battering women? The IL GOP shouldn’t have to worry much about getting independent and crossover voters, even with a conservative like Brady heading the ticket. When the alternative is incompetent Quinn and violent Cohen, the odds are now in the Republicans’ favor.
Quinn incompetent? Explain since I haven`t heard anything about this.
Hey Anon,
53% of Democrats view socialism favorably.
http://realclearpolitics.blogs.time.com/2010/02/04/gallup-majority-of-dems-view-socialism-positively/
Cliff, great poll. I refer you to what you yourself wrote earlier :
Let’s see, what do I trust: one poll done by the Daily Kos, or actual occurances on the ground.
Hmmm…tough decision.
BTW, if someone asked me a question that stupid, I’d give them the worst answer I could possibly give them. If you’re dumb enough to ask me if I think Washington State should secede from the union, you’d get a dumb answer, yes.
So do I trust a poll by a partsian group or do I look at what is happening on the ground.. Umm tough decision!!
Lets forget stupid polls (as you inferred earlier) and try and stay consistent. I know you have a problem with that.
What is happening on the ground - how many Dems are running leftwards and are avowedly Socialist? Name me one and Bernie Sanders doesn`t count since he is an Independent.
Now on the Republican side we have plenty of elected officals running ever rightwards and basically having litmus tests on a range of issues. Derailing compentent Conservatives like Crist.