Clearly

Burris's numbers are depressed because he hasn't tapped into that huge warchest with an ad buy yet.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 20:29:05 PM UTC

I think it's

his mind-blowingly low name recognition.

---

by: Caspar @ Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 20:57:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think another poll (perhaps of the primary)

is expected from PPP this week.

---

by: andgarden @ Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 20:39:03 PM UTC

I think 36% Undecided = meaningless poll

though it does indicate a longshot senario where two (or more) strong non-Burris candidates could split the anti-Burris primary votes, and allow Mr. $845 to slip by a plurality win.
Anyone know the Dem primary election voting rules in IL? Can Repubs vote in it to cause mischief?

---

by: homerun @ Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 20:58:52 PM UTC

Possible, but unlikely

In Illinois, you don't register for a party, you just ask for a party's ballot on election day. Theoretically, Mark Kirk himself could vote in the 2010 Dem Primary.

However, don't expect to see such a thing happen in large numbers. The Republicans will have contested primaries themselves. Maybe not for Senate (but then, maybe, I'd actually be surprised if the Movement Conservatives gave Kirk a pass), but definitely for the Governor's Mansion. After all, in IL, an election is as much about the Moderate and Conservative wings of the GOP gouging out each other's eyes as it is about winning.

Which points to a second reason it won't happen- Illinois Republicans just simply could NOT organize such a campaign.

BTW- Schakowski is an FoB, too, she jumped on the Obama-wagon early and never looked back. The primary could very well be two candidates trying to out-Obama each other, and Burris doing something else (his press flack, a Clinton dead-ender, has already taken swipes at Obama).

---

by: colbycakes @ Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 21:21:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

GOP candidates all want to run for Guv

I speculate the mentality is that the constitutional officers will go Dem based on party affiliation of the voters. Possibly, Judy Baar Topinka could win an open-seat race for treasurer or comptroller.

The governor race will get enough coverage it's possible for a Republican to win.

If the GOP runs against Quinn they will hammer him on tax increases and take advantage of the fact that a good chunk of Machine Dems and some unions think Quinn is a self-righteous prick.

If the GOP runs against Lisa Madigan they will hammer her on too much power being consolidated in her family. Her dad is Speaker of the House and chair of the Illinois Dems.

Plus, the Greens have a candidate who can probably get 5-15% of the vote (lower if Quinn is the candidate, higher if Madigan is).

But if the GOP couldn't beat Alexi Giannoulias with Sen. Christine Radogno in 2006, they just don't see a viable path to winning the constitutional offices below governor. Speaker Madigan, the chair of the Dems, all but campaigned for Radogno.

---

by: Carl Nyberg @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 00:28:10 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not Really

In general, I'm pretty sure it's just the opposite- some of the lower Constitutional offices are endangered, but the Governor's Mansion is pretty safe.

Topinka would have a damn good shot at one of the financial offices, especially if they're both open. Some of the other candidates like Rutherford have campaign experience and could figure things out.

But the Republicans really DON'T have a decent candidate for governor. Contrary to your title, the strongest Republican in the state- Mark Kirk- seems only interested in the Senate seat. Absent him, the Republicans have nothing but a bunch of too-conservative emtpy suits like Pete Roskam and Bill Brady. They could bitch about tax hikes and the Madigans all they want, but those complaints have been circling around IL politics for a decade and done absolutely nothing for the Republicans. The Big Blue Machine, meanwhile, will have no trouble painting those guys as Oberweis-esque wackos.

I'm not sure who the Green candidate is, or that they'd really be a factor. The Greens got 10% of the vote in 2006, and a deeply unpopular Dem governor still won by 9.

Overall, I think the Dems will be pretty united, making it tough for Republicans to find any room to run. Madigan's actually done a good job attracting the Goo-goo types. Quinn hasn't done as much to court the Machinists, but they're pragmatic, they won't stray if he's the nominee.

---

by: colbycakes @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 14:40:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I knew IL was first, but FEBRUARY, jeez EOM

---

by: vicupstate @ Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 21:00:16 PM UTC

forestalling the gianoulias stampede?

maybe, maybe not.

---

by: st paul sage @ Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 21:35:11 PM UTC

Gianolouis

has some skeletons, his family has some shady business dealings and alledged mafia connnections. It was a rather interesting story to read up on.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 23:00:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

In Illinois?

Illinois mafia dealing?  I'm shocked... shocked I tell ya!

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 23:29:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Which Scandal is Worse?

In Democratic Illinois it seems that even if a Republican candidate isn't likely to win an election, a Democrat can still lose this race. And the easiest way would be through scandal. So which can be more damaging - the treasurer's family ties or the congreewoman's husband's bank fraud?

---

by: armand @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 00:09:25 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Eh, it's complicated

Most of Giannoulias' problems are only alleged. Schankowsky's problems don't really concern her; she's only guilty by association.
I guess it depends on how much truth there is to the whispers around Giannoulias. Repubs will go after Schankowsky for her husband, and since moderate "I vote on character" voters are noted idiots, it might actually work.
However, if Giannoulias (or his family) gets fingered in a major mob scandal...

22, Democrat, AZ-01
Peace. Love. Gabby.

---

by: Nico @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 00:22:07 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Giannoulias and organized crime

I think the financial sector scandal helps Giannoulias.

Working from memory, the allegation against Giannoulias is that he was a VP who was theoretically in the loan approval process when his family's bank loaned money to a business venture that was substantially a brothel.

I chatted with someone who inspected banks back in 2006 and he said that normal due diligence should have allowed the Giannoulias bank to detect the criminal enterprise.

But since 2006 we've learned that a whole bunch of financial institutions were loaning money to borrowers who weren't research on properties that weren't properly appraised. Failure to investigate was the industry norm.

Giannoulias was young (27 maybe?) when he signed-off on a loan that went to a member of organized crime.

I think the likely scenario is that older members of the family more-or-less knew the borrower was a member of organized crime but the younger Giannoulias was kept ignorant or that stuff to keep him viable for politics.

By all accounts he's done a good job as treasurer.

---

by: Carl Nyberg @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 00:37:12 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Option #3

It's starting to look like the biggest problem for either of them is Giannoulias' handling of a state college fund. Bottom line, it was invested in the market and lost a MASSIVE amount of value this year, but Alexi kept it there (which, honestly, is probably what you have to do, but no one's going to hear that part in a 30 second RNSC ad). And of course, having a background in banking, as Alexi does, isn't going to be popular for awhile.

He's really done a decent job as Treasurer, though, and I was very skeptical at first. And who knows, this scandal may not go anywhere. But it's the big knock on him right now.

---

by: colbycakes @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 14:46:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Schakowsky's far and away the best choice

I hope she runs and wins.

---

by: Paleo @ Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 23:15:33 PM UTC

don't be shocked if...

Another candidate or two gets in the race and Burris wins the Dem nomination.

Remember, much of the Dem Party wants to dump Todd Stroger in the primary too.

There's a concern that Black voters will be miffed at the Dem Party actively working to dump two high profile Black Democrats.

---

by: Carl Nyberg @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 00:18:52 AM UTC

That is such bullshit

The Democratic Party of Illinois advanced and elected the first black President.  Burris and Stroger don't light a candle to Obama or even the three black Congressmen.  Stroger is the worst, he is simply a hack who took over his daddy's job.

---

by: IHateBush @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 00:41:07 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Also

It elected Moseley-Braun back in 1992 to the Senate.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 01:26:15 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Burris and Stroger are not Obama

I tend to think you're right.

Stroger ain't popular in the Black community.

And Burris isn't unpopular the way Stroger is, but he hasn't given anyone a reason to be for him. There are a bunch of 60+ y/o Black ministers who say Roland is there guy, but they aren't gonna work to help him.

The argument for Stroger that does resonate in the Black community is that Cook County gov't has always had ample favoritism, nepotism and corruption. The "White" media is now outraged b/c the power is being wielded by a Black pol.

There's enough truth to the position that it's not totally unreasonable.

But the people backing Todd Stroger are hungrier than the people backing Roland. Nobody advocating for Roland needs him to win to put food on the table. There are people backing Stroger who are that hungry.

---

by: Carl Nyberg @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 02:40:10 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Staying on That Topic (Sort Of)

How do things look with Jesse Jackson Jr.? Any chance anyone takes a run at him given the clouds around him of late?  

---

by: armand @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 02:56:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Burris-Giannoulias-Chris Kennedy-Schakowsky

It would probably take one more serious candidate to tip things to Burris, but....

Has anybody got a reason Rod Blagojevich wouldn't file to run? He'd get media attention. He'd piss off lots of people he doesn't like in general terms and a few that he doesn't like specifically.

The media coverage would get sucked out of the race. And compared to Blago, Burris seems like a reasonable choice.

Blago puts out the word to the Democrats: "Pay my legal bills or I run for U.S. Senate."

---

by: Carl Nyberg @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 05:27:51 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Democratic Response: "Please Do!"

I can't imagine anyone would really be scared of such a threat. If anything, the Dems would love to spend a whole primary campaign establishing their anti-Blago bonafides. Be pretty great if someone were able to say, "Yeah, Mark, I know you bitch about Blago a lot, but I'M the only one who actually beat the nutjob."

---

by: colbycakes @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 14:57:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Splitting the Black Vote

Probably unlikely to happen, as Preckwinkle is in the County Board race and the head of the Urban League is considering the Senate Race. Polls already show them splitting the black vote with the unpopular incumbents, and were I just a touch more cynical, I'd insist that the Machine power-brokers planned it this way.

---

by: colbycakes @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 14:51:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Schakowsky's problems

could be her very liberal voting record even for Illinois and her husband  

---

by: politicalal @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 03:13:27 AM UTC

Kind of like for a state senator in 2004

who supposedly had one of the most liberal record in the state Senate?

---

by: IHateBush @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 03:51:49 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

i don't think Shakowsky will have the luxury of Alan Keyes

I expect Mark Kirk to be much more formidable

---

by: politicalal @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 03:54:33 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think Obama would have beaten Kirk

in 2004, do you not?

---

by: IHateBush @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 03:58:09 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Schakowsky does not equal Obama

does not have the charm or appeal of Barack Obama.

Schakowsky < Obama

Kirk > Keyes

is Schakowsky > Kirk is the question?

---

by: politicalal @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 14:59:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Jack Ryan

The former junior senator from IL was posterizing the moderate, telegenic Jack Ryan before he dropped out, too.

A lot of people make this mistake about the 2004 IL Senate Race, they say that Obama's big victory was only because Keyes was so weak. But really, the IL Republicans weren't bound to pick Keyes, they would've slated anyone. But no one else wanted it. It's not that Obama won because he had such a weak opponent; he had a weak opponent 'cause he was going to win anyway.

---

by: colbycakes @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 15:01:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

And that same senator

in 2008 supposedly had the most liberal record in the U.S. Senate!

My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)

---

by: californianintexas @ Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 04:01:17 AM UTC

[ Parent ]