Premium Sponsor


Featured Sponsor


Our Sponsors


Ad Networks

Advertise Liberally

Buy an ad on all of the top liberal blogs with just one click.

Site Stats

IL-Sen: Dan Seals on Blago's Short List

by: DavidNYC

Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 12:35 PM EST


Some new names cropping up in the bid to replace Sen. Obama:

As of Wednesday, the short list of potential Obama replacements included: Reps. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.) and Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), state Comptroller Dan Hynes (D), state Veterans Affairs Director Tammy Duckworth (D), retiring state Senate President Emil Jones (D), state Sen. Kwame Raoul (D), and marketing consultant Dan Seals (D), who lost his second consecutive race last night to Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.).

I don't know if Seals has a real shot at this, and  his selection would probably cheese off some long-time pols who might perceive that he didn't "wait his turn." But regardless, he'd be an excellent, excellent choice. I think he would represent Illinois well and would be a strong candidate when the seat is up again in 2010.
DavidNYC :: IL-Sen: Dan Seals on Blago's Short List
Tags: , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
IL-Sen: Dan Seals on Blago's Short List | 92 comments
So he can lose to Kirk for the third time in 2010?
No thanks.
That was my same first thought
He would not be a strong candidate for 2010 because we can all tell you who his opponent, and the next senator of Illinois would be.  
[ Parent ]
If Seals gets the appointment
I'll gladly take the other side of that bet.
[ Parent ]
It's getting pretty sad to me
If you can't beat someone in a D+3.6 District twice, and you need to change it D+8 battlefield to have a chance at winning.  Remember, he didn't just lose a D+3.6 district.  He lost it by 9 points.  By my calculations, he's underperforming the district by about 12.6 points.  So I wouldn't be surprised to see him lose a statewide race in Illinois.  On top of that, he received a lot of funding from the blogs.  The blogs can't single-handedly fund a senate race.  Period.  
[ Parent ]
They wouldn't
If he ran for the Senate in Illinois (even if he wasn't an incumbent) he would receive all kinds of funding. There is no way a Democrat will be outspent in the next Illinois Senate election, no matter who is chosen. As for the IL-10 race, he was running against an incumbent. Many of our challengers had difficulty winning against incumbents, especially more moderate ones.
[ Parent ]
This is a non-sequitur
On top of that, he received a lot of funding from the blogs.  The blogs can't single-handedly fund a senate race.  Period.

"The blogs" didn't "single-handedly" "fund" Seals's house race either.

[ Parent ]
Oh, I didn't know Mitt Romney posted here!
/snark  (Anyone remember that R-Pres. Primary debate?)
[ Parent ]
Sheesh
The ability of this community to go from predicting 50-seat mega-waves in 2008 to losing Obama's Senate seat in 2010 will never cease to amaze me.
[ Parent ]
Ain't the same people though is it

[ Parent ]
I was predicting +33 House seats. Off by about 10 it looks like.

[ Parent ]
And I said net 27
What is it now? 22 or 23.
[ Parent ]
25 isn't too far off.
I would agree with James, though. Obama's Senate seat will be safe no matter who has it. Democrats have a 1.3 million advantage in Illinois at the moment. Good luck on trying to overcome that hill, Republicans. There's no way their going to swing 650,000 voters, no matter what they do.

I think the question now is whether Blago will appoint someone good. From what I tell from the list, I think we'll be pleased with his choice.

[ Parent ]
I figured 20-30...
So it looks like 2008 was around the low end of my final prediction. I'm usually cautiously optimistic, so I'm not ready to worry about massive 1994 style losses in 2010. Still, I'd like for us to prepare for at least a more neutral environment. That's why I'm not too hot about Jesse Jackson, Jr., & Dan Seals.

C4O Democrats: A Place for All Democrats
[ Parent ]
I would greatly prefer
Dan Seals to JJJ. In the end, I don't think Dan would have a problem holding onto this seat.
[ Parent ]
Agreed on Seals v. Jackson...
If it came down to those two, I'd have to pick Seals because:

- he's more honorable
- he's more electable
- he's probably more progressive

Still, I'm pulling for a third option... Especially Jan Schakowsky! It's not that I don't like Seals, far from it. I just want to make sure we pick a good progressive who can win in 2010.

C4O Democrats: A Place for All Democrats

[ Parent ]
Alright, now people are just being crazy
He's probably more progressive than fraking JJJr?

The man has the 6th highest progressive punch score in the entire House of representative (just above Jan Schakowsky fyi) and you think Seals is going to beat that?

If Seals was going to beat that, he sure didn't let on in the election that that's how he'd be.

Let's stick to a reality based community here people. Jesse Jackson Jr. is not Jesse Jackson. Why is Jr. somehow less honorable than Dan Seals? Sounds a little fishy to me.  

[ Parent ]
I know Jesse Jr. isn't Jesse
And I'd vote for Jr. over ANY republican.  The thing is a lot of voters WILL believe the two are one in the same.  He's not less honorable than Dan Seals, just less electable because of his name.  There's a big differece between getting Jr. elected to a ridiculous D+30 or so black majority district in Chicago and getting him elected statewide.
[ Parent ]
See that's logic that I can respect
even if I'm not sold on its conclusion. But people saying that Jr. is somehow less progressive than just about anybody else is just crap and not based on reality.
[ Parent ]
"Progressive" can be approached many ways.
I think political dynasticism is inherently unprogressive.  I have a visceral objection to dynasties also, I should admit up front.  A meritocratic world of equal opportunity is a progressive ideal, and it strains credulity to believe that in a perfect meritocracy, the best-suited person in the entire world to hold a given position is the child of the person who held it previously.

So if you believe that dynastic politics rewards something other than pure merit, something that in a more progressive world wouldn't be rewarded, then maybe you'll think that promoting the kid of a famous national politician is inherently unprogressive.  And that that politician is less than ideally progressive, because of what their path to power looks like.

Any legacy politician begins with a minus one point from me.  Obviously that can be overcome by other things; I'm pretty positive on Chris Dodd, and the fact that his dad was also a Senator barely affects my regard for him at this point.  But if you take two very similar politicians, going for the same position, and one of them owes a substantial chunk of his success to being well-connected at birth, whereas the other owes the equal success he has attained to some other, more directly personal quality (ability to communicate vision, willingness to work tirelessly, extremely astute judgment, etc), then I'm going to go with the guy who got there through potent personal qualities, rather than the guy who got there by knowing all of daddy's friends.

Anyway, since I really know almost nothing about Jesse Jackson Jr other than his lineage, my opinions on that subject affect my judgment of him pretty deeply.  I freely admit that if I knew much more about JJ Jr I might feel very differently, but from this standpoint I think appointing him would be somewhat unprogressive.

So... when you hear others say he's "unprogressive", figure that they might be taking points off for nepotism, like I am.

[ Parent ]
Well that's the first time I've heard anything like that
Seems a pretty hard sell to assume that's what people mean when they say he's not progressive.

I also don't buy it. And again, I don't know if JJJr is the best choice or not. Maybe there are serious electability issues. But in terms of MY definition of progressive, meaning working for a better life for all people, then I think we'd be hard pressed to find someone on that short-list who is ahead of him.

And I would suggest you look at his positions and what he's fought for because it would be good to go into this knowing where he stands and who he is as a person.  

[ Parent ]
Me, too...
That is, I'd vote for him over a CReep in a heartbeat. What I meant in saying that he lacked honor is that:

- He threw his own father under the bus to get precisely on this shortlist for Senator. While Jesse, Sr.'s comments on Obama were wrong, he still didn't deserve to be trashed by his son like that.

- The misogynistic comments he used against Hillary Clinton in the primaries were DISGUSTING! How dare he interpret Hillary's "tears" moment in New Hampshire as "shallow" and "racist"! And that was only one of his many media appearances where he used sexism to bash Hillary & her supporters.

- He's just too Chicago Machine for comfort. While I know that just about every Illinois Democrat in office has some connection to the Daley Chicago Machine, Jesse Jackson, Jr., is just too much a part of it to probably survive beyond 2010. Why risk a Senate seat for him?

C4O Democrats: A Place for All Democrats

[ Parent ]
Please see my comment below...
Sorry, but I NEVER find misogyny, machine politicking, and blind ambition to be "progressive". While Jesse, Jr., is to be commended for his Progressive Punch score, it's certainly not enough to make up for his personal flaws. I actually have more respect for Jesse Jackson, Sr., than Jr. For all of Jesse Sr's faults, I don't remember him employing ugly personal attacks against other Democrats and OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS in the same way Jesse, Jr. has.

C4O Democrats: A Place for All Democrats
[ Parent ]
Uhhh
I'll take the other side of the bet as well. Clearly IL-10 is not the same thing as IL-Sen. No way Illinois chooses Kirk over Seals for a Senate seat. There are too many blue districts and Seals even got 45% against the incumbent Kirk in the House race where he is known best. Money would be on Seals' side in a Senate race and you can be sure Obama would help to make sure he wins it.
[ Parent ]
In a neutral year perhaps
But 2010 isn't likely to be that way. Seals is a decent guy but anybody would struggle with the stain of having lost twice already to the same opponent, statewide or not.
[ Parent ]
Right after the 2006 elections
I made the assumption that we'd be playing defense in 2008 and would be lucky to pick up just a handful of seats. Turns out we had back-to-back waves. While I'm not sanguine about 2010, I'm a little less eager to predict what the future will hold this time around.
[ Parent ]
Kirk vs. Seals for US Senate would be competitive
If one assumes Blagojevich gets whacked by the U.S. Attorney or in the Dem primary then Seals should be in good shape.

The most likely gubernatorial candidate will be Lisa Madigan. He father will go to the mat to get Dems to the polls.

If Obama and the Dem Congress are perceived as competent and making progress, Seals would be the favorite.

[ Parent ]
That's a good point that hadn't occured to me
The most likely gubernatorial candidate will be Lisa Madigan. He father will go to the mat to get Dems to the polls.

Thanks. OK, that will really help with electability for any of these choices if Madigan is the Gov. candidate. He/she can grab onto Madigan's coattails.

Tho I do think JJ Jr. will have the toughest time with re-election.
You and I know he's not the same man his father. But it will be SO SO easy for the Repubs to tie them together in the minds of the low information voters in red conservative downstate Illinois. (I can visualize the ads already... )

[ Parent ]
Well keep in mind though
that they did elect Carol Mosely-Braun.
It'd be nice to see some polling on this.  
[ Parent ]
He'd fare better
Than Jesse Jackson Jr.
[ Parent ]
I wish there was a way to see if that were true.

[ Parent ]
Yep...
And that ain't saying much. Can Blago PLEASE appoint someone to the Senate who can actually win the 2010 election?

C4O Democrats: A Place for All Democrats
[ Parent ]
In general
I think we should hold back on laying out certitudes as to who can and cannot win this seat until we see some polling in this race.

Never underestimate the power of Chicago to elect one of its own statewide.

[ Parent ]
I just find it
So puzzling that people who are not from Illinois are so willing to make these proclamations that certain people can or cannot win.
[ Parent ]
They can all win
But some will find it harder than others. Is it worth the risk when campaign cash might be harder to come by and might have to be spread around more in two years time?
[ Parent ]
Absolutely
But I don't think Schakowsky would be an easy win. In a race against Mark Kirk, whose for the most part squeaky clean, he could probably get some traction running against her husband. Duckworth and Seals have never won a race. Dan Hymes, who isn't really being mentioned too much around here probably because a lot aren't that familiar with him. But if your looking at it strictly from the perspective of who could most easily win this race in 2010 he's the slam dunk choice. But Schakowsky, JJ Jr. Seals, Duckworth and Madigan could all be beaten.
[ Parent ]
Me too.
I feel like there's some projection going on here. I don't quite understand the animosity towards him, but it seems to be affecting peoples' conclusion that he "can't win".

This is a state where Carol Mosely-Braun won a senate term for cryin' out loud. In 1992!

If the comments about Halvoson are true, then that would be a decent reason to not support him. But I'd like to see those comments.  

[ Parent ]
Yeah, Seals should not be the appointee
Kirk would definitely feel that it's time to run for Senate in 2010. We should put up Lisa Madigan, who I think has the best shot at keeping Illinois blue. Seals can run for Kirk's open seat in two years and he'll have a huge advantage due to fundraising and name recognition.

My Can Of Contemplation is now open to all for perusal.
[ Parent ]
If Kirk leaves IL-10
that seat will be an almost automatic pickup for us.  
[ Parent ]
Especially If...
The Republicans accidentally pick some outrageous far right candidate to run there!

My Can Of Contemplation is now open to all for perusal.
[ Parent ]
Dan Seals
Dan would make a fantastic Senator - Period.

Just because conservative Democrats in the 10th voted for Kirk does not mean they would statewide imho.

I agree with the former but not the latter
Can you imagine the ads? Shudder. Especially in a defensive national environment. Too risky IMHO. There are better choices that can tick both political and legislative boxes.
[ Parent ]
why defensive
As others have noted upthread why would you assume we will be playing defense in 2010? With the large number of competitive races in the senate Illinois is unlikely to be a GOP priority anyway.

Yes I agree that there are other more experienced options out there but that was also said durng the il senate primary in 2004 and look who won.

Seals would thump Kirk in a statewide race.

[ Parent ]
Open seats & Recruitment define a race
VA-Sen, NM-Sen weren't competitive until there were R-Retirements and strong D-Recruits and then they were in the bag for us.  The only reason the Republicans had no opportunities in the US Senate for 2008 was because all D-Incumbents stayed on board and Republicans had 0 recruits (with he exception of Kennedy, but any Republican might have gotten as far as he did... So it's hard to say whether he was a good recruit or not)

If we start with a poor candidate in Illinois and a Republicans field a strong candidate, s*** can happen.  Same applies to alot of states up for grabs in 2010.

[ Parent ]
You're acting like Illinois is normally like Pennsylvania or Ohio
Honestly, if Obama hadn't been from Illinois, and the year wasn't so universally favorable to Democrats, Obama would've been in any danger of not carrying the state? Seriously, in the 2000 and 2004 elections, Gore and Kerry both outperformed in Illinois by 7 points compared to the rest of the country, in 2000 and 2004, Bush won 42% and 44% of the vote, respectively. This year, Obama won the state by 25 points, compared to a 6 point win nation-wide (Obama got 62% in the state, while only winning 52.5% nation-wide, meaning that Obama outperformed his national performance by 9.5 points, that means that Obama is nearly 10 points more popular in Illinois than he is nationwide).

People assume that the 1994 midterms were simply a referendum on Bill Clinton, and not that it was simply an aggrevation of what was inevitably going to happen, that the realignment of the South was always going to force a lot of Democrats out. 2006 was, to a certain extent, the same thing, the Northeast had become too Democratic for a lot of these Republican congressmen who simply became too conservative for their districts.

Visit Election Inspection for first-rate political analysis.

[ Parent ]
Clintons sloppiness
When it came to healthcare, Whitewater, gays in the military, ect. also hurt us badly.  
[ Parent ]
Damn...
That list doesn't look too hot. Still, the most promising of the options Blago are considering look to be:

- Dan Hynes

- Jan Schakowsky

And maybe, just maybe, Tammy Duckworth might fare better statewide than she did in the more red-leaning IL-06 in 2006. Still, I don't know if we should take that risk unless we know Duckworth can wow & dazzle Illinois as Senator. Dan Hynes is probably the safest bet, while Jan Schakowsky can probably provide the most "bang for the buck", meaning the strongest progressive advocacy while also being able to win in 2010.

C4O Democrats: A Place for All Democrats

Schakowsky
I think she'll end up getting picked. I agree, she'll be great on policy and should have a great chance of being elected. She's probably the best out of all of them on progressive issues. I'm hoping for her or Seals.
[ Parent ]
YES!
I'm glad I'm not the only one here who likes Schakowsky. She's also my #1 pick precisely for the same reasons you & I talked about. She's a solid progressive who also can do well enough on constituent service to build a good relationship with voters statewide.

I REALLY hope Blago picks her! :-D

C4O Democrats: A Place for All Democrats

[ Parent ]
You should give Blago a call and let him know what you think.
Then send him an e-mail from yourself and every member of your family you can think of. Hopefully he'll take your advice.
[ Parent ]
Seals would be a strong candidate
in IL-09 (Schakowsky's CD).
[ Parent ]
Are there any good potential downstate appointees?
Most of those mentioned so far are from the Chicago area and there are good options in this list.

But, nominating someone from downstate has been a winning formula in the past: Paul Simon, Dick Durbin.

CW is they don't want two downstate senators

[ Parent ]
From a former Hoosier who worked in Chicago...
Obama and Moseley-Braun proved that, unlike in neighbouring Indiana, you don't have to be a downstater to win statewide in IL. Even skin color is not a barrier (see Jesse White, Roland Burris etc)but Jesse Jackson will most likely lose because of suburban voters in DuPage, Will, Lake and Kankakee counties.  

I agree that Schakowsky is the most progressive while Hynes is more the machine candidate. Unlike Seals and Duckworth, who haven't won a seat yet (they ran in ticket splitting districts), Schakowsky and Hynes can win. Durbin is a downstater though he's moved further left from the Glen Poshard/Jerry Costello wing of the IL democratic party.

I would bet on Schakowsky. With Obama as president, there may not be pressure to have an AA replace him. On the other hand, Schakowsky is female, Jewish and the most progressive U.S. House member. She will be just as history making as Moseley-Braun. She won't have any problem raising money and she has won many elections already. She is relatively young (62). Indeed, picking her will open up her seat so maybe Seals can make a run for it since he actually lives in her district.

[ Parent ]
Schakowsky
May be just as history making(although I dispute that assertion). But Blago is all about his own future. He's not going to piss off the entire African-American community by appointing a white person.

This is precisely why Seals' name is being mentioned. Blago knows he's under immense pressure to appoint an African-American and all but one of the African-Americans being mentioned are old. The only other name is Jesse Jackson Jr. and there are concerns about his electability.

Think about it, if Seals were white do you think there's a snowballs chance in hell that he'd be mentioned?  

[ Parent ]
I don't buy it (at least not entirely)
Blago is still a walking corpse (electorally speaking) but whomever he picks to replace Obama has no bearing on his chances for relection. His approval rating are at sub-zero levels and Dems, fearful that he might drag the party down in 2010 (which I suspect he will), should challenge him in a primary a la Bob Wilson-Claire McCaskill in neighboring MO. IL is much more strongly dem than MO so intra-party divisions are not likely to harm whomever beats Blago. While picking an AA to replace Obama may help him in a Democratic primary, he will still get massacred in the suburbs and downstate.

One option, could be this: get with Daley, Madigan and Emil Jones to orchestrate a plan: Blago will pick Schakowsky to replace Obama; Seals will run to replace Schakowsky; Blago will not seek reelection as Gov, paving the way for Lisa Madigan to replace him in exchange for state and feds dropping all charges and potential charges; he can get some federal non-Senate confirmation job or become a lobbyist and live well off for the rest of his life. Blago doesn't drag down Dems and he won't face a judge; Lisa and Jan run statewide thus helping Dems retain power in IL.
 

[ Parent ]
The option
Well, I like it. But I wonder, isn't that why we have a Chicago Machine, to make these backroom deals that work for the party?
[ Parent ]
Nope.
You're right. Blago has one and only one shot to win a Dem primary in 2010, and it's overwhelming support from the AA community. Even then I think his chances are slim to none that he'll (Blago) get it.

It's also why I wouldn't be surprised by a Jesse White or Emil Jones pick as sort of a care-taker senator. Then in 2010, they can all fight it out.  

[ Parent ]
and he would be Seals's kingmaker
Blago not only has to appoint an african-american to retain support... he has to appoint one who will support him in turn

jesse jackson jr already has his base, his political allies, etc. he's made himself (with initial help from his father - but you gotta give him credit for driving his own political destiny)

whereas what does dan seals have? he's just lost two congressional races in a row... no foreseeable angle towards a political future. he'd owe blago big - and be a lot more likely to stump for him in the primary.

anyway, i don't know enough about chicago politics as i'm a new york boy, but i'm throwing that thought out there. either of them would be my top choices as i think they're both the most progressive choices (along with schakowsky) - but they're also young (seals is 37, jackson 43). schakowsky would be a great person to have in the senate, but she's 64 and wouldn't have as long to build into a strong and powerful progressive voice. whereas seals or jackson (as long as they don't pal around with dictators and go on funded honeymoons with their campaign managers like Carolyn Maloney, which is why she becase such political anathema i believe i believe) could push a liberal agenda for ages to come...

It is difficult to get the news from poems, but men die miserably every day for lack of what is found there. --William Carlos Williams

[ Parent ]
Jesse Jackson has done more for DuPage
than he's done for parts of his district.

Those DuPage voters who don't like noise from O'Hare love the Peotone project.

JJJ has made pushing Peotone his top priority.

[ Parent ]
That wouldn't be a bad pick
would be very unlikely but could be a non-Duckworth compromise pick.
I'm having to examine myself, to figure out why I would love a Seals pick,
and hate a Duckworth pick.

I'm sure it's because of the reported narrative that Duckworth was almost literally plucked out of the hospital by Durbin and Emanuel, turned into a candidate, and dropped into a district she had never lived in.  The impression I was left with, fair or not I don't know, is that she is a puppet who owes so very much to these other pols that she has no real independent agency at all.  I don't actually know what the Seals recruitment story is, but I don't have a strong negative narrative there, just a blank space.  

Plus everyone knows that DKos was wildly hostile to Duckworth and Emanuel all through 2005, whereas it was pretty pro-Seals in that same time period.  I'm not sure what Seals did to earn the love of that group of people, but the attitude did rub off on me.

Anyway, I'm left to wonder how fair or well-founded my feelings are.  Because right now I hate the idea of a Duckworth appointment as a naked machine play (look, Emanuel can be Chief of Staff and Senator at the same time!), yet I'm fairly positive on Seals (I'd prefer Schakowski as a known quantity, but I see the desire to not return to an all-white Senate).

All this even though Seals did pretty badly this cycle.  I really expected him to win this one.

So, there we go.  Who can correct or reaffirm my leanings here?

[ Parent ]
win an election first
for both duckworth and seals.  there are talented, experienced people with electoral records - try one of them.
Agreed
There's no shortage of elected Democrats in IL.  Pick someone who has proven he/she can get votes - while the seat should be safe, there's no reason to take a risk.

BTW, how certain are we that Kirk is going to run?  He looks like he has a safe House seat, surviving a tough re-election campaign easily.  Why would he risk that to run statewide?

Mad At Thad:  A Blog Devoted To Ousting Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, Republican - Michigan

[ Parent ]
Weak Seals
Those from the Chicago area, please tell us why Seals so underperformed.  What were his weaknesses?  If the rest of us know what went wrong, it will be easier to decide if he would be a good pick or not.
Ticket splitters
same reason Linda Stender, Darcy Burner and Ashwin Madia lost. Also, Kirk is well established in that district (was the former COS to Porter the previous congressman). Knocking off Kirk, w/o him doing anything wrong, is like expecting a Republican to easily knock off Chet Edwards, Allen Boyd, Jim Spratt or Gene Taylor...it's just not done.
[ Parent ]
My Thoughts
As a life long Illinois resident, here are my thoughts on some of the prospective candidates:

Dan Seals: I like Dan Seals a lot personally, but do not wish to see him selected here. 2 6%+ losses in a clearly Democratic district is not very impressive to me. Why would we have a two-time loser run statewide then? What has Seals accomplished in politics? I'm not suggesting he would lose, I simply wonder why he is even being considered.
Tammy Duckworth: My preferred choice, and a much better one than Seals. Yes, she lost too, but she lost in a R+4 district (not D+4) by just 2%. Also, she has been heading veterans affairs in Illinois for two years now, so she has something of a statewide profile.
Jesse Jackson Jr: Probably the worst possible choice for a couple reasons. First of all, Jackson Jr. publicly trashed IL-11 candidate Debbie Halvorson this cycle over her support for the proposed Will County airport. IN the article, a Jackson aide even admitted that he didnt want to see Halvorson elected because it would deminish his clout on the issue. I dont care what his progressive punch score is, thats not the kind of Democrat we need. Furthermore, the Jackson family is not popular at all outside of Cook County, and I would bet that he would poll the worst of any Democratic candidate to prove it.
Dan Hynes: A safe choice... thats really all there is to say about Hynes. He lost to Obama in the 2004 Senate primary, and he's been a graceful team player as State Comptroller. He's a machine-type and pretty non-descript.  

Can you provide the link to this please?
"a Jackson aide even admitted that he didnt want to see Halvorson elected because it would deminish his clout on the issue"
[ Parent ]
Link to JJJ Trashing Halvorson
[ Parent ]
Thanks for the info.
I can certainly understand why some would be upset with him for that.

I jsut don't agree that he would be a loser statewide and.

[ Parent ]
Yes thank you
That's disappointing. Not sure how the two of them are going to work in congress together starting off like that.

Although I do agree with Jackson's stand that Cook county should have a say in the airport considering that whole region is dependent on chicago. But still, that's inexcusable to try to sabotage her campaign. Maybe if they had pulled this before the primary that'd be one thing (if they had another Dem they preferred), but not during the general election.

I still like JJJr and think he's very progressive in terms of how he votes, but I don't like this and prefer someone else take the seat.  

[ Parent ]
Agree somewhat...
you echo my thoughts on Hynes and JJ Jr, except on Tammy Duckworth. IL-10 district is a very moderate but ticket splitting district and Kirk fits it very well. It's notyet like CT-04 though it has only had one Dem Rep: Abner Mikva since the distric was created. Duckworth ran in an open seat and ran as a center-right Dem against a center-right Rep; faced with a choice of 2 center-right politicians in more republican DuPage county; voters will pick the Republican. So I would not make Seals loss any worse than Duckworth's.

Per my previous post, Blago should pick Schakowsky to replace Obama. Seals can then run for Schakowsky's seat. Judy Biggert and Pete Roskam ran against each otehr to replace Harris Fawell (the most conservative House Republican in the entire Mid-West); Biggert won but Roskam later repalced Hyde in the neighboring district.  

[ Parent ]
I don't think anybody is disparaging Dan personally
Or underestimating the challenge in toppling Kirk. But neither does it warrant a senate appointment. I fear it would smack of affirmative action in the worst way. I don't subscribe to the view that Obama must be replaced by another African American - there is a gonna be black dude in the White House for heaven's sake. That says more for racial equality than Blagojevich making a selection based primarily on skin color, particularly one with the baggage of two congressional defaets in a Democratic leaning district. Again, nothing against Seals. He is a good guy and I wish he had won.
[ Parent ]
don't assume Blago mans what he says
By floating Seals name Blagojevich hopes to curry favor with Dem activists.

He may have no intention of appointing Seals. Blagojevich merely wants credit for mentioning him.

OTOH, Seals does have some benefit.

It would be hard for Black pols to get traction with the argument that Blago should have appointed a Black candidate since Seals is Black.

Seals is a suburban candidate.

And going to a non-Springfield candidate bypasses whatever pecking order those people think exists.

I stand by what I wrote earlier:

here's a set theory exercise
Which candidates are acceptable to Obama?

Which candidates are acceptable to Blagojevich?

Which candidates will create a backlash from the media or a key constituency? Daley and Michael Madigan may count as key constituencies in this analysis.

When you answer these questions you will have a good idea who will be picked.


Seals does seem to fit the criteria I identified.

Is Seals acceptable to Obama? IIRC Seals was the only Illinois House candidate for whom Obama made a commercial (radio).

Is Seals acceptable to Blagojevich? Blago brought Seals' name into the game.

Will Seals inspire a backlash from a key constituency? Jan Schakowsky and Jesse Jackson, Jr. aren't key constituencies. I see no reason for Daley or Madigan to object.

Seals seems to be a good fit.

Is Blago seriously running for re-election in 2010?
If so why?  His approval rating is 4% in the latest Ramsussen poll.  Heck, that approval rating makes former Governor Taft of Ohio and Fletcher of KY look like rockstars in comparison.

http://www.rasmussenreports.co...

BLAGO SHOULD PICK KEYES
The fairest thing to do is pick the runner-up in the 2004 Senate election - Alan Keyes.

OK, I'm kidding, but did anyone notice that Keyes was on several states' presidential ballots this year and finished about 20th?  This guy is truly the definition of delusional megalomaniac, replacing Ralph Nader, who at least had a decades-long record of accomplishment before becoming delusional.

On a serious note, I am a resident of Illinois and I strenuously object to all of the people who have insisted on this post that Blago should pick someone who can win in 2010.  He should do the OPPOSITE.

He should pick someone who promises to NOT run for election in 2010, possibly an older person like Emil Jones or Roland Burris who can cap his career by being a senator for two years.

Trying to pick someone who can win in 2010 takes the decision out of the hands of us voters because the new incumbent will have a huge and unfair advantage.  What Illinois needs is a robust campaign among numerous qualified people, not an attempt to fix a primary and, thus, an election because the Illinois GOP is dead (only Mark Kirk could be competitive).

Illinois is a corrupt, anti-democratic state where fathers frequently act unethically to fix elections for their children (Lipinski, Stroger, Beavers, Jones) or just use their naked political power to do the same thing (Madigan, Hynes, Jackson).  The success of someone who got there by merit (Barack Obama) should prove how important it is to have a genuine election.

Shalom,
ZWrite

PS: I'm now answering this question - "Weak Seals: Those from the Chicago area, please tell us why Seals so underperformed. What were his weaknesses? If the rest of us know what went wrong, it will be easier to decide if he would be a good pick or not."

Answer: Mark Kirk is perhaps the most liberal Republican in the U.S. House of Reps.  He is basically a social liberal, an economic conservative, and a foreign policy moderate.  He is low-key, intelligent, and is regarded by voters in his district as an independent as opposed to a Republican or Democratic partisan.  His election proves that Americans want problem-solvers, not ideologues.  I'm not aware of Seals doing anything wrong in his campaign, but he is inexperienced, unproven, and may or may not be a problem-solver or ideologue.  By the way, Kirk advertised heavily on Air America so he was targeting liberals who want congressmen who are more independent than ideological.

Kirk will probably run for statewide office.  If not, he will be beaten when the Illinois legislature redraws his district to make it more Democratic or he will be lumped into the same district as Republican Peter Roskam.

Second PS - Rahm Emanuel is the WRONG choice for Obama's chief of staff.  He has a personality problem that leads to stupid and incompetent decisions like funneling millions of dollars raised by the national Democratic Party Congressional Committee to the campaign of Tammy Duckworth (2006 Congressional campaign for Henry Hyde's seat) while spending NOTHING on numerous campaigns that could have resulted in an additional 10 seats for Dems in 2006.
(Emanuel was ripped by Dems in the Hyde district for taking sides in a primary Duckworth won 41-40 and spent millions just to prove he was right; even if she won, the money was a waste.)

You have to live in Chicago to understand how bad Emanuel's pro-Duckworth decision was in 2006.  He literally flushed millions of dollars down the toilet because the Chicago media market covers about 15 congressional districts and, thus, 90 percent plus of the people who saw the endless Duckworth TV ads were outside her district.  Emanuel is a moron.

I'm done venting.

Kirk the most liberal republican in the house?
Please tell me tht's a joke.
[ Parent ]
Kirk
Is a fake. He is as conservative as the rest of the Repub congresscritters he, unlike Roskam, just lies about it. Voted the GOP way about 90% over the last two years and also voted for the Schiavo bill.

Kirk is no moderate.

[ Parent ]
Kirk is the second most liberal.
Castle is the most liberal according to Hotline.

Before their defeats, Shays was #1 and Gilchrest was #2 so Castle has moved up two slots.

[ Parent ]
Jan Schakowsky!
  We need more women in Congress.  Look, if Blagoevich can win  statewide in Illinois, then I think Dan Seals can win also.  Illinois is a very Democratic state these days.

John McCain lets lobbyists shape his economic policy
don't underestimate Madigan
he is likely working out some deal so that this helps Lisa take the Gov's mansion.

remember Blago was the first Dem Gov in a long time.

Seals can't make it through a Dem primary without some machine support.  

Thanks Tyler for doing the research
It never ceases to amaze me how ideological blinders can prevent both conservatives and liberals from looking at facts and making rational conclusions.

Yes, Mark Kirk is a political moderate who is far more liberal than many Democrats, and thanks to Tyler Oakley for backing me up with statistical data.  Anyone who thinks Kirk is a conservative just doesn't have the ability or willingness to think about politics rationally.

Kirk is DESPISED by conservatives.  Last week, four GOPers on Tom Roeser's Sunday night radio show spent five minutes ripping the guy, calling him a RINO (Republican In Name Only) and wishing that he would be ousted from the House.  Conservatives hate Kirk far more than they hate Dems.

If Kirk lived in many states (and parts of Illinois), the voters would boot him out of Congress for being too liberal.  But, he lives in a liberal district, a district that also has one of the highest percentage of college and post-college graduates in the entire USA.  The voters in his district are very smart.

On another matter, in response to another poster, if Michael Madigan and Rod Blagoyevich try to engineer any sort of political fix, they should be deported to a nation that disrespects democracy.  I'm tired of living in a state where so-called liberals have contempt for democracy.

Shalom,
ZWrite

WTF?
Who cares if they try to "fix" it. It's ultimately the voters decision. You're completely delusional.  
[ Parent ]
People who have contempt for democracy should move
Anyone who cares about democracy should care about a fix.  You obviously don't so please move to a nation where people don't care about democracy.

When there is a fix it is definitely NOT the voters' decision.  Not when decisions by political power brokers are made AFTER the primary.  Some examples:

1.  Congressmen William Lipinski (Illinois) took his name off the ballot months after winning the primary and power brokers put his son Dan's name on the ballot.  It's a Democratic district and NO DEMOCRAT EVER could challenge Dan, a professor in Nashville, in a primary.

2.  Cook County CEO John Stroger took his name off the ballot months after winning the primary and power brokers put his son Todd's name on the ballot.  It's a Democratic county and NO DEMOCRAT ever could challenge Todd.

3.  State Senate president Emil Jones took his name off the ballot months after winning the primary and power brokers put his son's name on the ballot.  It's a Democratic district so NO DEMOCRAT ever could challenge the son.

4.  Republican power brokers took Jack Ryan off the ballot while he was running against Barack Obama for the US Senate although Ryan had won the primary.  They then replaced Ryan with Alan Keyes, a conservative moron who lived in Maryland.  The voters NEVER had a chance to choose Obama's opponent.

THERE IS A LOT MORE.

So, no I am not "delusional."  I just cited four cases where there was a fix and voters definitely did NOT make a choice.

THE "CHOICE" WAS THE RESULT OF A FIX, EINSTEIN.

Conclusion:  I have the facts on my side and you are absolutely BRAINLESS.  Please move to a nation where your views are respected.

Shalom,
ZWrite

[ Parent ]
What are you talking about?
Kirk may be the 2nd most moderate surviving repub in the house but that is akin to saying you are the second tallest smurf. Nobody repeat NOBODY whp votes the GOP way 89% of the time can be considered a moderate. And btw if you do your homework you will discover that the most moderate repub is still voting less liberally than the most conservative democrat. It has been talked about repeatedly in the progressive blogs since at least 2004.

Get it right.

[ Parent ]
Benawu knows better than tens of thousands of attorneys and doctors
Benawu:

On the one side is Benawu.  On the other side is TENS OF THOUSANDS of Democrats who have voted for Mark Kirk in the same election that they voted for Al Gore, John Kerry, and Barack Obama.

These Democrats -- and tens of thousands of Republicans -- think Mark Kirk is a moderate.  But you say he is the same as Peter Roskam.

Actually, if YOU do your research, you will find that Kirk and Roskam differ on DOZENS OF ISSUES, maybe a majority of issues.

But you keep proclaiming that Kirk is a moderate and then scratch your head because you can't figure out why Democrats can't beat Kirk.  Keep scratching.

Here's a helpful hint:  If you want to beat Kirk, who is respected as an independent despite your close-minded views, try to get a Democrat who is widely respected as an independent to run against him -- someone like Cook County Commissioner Forest Claypool or ex-Chicago schools chief Paul Vallas (neither has ever lived in the district, but that didn't stop Hillary Clinton, RFK, and lots of others).

But if you want to maintain your position that Kirk is a conservative, be prepared to be surprised again when a progressive gets his or her ass kicked again and again by Mark Kirk.

Shalom,
ZWrite

PS -- Research Disraeli's comments about statistics.  If your logic on Kirk holds, Barack Obama is also the most liberal senator in the USA.  Kirk IS more liberal than conservative Democrats on a wide variety of issues.  Do your research.

[ Parent ]
I missed a NOT
In the fourth graph, I left out the word "not" before "a moderate."
[ Parent ]
MARK KIRK: THE PRO-CHOICE, PRO-GUN CONTROL, PRO-GAY RIGHTS, PRO-ENVIRONMENT "CONSERVATIVE"
Benawu:

It is not metaphysically possible for anyone to be as wrong about something as you are about Mark Kirk.  I knew he was pro-choice, pro-gun control, and pro-gay rights, but here is what else I found in FIVE MINUTES.

Do you still think he's a conservative?  If you do, you really need to go back to school -- for many, many years.

Here is the evidence of Mark Kirk's conservatism. All of this is copypasted from research.  These are NOT my opinions.

1. "President Bill Clinton reappointed Kirk to work in his Administration on the restoration of democracy in Haiti."

2. "The League of Conservation Voters recognized him as one the top 13 "Environmental Champions" in the Congress in 2003."

3. "The 1994 assault weapons ban expired on September 13, 2004. Congressman Kirk supports extending the assault weapons ban. On July 8, 2004, he joined three of members of the House of Representatives in a letter requesting that Speaker of the House, J. Dennis Hastert, bring this critical piece of legislation up for a vote. He also urged the Administration to push for renewal of the assault weapons ban. On May 5 and June 18, 2004, he co-signed letters to the President and Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge urging action on the assault weapons ban."

4. "Congressman Kirk co-sponsored H.R. 3540 to close the gun show loophole. This bill requires criminal background checks on all firearms transactions occurring at events that provide a venue for the sale, offer for sale, transfer, or exchange of firearms."

5. "Congressman Kirk believes that the federal government must support the groundbreaking promise of stem cell research. Pluripotent stem cells have the ability to develop in nearly any cell in the human body, providing real hope for the millions of Americans suffering from a wide-range of diseases, including diabetes, cancer, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's and even spinal cord injuries."

6. "Kirk scores 100% by NARAL on pro-choice voting record
For over thirty years, NARAL Pro-Choice America has been the political arm of the pro-choice movement and a strong advocate of reproductive freedom and choice. NARAL Pro-Choice America's mission is to protect and preserve the right to choose while promoting policies and programs that improve women's health and make abortion less necessary. NARAL Pro-Choice America works to educate Americans and officeholders about reproductive rights and health issues and elect pro-choice candidates at all levels of government. The NARAL ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.

7. "Rated 75% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance.
Kirk scores 75% by the HRC on gay rights."

Yes, Mark Kirk is a MODERATE.  He is WAY, WAY MORE LIBERAL THAN DOZENS OF DEMOCRATS.

Get over it.

Shalom,
ZWrite

[ Parent ]
Obama would like Valerie Jarrett
Who Will Be Chosen
JJ seems to be the one who wants it the most. He probably won't get it because of the fear that he won't hold onto the seat because of the animosity towards JJ Sr.

The new rumor is that Rahm wants Duckworth to be in the federal VA department, even as secretary, therefore that would leave her out as far as being the new Senator. I also have to go with those who are uncomfortable about the fact that neither Seals nor Duckworth has ever won an election. If Seals can't win in a progressive district like the one he currently ran in, how can he win statewide?

There are so many people jockeying for Obama's seat that Blagojevich is going to be innundated - this is probably the most popular he'll ever be with anyone. I'm sure a lot of back-room bargaining is going on right now. Will it be a "place-filler" like Burris or Emil Jones or will it be someone who will actually run again in 2010?

Eh
If Seals can't win in a progressive district like the one he currently ran in, how can he win statewide?

Seals was running against a slippery incumbent. The difference is, he would BE an incumbent in 2010 -- lots of time to build up a statewide profile. I'm not nearly as worried about his 2010 chances as many others are here, but I also don't consider him a likely candidate for this seat.

[ Parent ]
Seals would win
In 2010 almost any Dem will win in the Senate race with 2 years incumbency under their belt IMHO.
[ Parent ]
Kirk's schtick would never work statewide
For those worried Seals would end up fighting for the seat against Kirk, I think you have to stop looking at numbers and start looking at what happened in the district. The local press does anything and everything for Kirk. that would not necessarily happen statewide. Kirk controls a large portion of the pro-Israel vote in the northern suburbs, also not necessarily true statewide. He's also gone on record as hating Chicagoans, calling them thugs and goons on tape. He'd have to get major love downstate to pull it off, and knowing him, I just don't see it.
IL-Sen: Dan Seals on Blago's Short List | 92 comments

Copyright 2003-2009 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

Talk to your supporters, not tech support. Campaign Engine is the powerful, affordable Progressive Campaign Software.

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

About the Site

Publisher: DavidNYC

Senior Editor: James L.

Contributing Editor: Crisitunity

SSP's Twitter Feed

Search the SSP archives:

Sign up to receive a daily e-mail whenever the SSP is updated:

Subscribe to SSP's RSS feed: Subscribe via FeedBurner

SSP Resources

Presidential Vote by CD

Partisan Voting Index

House Open Seat Watch

SSP Document Collection

Race Tracker Wiki

2010 Calendar

SSP Race Ratings

Senate Race Ratings

Gubernatorial Race Ratings

House Vulnerability Index

Blogroll

Daily Kos
DemConWatch
DLCC Blog
Five Thirty Eight
From The Roots (DSCC)
Hotline On Call
Kicking Ass (DNC)
Political Wire
Pollster.com
Project 2010 (DGA)
The Next Hurrah
Senate Guru
The Stakeholder (DCCC)
The Thicket (NCSL)
Powered by: SoapBlox