28 Comments - Ravenswood Right Winger - Thursday, Aug 24, 06 @ 12:26 pm: I’m calling shenanigans, Rich. Didn’t your recent blog entry ridicule the Green Party’s fundraising efforts? So are you saying that despite their alleged inability to raise funds, the Green Party could/will have an impact on statewide races? Vote Green in 2006: Only because the Libertarians in Illinois are screwed up!! - Wumpus - Thursday, Aug 24, 06 @ 12:43 pm: Well, people are so displeased w/ the major parties and some races will be close. RWW, if Whitney takes 3-5 % of votes, that could swing it to JBT. - Buck Flagojevich - Thursday, Aug 24, 06 @ 12:46 pm: The Green’s will get more votes than most people think. I for one am happy there is a third choice on the ballot. There are a lot of people who are not enamored by having to choose between Gov. Phoney and JBT. At least now you can cast a vote for Gov rather than skipping that race because neither candidate is a palletable choice. Look at a vote for the Green’s as being a vote for none of the above. - chinman - Thursday, Aug 24, 06 @ 12:53 pm: any party with some green is good. - moderate - half way between crazy and crazy. - Thursday, Aug 24, 06 @ 1:08 pm: agreed (with Rich) - DOWNSTATE - Thursday, Aug 24, 06 @ 1:40 pm: Will they be included in the debates?It is only right. - Ravenswood Right Winger - Thursday, Aug 24, 06 @ 1:46 pm: wumpus, I concur with your analysis. Green hurts Blago, could be enough to swing it to JBT. What will be interesting is to see post-election polling of those “lakefront liberals” to see if they voted for Whitney over Blago and Peraica/leave ballot blank over Prince Todd Stroger. - zatoichi - Thursday, Aug 24, 06 @ 2:17 pm: Liking this guy more and more. - Squideshi - Thursday, Aug 24, 06 @ 2:23 pm: You’ve got it all backwards. What we should be worring about is Blagojevich siphoning off enough votes to spoil the election for Rich Whitney. The Democrats are the only ones that can be considered spoilers in this race. Illinois Greens have been asking those in power (i.e. Democrats) to implement Instant Runoff Voting for years; and despite getting multiple IRV bills introduced in the Illinois General Assembly over the past few years, the Democratic majority on the House Rules Committee won’t let this be debated or voted upon. It seems that people like Mike Madigan don’t want to eliminate the spoiler effect in Illinois because it gives them a convienent excuse to limit their own competition. Democrats are the only ones with the power to implement IRV in Illinois, and they’ve been aware of this solution for years. They are the ones that have failed to fix this problem. Let’s place blame where blame belongs. Democrats don’t automatically own these votes–they need to earn them. It’s time to drop the entitlement mentality. Besides, Rich Whitney will be energizing a lot of new voters, who would not have otherwise voted and who certainly would not have voted for Blagojevich. - Chicken a la Rod - Thursday, Aug 24, 06 @ 2:24 pm: The debate sponsors are the real gatekeepers. Rich or another enterprising reporter reading this should make a round of calls to the League of Women Voters, Farm Bureau, and other sponsors of debates and candidate forums to find out whether they have invited (or will invite) all candidates. If not, voters deserve to know ASAP - in time to bring public pressure for fair, inclusive debates. - Bluefish - Thursday, Aug 24, 06 @ 2:45 pm: I think Wumpus and RRW may have it backwards. Whitney may ending up taking the votes of many disgruntled Dems who despise Blago and would have voted for JBT. In fact, if he gets the votes of everyone who is truly disgruntled with both parties/candidates, he’ll be the next governor. Of course, the vast majority of those folks are staying home in November, so no need to print up the Gov. Whitney stationary (on recycled paper I’m sure) yet. - Rich Whitney - Thursday, Aug 24, 06 @ 2:48 pm: Well, since you brought it up — and thanks, Rich M, for posting this — it just so happens that I spoke with Jim Anderson of the Illinois Radio Network today, which is the group sponsoring the October 2 debate set for Milliken University in Decatur. With apologies, he told me forthrightly that, as of now, I am NOT being invited into the debates, for several reasons. In part, he said it harked back to 2002, when the Jim Ryan campaign insisted that Libertarian candidate Cal Skinner not be invited, because “he can’t win and therefore he doesn’t have to be responsible for what he says.” I don’t think that “reasoning” applies to me even if we were to accept that as a valid reason for excluding Cal (which I don’t). I think that I have at least demonstrated that I am a serious candidate, and although I am not predicting a win, I don’t think it’s outside the realm of possibility. We are gaining support by the day. I at least have a David vs. Goliath chance — and I don’t think even Goliath had the same high disapproval ratings among the Israelites as Rod and Judy. He also indicated that it was hard enough to get Rod and Judy to agree to this and that he wasn’t going to spring a “surprise” on them. And he asserted that he had to do what the Network affiliates want (even though I informed him of at least one affiliate that I know wants me included in the debate). He said that there are a couple of things that could change his mind: 1) If Rod and Judy say differently, and 2) if either Craig Delamore, political editor, or Mike Krouser, news director, of WBBM Chicago say they want to include me. A third possibility is if I really started to pull some big numbers in the polls — as in double-digits. So if you believe that the point of view of all ballot qualified candidates should be presented to the voters, please help us put gentle but firm and persistent pressure on WBBM and/or other affiliates of the Illinois Radio Network and/or the Blago/JBT campaigns. We still have time to get this done. Whether you support me personally or not, if you support the principle of a fully informed electorate and the free marketplace of ideas, I respectfully ask for your help in this endeavor. Your efforts in this regard will be appreciated. And please don’t take it out on Jim Anderson — or if you do contact him, be polite and respectful. I disagree with his decision obviously, but at least he was up-front about it and was personally sympathetic. Let’s build up public pressure in a civil manner until we give him good cause to change his mind. Thanks for your consideration. The “other” Rich P.S. Damn! Two posts in one day! I must be becoming a Capitol Fax Blog junkie! - Garp - Thursday, Aug 24, 06 @ 3:10 pm: I think the green party being on the ballot benefits Blago. There are many disenchanted dems that will not vote for Blago and would have voted for JBT if they had to. With the green dude on the ballot they can go ahead and vote for him which will not help the Repub. Apparently, Blago’s people think differently since they are trying to get him off. Maybe I am wrong, but if I were with Blago I would want him on. - GreenieGirl - Thursday, Aug 24, 06 @ 3:48 pm: Some debate sponsors have a rule that a candidate must be polling a certain amount to be invited to the debates. So to get into the debates, Whitney must be included in the polls. As he said, we can put pressure on the debate sponsors, but I think also on the pollsters. Whitney could take some votes from JBT, too. He is the only candidate from Southern IL, and the only one who supports the right to carry. - Shallow Pharnyx - Thursday, Aug 24, 06 @ 4:25 pm: I think it is Nader all over again. I would consider voting green if they had a better chance. I think those disenchanted with Blago and not exactly thrilled by JBT will vote green. They would have voted for her if there was no other choice. I think JBT votes will be more effected by the greens than Blago. - Chicken a la Rod - Thursday, Aug 24, 06 @ 4:59 pm: Jim Anderson’s line is horsepucky. Illinois Radio Networks allowed an unelectable clown into their debate in 2002 - anybody remember some guy named Alan Keyes? Would you say he felt constrained by a great sense of responsibility for everything that escaped his mouth? Yet somehow the republic survived. I think any news organization that bars a candidate from a debate is a news organization in violation of the public trust. They are to report the news, not create it. By pre-selecting some candidates and barring others, the news organization puts itself in the position of influencing the news. Democrats, Greens and Republicans will each be on the ballot, and each party’s candidate should be invited to every debate. Simple as that. - Chicken a la Rod - Thursday, Aug 24, 06 @ 5:01 pm: Sorry, should read 2004 above. - Justice - Thursday, Aug 24, 06 @ 6:47 pm: It’s great to see Green on the ballot!! Let everyone hear what they have to say. From what I’ve seen so far, I like a lot of their positions. Not real comfortable with disarming the public, but that aside, I would like to see Rich in the debates!! - Angie - Thursday, Aug 24, 06 @ 8:42 pm: Third parties sound creative, but unfortunately, they tend to attract not just those who seriously want reform, but also those who are a little…you know…the tinfoil hat/black UN helicopters are coming, and that type of thing crowd. ‘Tis best to stick with one of the two mainstream parties, methinks. Or just run as an Indie. Like poor Joe Lieberman, who should just really come over and join us in the GOP. Joe, stop being a schmuck and just come on over already. - Disgusted - Thursday, Aug 24, 06 @ 11:33 pm: It’s believing that we should “stick with one of the two mainstream parties” that has gotten this state and our federal government in the mess they are in. Think outside the box for a change. I haven’t heard an original thought from either of the two major candidates all year. - Anonymous - Friday, Aug 25, 06 @ 12:18 am: Once a candidate is legally on the ballot (esp in highly restrictive IL), news and debate organizations need to stop pandering to politicians and selling out the public by demanding all candidates participate or no debate. Groups that pander or sell out the public should be called on the carpet by other groups. Is it any wonder Illinois has serious problems with corruption and abuse of power, given such spineless support of voter education? Just educating the public about Instant Runoff Voting would be a major achievement in thinking outside the box. - M.V. - Friday, Aug 25, 06 @ 1:53 am: Angie writes: “‘Tis best to stick with one of the two mainstream parties, methinks.” If the status quo works for you, that’s great. Go ahead and vote for Topinkjevich. You’ll get more of the same corruption, graft, dishonest, etc. I personally would like to see Whitney elected so he can turn the corrupt political machine on its head, fix the schools and improve the environment. But my vote reflects my values and your vote reflects yours. And I respect that. And for the record, as a Green Party member, I have yet to see anyone wear a tin foil hat, although I sometimes wonder if third-party-phobes such as yourself have one at the ready in the closet. The fact is, the people I’ve met in the Green Party are very intelligent, have real jobs (or are retired from them or are in college preparing for them), are raising children and care deeply about their communities. I don’t know how much more mainstream you can get. - Criminal Enterprise Called Illinois - Friday, Aug 25, 06 @ 2:15 am: GO GREEN! Rich is such a breath of fresh air! And from Carbondale, the land of those that “thought out of the box” before anyone in Illinois even knew what that meant. He will be fantastic for Illinois and downstate. He has a great team of bright, committed, moral and thoughtful campaign workers. Can’t get much better than that. Let the man in the debates. Who is the media to say otherwise? Journalists, report the news, don’t make policy. Ed Murrow must be rolling in his grave at the media’s consolidation of power and general decline in standards and investigative reporting. - Bill - Friday, Aug 25, 06 @ 7:48 am: Criminal, Is anyone in Carbondale ever sober? Party on,Garth! - Ravenswood Right Winger - Friday, Aug 25, 06 @ 8:03 am: Rich Whitney, it’s “Millikin” not “Milliken.” You’re costing yourself votes in Decatur!! - Smitty Irving - Friday, Aug 25, 06 @ 8:09 am: Two questions. Will Rich Whitney hold the winner to less than 50%? Will the Illinois Greens get into bed with the IL GOP, just like their PA cousins have with Senator Santorum? - Squideshi - Friday, Aug 25, 06 @ 8:57 am: The voters have a right to be informed about all 3 candidates on the ballot in 2006. Please send an email to James Anderson at the Illinois Radio Network, requesting that he include Rich Whitney in the debate. Mr. Anderson’s email address is jima008@aol.com - Greensschafer - Monday, Aug 28, 06 @ 11:42 pm: I’d like to add some clarifying remarks to some of the posts in this thread: 1) if there’s a Green on the ballot, it’s a toss-up as to who the votes will come from. I gathered 2,500 of the signatures and in the process talked to thousands (and thousands) of potential voters. Voter dissatisfaction is from both sides of the aisle. This isn’t the national election, and voters are not divided along the usual party lines, at least not downstate. I may be typical, thinking of voting for JBT and hating the thought so much that I’d all but decided that I was going to register as a write-in if we didn’t get a reasonable choice. That’s part of what kept me going in the signature drive. 2) Rich certainly won’t disarm the electorate; in fact I don’t personally agree with him on his take on 2nd admendment rights, but having heard his reasoning, and being swayed by intelligent arguments, I can move on the the other issues that will affect us more, like education, energy, quality jobs and ingegrity in state government (and certainly not by looking to more gambling as the solution the other two have come up with). This is one clear reason why he should be in the debates - let his views be hears so that his positions can be known by everyone and not just a few. He’s articulate and well informed and intelligent voters should appreciate the chance to hear that kind of discourse from a candidate. 3) the Republicans had no hand in our ballot drive, except to sign as often as the Democrats. I personally knew over half of the petitioners (or got the signatures directly) and knew by reputation and name most of the others; 40% of the signatures were gotten by foks I’ve known in the party since 2001. Whatever happened out East was out East and has no bearing here in Illinois, and I know that firsthand. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.