|
Ignoring the millionaire in the room
Tuesday, Nov 9, 2010 - Posted by Rich Miller * Subscribers already know what I found last week after talking to Bill Brady’s campaign and others about where and why Brady lost to Gov. Pat Quinn. “Social issues” seems to be a big part of everyone’s post-election analysis, although I think I’ve pinpointed that aspect of it far more for subscribers. * For instance, here’s Kent Redfield…
That was part of it. * Sean Trende, a Senior Elections Analyst for RealClearPolitics, published a nifty little map. The counties in blue are those that Mark Kirk outperformed fellow Republican Bill Brady. The counties in red are those where Brady did better than Kirk…  And his resulting take…
The DGA’s ads ran during the summer. They didn’t work. This is what happens when you write your analysis in DC and you only talk to fellow DC denizens who love to take credit for themselves. * Bernie thinks that creationism and Sheila Simon were in the mix…
* Progress Illinois thinks it was the ground game which got black and Latino voters to the polls…
62 percent of the Latino vote is pretty darned horrid. Rod Blagojevich took 83 percent of the Latino vote four years ago. * But Greg Hinz and I are the only two who pointed out the obvious…
It’s more than just random third candidates, however. Keep in mind that Cohen spent a fortune on this race. He wasn’t your usual third party also-ran. The Brady campaign told me a few months ago that they believed Cohen wouldn’t hurt them until he got more than 7 percent of the vote. I told them at the time that I thought they were wrong. They were. Let’s take a look at just two suburban counties. In DuPage County, Mark Kirk won by 57,338 votes and Brady won by 44,812. Third party candidates received 14,491 votes in the US Senate race, but third partiers and Scott Lee Cohen combined to score 20,188 in the governor’s race. Lake County saw the same thing. Kirk won by 36,247 and Brady won by 15,800. Third partiers got 9,451 US Senate votes and 15,148 gubernatorial votes. This actually happened all over suburbia. Lots of voters took a look at Quinn and decided they couldn’t be with him. But then they looked at Brady and, for various reasons (likely the social issues, subscribe for more detailed info on why) decided they couldn’t vote for him, either. So, they went with Cohen, who spent millions on TV, mail and radio. I told you weeks ago that when Cohen’s name was included in the polling, Quinn significantly closed the gap on Brady. For weeks, I refused to even run Rasmussen’s poll numbers until they included Cohen’s name in their surveys for that very reason. The Cohen factor was huge, yet it’s been almost wholly ignored out there. Scott Lee Cohen hated Pat Quinn. He got into the governor’s race thinking he could destroy Quinn. In the greatest of all 2010 ironies, Cohen ended up playing a major role in electing Quinn. I gotta wonder what he does for an encore. Any guesses?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
- dave - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:31 am:
I gotta wonder what he does for an encore. … Any guesses?
Running a recall Quinn campaign?
Mayor of Chicago?
- steve schnorf - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:32 am:
I’m wondering about state employees and their influence (friends and families, etc). In Sangamon, Bill won by about 7,000 fewer votes than Judy did four years ago. There were a lot of state employees who hated Blago, but felt that PQ was by far the lesser of 2 evils as far as they personally would be affected. Those 7000 are almost 40% of what Bill lost by.
I wonder if that happened in other counties with large numbers of state employees.
- Ghost of John Brown - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:34 am:
I have to think that the ground game, as mentioned above had more to do with it than anything. The ground game here being the union (SEIU, AFSCME and Teachers) had more to fear from Brady than from Kirk. I’ve heard numbers north of 10,000 people on the streets in the last few days campaigning for Quinn. If those numbers are accurate, it would be hard to beat.
The turn out in Cook County was just insurmountable.
- Unions Won It For Quinn - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:35 am:
I can’t believe all of this post-election analysis doesn’t mention unions at all. C’mon!!!!
MOST of Quinn’s money came from unions - AFSCME, IEA, PBPA, etc. They spent months absolutely pounding Brady with their members - much of it untrue scare tactic messages about Brady “…taking away their pensions…” or closing facilities. There were even fliers at police stations and city halls all over that state with these false pension warnings. Look at dropoff numbers in places like Sangamon County, which has tons of state workers. Kirk had to deal with little to none of that flak from the unions.
You can harp on the social issues all you want, but the fact is, if it weren’t for the unions, Brady would be Governor-Elect today. As he “leads” the state deeper into the abyss we’ve been headed to the last several years, we can all say ‘Thank You’ to the unions.
- Amalia - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:36 am:
i’m most interested in how Quinn did ward by ward, township
by township, to see what, if anything, as being done for him. while it is true that it is hard to get the average voter to sway for something at the top of the ticket, how much did the organizations actually want to hold all the cards during this most crucial of times, remap.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:37 am:
I credited unions in my subscriber wrapups, anon.
- just sayin' - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:41 am:
I think it should be noted that Kirk didn’t get that many more votes than Brady. Kirk got 63,195 more votes by the last count I see. That’s not exactly huge statewide. The differnce in many of those counties was tiny.
I don’t think too many general conclusions can be drawn re differences on social issuess. I think the real key is the fact Brady ran a particularly lousy campaign. Also, Brady was a chump and campaigned for Kirk, but Kirk avoided any tie to Brady except when he was down in the sticks at GOP events. Similarly, the State GOP was most concerned with Kirk.
- shore - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:41 am:
“social issues” is a cop out. If you go back to 2002 there were lots of democrats who won red states at the height of bush’s popularity in places like montana, new mexico, wyoming, ect. People like schweitzer and bill richardson won because they paid attention to local voters and did not run as dc democrats but as montanans or
new mexicans with bolo ties and cowboy boots rather than brooks brothers.
Brady made no attempt whatsover to run as Illinois governor the way 2002 democrats did in red states. His campaign came AFTER conservative bob mcdonnell won in blue/purple virginia and my guess is he saw that race and said, if he doesn’t have to moderate or be flexible neither should I. I don’t think jason plummer ever attended a non fundraiser/rally in the collar counties.
The problem with the scott lee cohen theory in the suburbs is that most suburban voters are highly educated people who follow issues closely, vote, want their voice to count and cohen was clearly a waste and that his lack of higher education and record hurt his case with them.
- John Bambenek - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:43 am:
With a margin of 20,000 votes, any number of things can be “blamed”…
For instance, in exit polls, voters who said corruption was important to their vote broke for Quinn. On the economy, it was more or less tied. In short, we didn’t win the two issues we ran on: corruption and jobs.
There were also organizers in Chicago who begged Brady for materials and resources to work it in the City and they’re saying they came up short. If Brady got 19% in the City, it would have gone the other way.
And downstate, several counties Kirk outpolled Brady… and in areas were being a conservative is an asset, not a liability.
I don’t by this social issues “emo”-ness because with such a small margin, any number of things could have made the difference.
And if moderate women who are scared because of Brady’s social issues on abortion broke for a guy who abused his wife and tried to ginsu a hooker… well, words fail me to describe that.
- Cynic Al - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:44 am:
@ Rich - you had it dead on. I was one of those voters who held his nose and voted for Cohen. I did not think he was qualified to be Governor, but I consciously made a protest vote because I felt like my choice was either someone who has proven he couldn’t do the job (Quinn) or someone who most likely couldn’t do the job and was scary to boot (Brady). Were it a race between Quinn and Brady, I most likely would have voted Brady and hated myself for it. A protest vote seemed the better way to go.
@ Unions - respectfully, Illinois should not be thanking unions. It’s pretty clear that there is an expected quid pro quo whenever unions support a candidate. Cut it any way you like, but unions are just another special interest group.
In the early days of the Blago administration, a member of AFSCME Council 31 told me, in essence, do what we want because we put Blago in office so he will do our bidding. After the deal that Quinn cut with AFSCME, does anyone really expect that he will put the State’s interest above that of the unions?
- Linus - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:46 am:
SLC encore: Maybe Cohen can run for president in 2012 and do for Obama what he did for Quinn - ??
- anon - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:47 am:
RE the red/blue county map showing where Kirk or brady ran ahead. Except for Chicago TV market and the university counties, I see no discernable pattern here to conclude Brady’s conservatism on social issues affected his margins over/under Kirk. As for Cohen, and his next move, is he the “new” Quinn, with money instead of populist issues driving his never ending quest for high office?
- Way Way Down Here - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:50 am:
==I gotta wonder what he does for an encore.==
I’ve got to believe it involves a local police department somehow.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:50 am:
===The problem with the scott lee cohen theory in the suburbs is that most suburban voters are highly educated people who follow issues closely===
Keep telling yourself that. The numbers show otherwise.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:52 am:
===Except for Chicago TV market and the university counties, I see no discernable pattern here to conclude Brady’s conservatism on social issues affected his margins over/under Kirk.===
Um, that’s more than half the vote.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:53 am:
Quinn won because he finally ran a winning campaigin. Brady did not even bother show up at two debates on Black radio…he deserved to lose.
My candidate, Rich Whitney had a sound platform, but no money. Doug Dobmeyer
- just sayin' - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:53 am:
Roskam, Walsh, and Hultgren all won too in districts with lots of suburban soccer moms. All are pro-life conservatives, pro-gun, etc.
The “he lost because he’s a conservative” is a crock and a cop out, especially this year.
Brady’s race was Brady’s for the taking. He lost on management skill, which is pretty embarrassing considering Quinn’s not exactly known for his own management skill.
- MrJM - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:54 am:
“I gotta wonder what he does for an encore. Any guesses?”
Scott Lee Cohen begins a campaign to legalize prostitution that inadvertently makes Sweetest Day a state holiday.
– MrJM
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:55 am:
–The problem with the scott lee cohen theory in the suburbs is that most suburban voters are highly educated people who follow issues closely, vote, want their voice to count and cohen was clearly a waste and that his lack of higher education and record hurt his case with them. –
Cohen got about 88,000 of his 134,000 out of Cook and the Collars.
But as someone who lives in the suburbs, thank you for your high opinion. Tell me, what’s wrong with my neighbors?
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:55 am:
just sayin’, you need to subscribe.
Walsh only won one Cook township. He actually underperformed Brady’s margins in all of suburban Cook.
- MSM H8R - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:55 am:
Strong analysis, Rich. We don’t get that in-depth without this site.
For the encore, I’m thinking Cohen will continue to throw rocks at the throne and dump the rest of his money into a recall campaign.
- you - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:57 am:
You can’t underestimate the chicago ground game. The ability to case highly populated neighborhoods with buses and bring people to the polling place can add tens of thousands of voters who normally would not have voted. Nice weather helped that strategy a lot.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 11:58 am:
===You can’t underestimate the chicago ground game. ===
Correct.
However, you also have to look at where Brady’s victory model went awry. It was the Cook suburbs, not Chicago.
- Unions Won It For Quinn - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 12:13 pm:
Cynic Al, you clearly missed my pretty obvious sarcasm, which might explain that vote for Cohen.
- kanah - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 12:15 pm:
RealClear Politics’ map shows Brady exceeding Kirk in Will Co. I believe Kirk beat Brady by 3000 votes there… so it should be blue.
It is incredible to me that what everyone thought were Brady’s biggest challenges coming out of the primary- appealing to suburban voters, particularly with regard to social issues- were still one of the main reasons he lost.
One of the main biggest missions of the campaign should have been to address this obvious liability. It failed in that important mission.
- chiatty - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 12:16 pm:
Putting the Cohen factor aside for a moment, it’s clear to me that Quinn eked out a win for two reasons. First, it took a while for voters to figure out who Brady really is. The “who is this guy” campaign was a big part of this success story. People began to figure out that Brady was a cipher in the legislature, with only one real legislative victory in his entire career, but that he was also a person with very conservative views, to the extent that it wasn’t much of a stretch to think that he was too “extreme” for the job, a label the Dems love to put on a Republican. The second factor is probably just as dominant: The Democrats have a much better organized army of workers who know how to get the vote out. Labor is a big part of this, of course, but it’s not the only part. The right continues to demonize unions for good reason: unions continue to bedevil Republicans on election day.
- Wally - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 12:16 pm:
So, anybody from the Chicago area, what grade would you give the Brady campaign for the city/suburbs effort? Getting literature out, sign placement, rallies, media interviews, etc.
- Irish - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 12:17 pm:
I am not saying that Cohen wasn’t a factor. However I thought I saw a moderate vs conservative theme. Republicans do well with, and the voters seem to like, moderates. Jim Edgar, Jim Thompson, and George Ryan worked well with both sides of the aisle. Neither of them went too far right in their platforms or agenda. If one looks at gains union and state workers have made a lot of times they have come from a Republican Governor. I would guess that union employees have done better with Republican Governors than they have with Mike Madigan.
For some reason the Il. Republican party does not follow history nor do they look at any statistics. They have hurt themselves everytime they get the idea that a conservative or ultra-conservative has a chance in Illinois. Keyes was the most obvious example but I think Bill Brady was also a victim of this. I believe the map bears this out. Towards the end of the campaign Kirk made it a point to distance himself from the right wing and Tea Party factions of his party. Brady, who had moved to the middle during the middle part of the campaign, began to drift right and by the time election came he was considered by many to be conservative in his social views. Some of the statements he made that gave some what they thought was a peek at his fiscal views, ie; right to work, cuts across the board, cuts to education, etc., also pushed him into that conservative position.
It is my belief that this caused voters to turn away from Brady, Those that couldn’t bring themselves to vote for Quinn, picked Cohen. It would be interesting to know how many didn’t cast a vote in the Gov race. It would also be interesting to know why those that turned away from both major party candidates didn’t choose Whitney. Had I not found a clothespin I would have voted for Whitney. After all he had an actual plan and no record, alleged or otherwise. Could it be that the votes for Cohen were to illustrate to what depths voters would go NOT to vote for either major party candidate?
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 12:19 pm:
===Putting the Cohen factor aside for a moment===
You cannot do that.
Try to focus on the actual numbers, rather than your preconceived notions, please.
- Anonymous ZZZ - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 12:21 pm:
Wally, in terms of efforts in Chicago, I’d give the Brady campaign a D. No, make that a D-.
- unspun - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 12:26 pm:
After watching Cohen’s post-election interview (yes, I had serious free time that day) I’m left guessing what he’ll do next. His tone was one of exasperation with the process, the media, and the voters. He took zero credit for his defeat. Anyway, he’ll either dump a zillion more dollars into another campaign in hopes of garnering 5% vote while assassinating Quinn’s character, or he’ll get back to the business of ripping off the people that didn’t vote for him, while knifing prostitutes for sport. Tough call.
- Vote Quimby! - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 12:29 pm:
==I gotta wonder what he does for an encore==
SLC spent a lot of money and time to (indirectly) elect Quinn. I guess a job at DCEO or IDOT is next…
- D.P. Gumby - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 12:47 pm:
Brady ran a full page ad in the SJR the Sunday before the election trying to reassure State Workers. That seemed to indicated that they knew they were having problems in Sangamon Cty. The map shows that he did–interesting since part of his district is, I’m told, in Sang Cty.
- Statesman - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 12:49 pm:
Critical issues:
1. Union Protecting their kind.
GOTV efforts and ground game. They were outgunned in Crook County. They rallied the mattresses and the pasta and made it happen just like a scene out of Godfather. It’s war!
2. Gender Factor vs. Social issues:
enough has been said here about that.
3. The Silo effect- like the downstate crowd that they were- the BFI campaign ran like the silos that are too common downstate. Communicatiion is key North of I-80 and there was little of that. Paid staffers dropped the corn husks.
4. The ‘good R-bad R’ Factor-
Hispanic outreach consisted of partnering with a known Blago deal maker (J.O and D.M) who worked to slam Kirk against Ali G (bad R) While providing access to Hispanic activist groups and touting Brady as a Hispanic-friendly GOPer. (good R). Ok- guess Ochoa forgot to send that memo to the Hispanics or his impact is loosing it’s touch now that the hair is headed for the slammer.
Sure there are more.
- cermak_rd - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 12:50 pm:
Wally, as someone from the burbs (Berwyn) I’d call Brady’s campaign MIA. I never saw any sign (other than one billboard) that he was running for anything around there. I don’t watch a lot of TV and lately I’ve not been listening to a lot of English language radio. I heard a number of Quinn, Ginnoulios, and Kirk commercials on Spanish language radio, but no Brady. Got canvassed by Tobolski people who also encouraged me to vote for Quinn. Nada from Brady.
- anon III - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 12:56 pm:
All these comments are very interesting and kind of inside-baseball. Just a comment on the obvious: we have a minority Governor-elect. Neither Quinn nor Brady obtained a majority of the votes.
Single member districts like state-wide for governor are supposed to enforce political consolidation, but the age of u-tube and the internet is not the age of the quill pen and movable type. It does not seem to work any more.
Would we be better off with non-partisan races for state offices with a runoff for the two strongest candidates? What would have happened in the 2010 cycle if the governor’s race had been non-partisan?
- Wally - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 1:02 pm:
Just amazing that a great opportunity is right in front of you, and the Chicago area Brady campaign was so lackluster.
I don’t think money was the issue. Overconfident? Complacency? Mismanagement?
- LouisXIV - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 1:14 pm:
It was the puppy bill that did in Brady. Not paying taxes (even if he did not owe them) did not help either.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 1:15 pm:
Wally, Brady and Kirk spent a lot of money on TV in the Chicago area. But in the Cook suburbs in recent years, the Dems just outhustle the GOP on the ground. There’s a lot of folks who want to be asked for their support, face to face, or at least see a presence in their neighborhood, and the Dems do that a lot better up here.
That wasn’t always true. Edgar was pretty strong in the Cook suburbs and the city. The GOP had the parts of an organization going for a while with O’Malley, O’Grady, Dvorak, Stephens, Maltese, etc., but for reasons innocent and not-so it’s fallen apart in recent years.
- cermak_rd - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 1:18 pm:
Over-belief in the polls. I suspect he saw that he was winning and determined that a Chicagoland operation would cost him money that he didn’t have to spend.
I’m not sure anyone foresaw what a good turnout Cook would have this year. I also don’t think that many people have come to terms with the fact that many of the Cook ‘burbs are fairly blue now. Evanston, Berwyn, Stickney, Oak Park, Maywood, heck I think even Cicero went Dem. Some are still Red like Hanover Park and Schaumburg, but not as much as they once were. Edgar was able to win by getting a lot of suburban cook votes and then piling up the kind of results in Dupage that Dems get in city wards.
- Wally - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 1:22 pm:
Louis——–I wish the Brady campaign would have addressed the tax issue and quickly made it a non-issue. That was puzzling to me since it was a simple, understandable explanation.
The powers to be in the Brady camp must have thought otherwise. Also puzzling is why they did not strongly consider the opinion of Rich and others about the SLC impact. Guess they were going to do it “their way!”
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 1:43 pm:
–I wish the Brady campaign would have addressed the tax issue and quickly made it a non-issue. That was puzzling to me since it was a simple, understandable explanation.–
It is simple and understandable and that’s why it honks people off. Ask Alexi.
- Phineas J. Whoopee - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 1:52 pm:
Too me, Brady received a higher amount of union household votes than I thought he would. It just shows how upset some people truly were. Quinn should have beaten Brady bigger but the Reagan Dems are still around.
I don’t think there was anyway Brady would have gotten the Cohen votes. They were people who couldn’t vote for Quinn or Brady and would have went to the Green or Libertarian or even back to Quinn in a one on one.
I always thought women would break for Quinn in the end.
From the very beginning, I wasn’t going to let flawed polls hoodwink me into thinking the union, women and minority vote isn’t unbeatable in this state. Brady had to change one of those factors and almost pulled it off by getting disenchanted white union members to come along.
I guess I give Brady credit for sticking too his beliefs and crazy gluing himself to his ultra-conservative positions but it did cost him the election.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 1:54 pm:
I have stated many times on this blog I think Jerry and Co. blew this election, and I think Rich points out here why, again, Paid Campaign Staff lost this election for Bill Brady.
When Rich pointed out the “SLC factor” here before election day, I had to admit, until that moment, I will say I missed it until he pointed it out. Rich made it clear that SLC was hurting Brady, and you would have thought a change in course would be considered. It never happened, - Staff Decision …
The SLC vote DID turn out to be a difference in the margin of the LOSS … by the Brady Staff, along with the poor suburban numbers, compared to Kirk.
Where I veer from Rich and from the Brady Staff, is that the real numbers, real meaning votes, indicate at a 50% turnout, there are votes left on the table, and the decision to be beaten, and beaten badly, on the ground, is a huge factor in Bill Brady returning to the IL Senate. I would say even that a lack of gound game was the last ingredient with all the other factors, that made the cement shoes to sink Brady in the water.
Where my frustration comes in with all these factors leading to the Brady loss, is that someone was asleep at the switch. Rich points out he, also, talked with Brady Staff about the SLC factor and their “model” still had Brady safe up to 7%, never dreaming even 1% of that 7% was a vote LOST that Brady was already counting on to be against Quinn, meaning, that Brady never thought a vote for SLC would take from their vote totals, or margins. That was a death nail in the campaign.
Factor in that nearly 50% of the electorate didn’t bother to vote at all, and the Brady Staff had no way of executing a ground game to counter the Dem ground game to get ID’d Dems to the polls no matter what, you can not over-state the LOSS by the Brady Staff, to the victory of Quinn.
I also take nothing away from the “too conservative, women were not friendly to Brady, minorities came ‘home’ to Quinn” mantra out there. Again, agree 100%. However, come election day, the Brady Staff no way of countering those variables, and further, were hoping the numbers in the polls (gotta hate polls that fuel strategy, in the face of countering facts to the polls!) were going to ring true in their region-by-region vote splits.
Reading all of this and digesting, I come away witht he following;
The Brady Staff felt in their polling, the breaking votes were within the model for victory.
There wasn’t a need for a ground game, unlike the primary, because all the breaking votes are going to Brady.
SLC will stay below a number that can defeat Brady.
Women and minorities will not come back to Quinn in great numbers to beat the model to victory.
Plan for Transition Team.
Lower turnout, and a lack of knowing/controlling/countering the votes Quinn brought to the polls with the Dem ground game did Brady in, by women, by labor, ideology … and Brady was Brady …Brady did what a candidate is suppose to do, the Paid Campaign Staff didn’t find his votes … unlike the Primary Election.
- The KQ - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 1:55 pm:
I like to use my Mom as “Joe six-pack”. She is a suburban senior who reads the Trib (because it has the best coupons and the local grocery ads) she gets all of her new from NBC, and she has the TV on all day for background noise. Her comments about the campaign were consistent: Why isn’t Brady answering all of these negative ads? Or “Surely that can’t be true about Brady”. From that perspective, the Brady campaign failed to address the onslaught of ads from the Quinn campaign.
- Bill - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 2:01 pm:
Thanks, Scott Lee!
- Newsclown - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 2:06 pm:
We’ll know what Cohen’s next plan is, if he moves his legal residence into the 22nd district. Imagine if an Oberweis had done that, put serious money on one, relatively small target. Look for those kinds of guys to start test-driving the recall system in the near future. Not that it is sure to work, but just the threat of it, and the tangling up it causes, could do enough damage.
Ny new pet theory is that the future pattern for all our state elections is to fight it by proxy thru sock-puppet third party candidates, in order to lower the percentage of votes the biggest winner needs to win.
- JakeCP - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 2:06 pm:
I agree with Dave..I could see him running for mayor of Chicago. However I don’t know how formidable of a candidate he would be..
- Tom - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 2:09 pm:
ok–My rant: Could we please stop quoting Kent Redfield and Paul Green as the experts on campaigns. To my knowledge, neither has run a modern day campaign. They are likable indiviuals but have no clue as to why voters did what they did. Lazy reporters continue to quote them becasue it’s easy. They should go to the people who run campaigns for a living…like Rich does..so you might actually get a valid opinion. I will step off my soapbox now.
- irisheyesrsmilin' - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 2:15 pm:
No, no mayoral race, but…
- Wally - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 2:21 pm:
Wordslinger, Alexi’s tax situation was not the same as Brady’s. The result may have been that neither paid taxes in a particular year, but the reasons were different.
Plus, Alexi was on record as wanting an income tax increase so Kirk could effectively use that against him. Brady, not so much.
- Statesman - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 2:22 pm:
“Where my frustration comes in with all these factors leading to the Brady loss, is that someone was asleep at the switch. Rich points out he, also, talked with Brady Staff about the SLC factor…”
The often heard quote among the paid staffers was:
“A vote for SLC is a vote from Quinn”. Really?
Well- we NOW know otherwise. Mismanagament and hubris to the umpteenth degree on many fronts there.
- Rambler - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 3:00 pm:
==[Brady’s] campaign team assumed that independent Scott Lee Cohen would pull votes from Mr. Quinn. Wrong. As I see it, any race involving an incumbent is a referendum on that incumbent, and any third candidate just splits the anti vote.==
So then Teddy Roosevelt helped Taft, John Anderson helped Carter, Ross Perot helped GHW Bush, Ralph Nader helped the de facto incumbent Al Gore, and Rich Whitney helped Blago.
The reality is that third-party effects are complicated and should be taken on a case-by-case basis. And the effects often remain murky even after the post-election analysis.
==Let’s take a look at just two suburban counties. In DuPage County, Mark Kirk won by 57,338 votes and Brady won by 44,812. Third party candidates received 14,491 votes in the US Senate race, but third partiers and Scott Lee Cohen combined to score 20,188 in the governor’s race.
Lake County saw the same thing. Kirk won by 36,247 and Brady won by 15,800. Third partiers got 9,451 US Senate votes and 15,148 gubernatorial votes.
This actually happened all over suburbia.==
Actually third-partiers in the guv race outpolled those in the Senate race statewide, 268,000 to 203,000. But Brady outpolled Kirk in a lot of those counties.
It does seem likely to me that Cohen helped Quinn slightly, but that’s largely because Whitney was already in the race. Left leaners had somewhere else to go besides Quinn. Cohen gave the others somewhere to go besides Brady.
But of course that’s speculation. And keep in mind that Libertarian Lex Green garnered more than 34,000 votes — far more than Quinn’s current advantage.
- IrishPirate - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 3:02 pm:
I think Cohen should ask Governor Quinn to appoint him to a number of unpaid advisory positions on various boards.
1. Domestic Abuse Council
2. Drug Abuse Council
3. Sexual Exploitation Council
4. Mental Health Council
5. Creating Jobs for Election Consultants Council
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 3:12 pm:
===Actually third-partiers in the guv race outpolled those in the Senate race statewide, 268,000 to 203,000===
The numbers I have are Senate third party candidates 223,521. Governor third party candidates: 133,918, plus independent Cohen’s 134,219 equals 268,137.
…Adding… Kirk outpolled Brady by 63,195 votes statewide. Cohen and the third partiers combined received 44,616 more votes than the Senate third partiers. With me so far? OK, now subtract that from Kirk’s margin over Brady and you get 18,579, which we can pretty safely assume is mostly due to the “suburban/social issues effect.” That’s not quite enough to win for Brady. The rest of the “credit” goes to Cohen.
- OldSmoky2 - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 3:23 pm:
=== So, anybody from the Chicago area, what grade would you give the Brady campaign for the city/suburbs effort? Getting literature out, sign placement, rallies, media interviews, etc. ===
So far as I know, and I think I would have known, Brady didn’t make a single appearance in Lake View or Uptown. I never heard of him being anywhere near here either, at least no closer than the Civic Club and the Tribune offices downtown. Never saw any Brady signs or any visible ground campaign. Quinn was here a lot in these neighborhoods, at least six or seven times within a mile or so, and Cohen put up a ton of signs. Brady did way worse than other statewide Republicans all over the lakefront on the North Side.
But in an election that close every edge everywhere matters, so yeah, if there’s no Cohen and nothing else changed, Brady is governor.
- Rambler - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 3:24 pm:
Senate 203,000 for the six-year term
Guv 268,000 for the “minor” candidates
(rounded numbers)
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 3:27 pm:
===Brady didn’t make a single appearance in Lake View or Uptown.===
I would hazard a guess that if he had shown up, he would’ve simply energized Democrats even more. The difference with Quinn going into Downstate was that he almost always went as “the governor” and not “the candidate.” And when he did that, he had truckloads of goodies to hand out. It lessened the backlash.
- downstater - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 3:32 pm:
Social issues were not the deciding factor. The hold on this State by the unions was the key. They got their voters to the polls on election day. Some of the collars and downstate counties that should have had high turnout didn’t do their jobs. How many Republican precinct committeeman were on the phone making sure their voters got to the polls? I guarantee you the unions did it. I know the IRP made a state effort but you need your neighbor who you have to see all the time to call you and check that you voted. The unions did it, the Republicans didn’t do as well. I still think that less than 5 votes a precinct in the state is not a mandate on anything. I think most people felt shell shocked on Wednesday to find out that nothing had changed. I have heard more people talk about leaving the state. There are rumors that Caterpillar will leave if a tax increase is passed. I have no idea if that rumor is true. Caterpillar leaving would devastate Peoria and Decatur. That may not matter to Chicago but those tax dollars and union jobs will be gone. Anyway, nothing anyone says will change the mind of those who want to believe that no conservative can win in this state and push that agenda. I’m willing to wait four years before I head South to a state that wants jobs and business because Illinois is likley to be so messed up that no one will vote for the incumbents in 2014. You can’t draw districts around voter rage that has not yet reached its full potential
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 3:36 pm:
===The hold on this State by the unions was the key. They got their voters to the polls on election day. ===
According to the exit polling, 26 percent of all voters said they belonged to a union household. That’s down from 32 percent four years ago.
- Statewide - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 3:56 pm:
I think Scott Lee Cohen did not win or lose this election for anyone else. I think Pat Quinn won a very challenging re-election campaign and Bill Brady’s candidacy failed to unseat him.
SLC’s percentage of the statewide vote was 4%, a number that shows up in numerous counties up and down the state, including Cook. And the suburban vote was all over the place based on the strengths of the candidates versus their opponents, regardless of party.
In DuPage County, for example, some Republicans did hugely well and some Democrats did hugely well. On each side, the hard-line party base vote was as low as 30-33% in some races. There is now a big swing vote in the suburbs whether or not third party and independent candidates are in the race.
Look at the DuPage County results for Republican statewide candidates: Judy Baar Topinka 179,970 votes. Dan Rutherford 171,550. Mark Kirk 163,391. Bill Brady 154,537. Steve Kim 111,385. Robert Enriquez 93,742. Bill Brady simply did not do well enough there.
In many statewide races there are protest votes going to the third party and independent candidates, sometimes a lot, but a good candidate can still earn the votes they need to win.
The huge reason Bill Brady under-performed the three Republicans above who got more votes in the DuPage County example was Brady is too extreme for the suburban swing voter.
Pat Quinn ran a good campaign to beat the odds and stun the pundits who are still looking for the “why?” Pat Quinn earned more support than Bill Brady, even in The Year of the Republican Tidal Wave. That’s your “why.”
- Rambler - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 4:11 pm:
==Kirk outpolled Brady by 63,195 votes statewide. Cohen and the third partiers combined received 44,616 more votes than the Senate third partiers.==
I’m referring to the six-year term, not the 2-month term.
==OK, now subtract that from Kirk’s margin over Brady and you get 18,579, which we can pretty safely assume is mostly due to the “suburban/social issues effect.”
That’s not quite enough to win for Brady. The rest of the “credit” goes to Cohen.==
In the two races there are nine listed candidates, all with their own assets and liabilities. To attribute any particular difference to one candidate or one “effect” alone is a naive approach, in my view.
Given all that, I tend to agree with you that Cohen likely gave Quinn a small boost. The same could be said of many other factors.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 4:24 pm:
===The same could be said of many other factors. ===
Perhaps, but they’re not quantifiable.
- rudy - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 5:57 pm:
SLC = cable TV political talk show host
- Wensicia - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 6:03 pm:
Cohen is not going to try to run for anything in the near future, but he might try to buy into a radio gig.
Brady made two mistakes, in my opinion. He couldn’t tell us his plans to reduce the deficit and told anyone who asked him that voters didn’t care about social issues this election. Up here on the north side of the state, we care very much about social issues. To me he appeared rather condescending.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Nov 9, 10 @ 7:59 pm:
Our corrupt spoiler election system works again to keep the powerful in power.
CA recently approved an open primary, which would force private parties to conduct their own candidate selection system (caucus, leaders picks-what’s new, multi candidates, etc.) at their own expense, instead of getting taxpayers to pay for their private party elections.
An open primary means the top 2 candidates run against each other in the general election, likely rein in the far left and far right of the duopoly party system.
Could voters really handle more than two parties to choose from in an open primary? Wouldn’t voters/taxpayers prefer our corruptable spoiler system that mandates us to pick a party in the primary if we want to vote in the private party primaries paid for at our expense?
- waitress practicing politics... - Wednesday, Nov 10, 10 @ 8:16 am:
state employees are a very small percent of voters in illinois, it was the union workers totaled together that helped Quinn.
Now Edgar is weighing in and blaming Brady’s views.
I think it was Edgar’s own unwillingness to help Brady and the weakened GOP that contributed to Bready’s loss in Illinois.
What is next for Cohen? Going back to work now that he has name recognition, his businesses should do better.