Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Scott Walker redux versus a “RINO”?
Next Post: Progress, but still serious problems
Posted in:
Former Chicago Bears coach Mike Ditka is cheering for Erika Harold in the 13th CD GOP primary. He’s recorded a radio ad supporting Harold that will start playing on radio stations in the district, saying the former Miss America is a natural leader, a conservative and “tough.”
* Rate it…
Sounds like he literally phoned that one in. They couldn’t get him to a studio or at least have him use a landline?
* Meanwhile…
Erika Harold of Urbana, one of three Republican candidates in the 13th District, will speak Saturday at CPAC 2014, the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C., as one of the top 10 conservatives under 40.
“We are pleased to announce that Erika Harold has been selected as one of our top 10 conservatives under 40,” said American Conservative Union Chairman Al Cardenas. “Our focus at CPAC has always been to showcase rising stars in the conservative movement. The depth and diversity of young leaders like Erika provides hope for America’s future as we face tough challenges ahead.”
Considering how badly she’s polling and how little money she’s raised, she’s probably on the list because she’s become a national media darling.
* But she did provide a thoughtful, if needlessly wordy, answer to a question about campaign finance reform…
The current framework of federal campaign finance laws favors special interest political action committees and political parties at the expense of citizens, as the amount of money citizens can contribute to their preferred candidates is capped at a lower level than the amount of money political action committees and political parties are permitted to contribute.
Moreover, this disparity in contribution limits serves to protect incumbents and disadvantage challengers, as political action committees simply are far more likely to contribute to incumbents in order to gain an audience with these individuals.
Accordingly, I would support legislation that eliminates these contribution limit differentials.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 10:37 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Scott Walker redux versus a “RINO”?
Next Post: Progress, but still serious problems
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I’m still voting for Da-Davis.
Comment by an innocent observer Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 10:50 am
Erika needed to have run against Durbin.
That would have shaken it up substantially.
It would have built her reputation regardless of outcome and made her a major player.
Her decision to run against Davis was a poor choice.
Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 10:52 am
Sounded like he was calling from a pay phone at one of his Rush street haunts.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 10:54 am
When you land Ditka, you get what you get on his terms, unless you’re paying him a boatload of money. One take and one take only, I’m guessing.
I had him for a PSA radio spot once for a non-profit. No money, of course.
We recorded one take. He said “that was great, we’re done, thanks gang.”
“Uh, coach, that was good, but could we try….”
“You’re doing great work, God bless you. Thanks, gang, see you later…” and out the door, lol.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 10:58 am
Not sure anyone cares much what Ditka thinks about politics, especially in a central Illinois district. He doesn’t exactly have a reputation as a deep thinker.
Comment by Ron Burgundy Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 10:59 am
A Ditka endorsement might have a bigger impact if he wasn’t willing to cut one of his one-take ads for any product on the market.
– MrJM
Comment by MrJM Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 10:59 am
I actually found her answer to this question somewhat disturbing, especially since she is a lawyer.
First, to the part you quote, the limits for individuals is 2K and for parties/PACs, 5K. Hardly a huge difference. And, it would make zero impact on reforming the wild-west of unlimited outside spending by PACs.
Also, she doesn’t state whether she means to lower the limits for parties and PACs to the level for individuals, or raise the limit to the higher limit for parties/PACs. Obviously, raising it would help candidates - like attorney Harold - who have rich and powerful deep-pocketed friends vs. candidates who rely on small donor base.
Second, she said this immediately after what you quoted:
===I would not favor a constitutional amendment to regulate campaign financing, however, because such an amendment likely would conflict with First Amendment protections.===
For an attorney to have such a misunderstanding of constitutional law is shocking. Yes, the Supreme Court has ruled that the 1st Amendment protects campaign contributions - but that is why a constitutional amendment is the ONLY thing that can change that. Her reasoning about constitutional amendments conflicting with each other is nonsense. By her reasoning, doesn’t the 21st amendment conflict with the 18th amendment, and liquor is actually illegal? Does the 13th amendment conflict with the provisions of slaves counting as 3/4s of a person, so that slavery is still legal in this country? The whole purpose of the amendment process is to be able to change the constitution anyway, including putting limits on free political speech. How does this supposed “constitutional conservative” not understand that?
Comment by Big Debbie Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 11:03 am
Ditka’s politics are to the right of Attila the Hun, but he’s a true eccentric, too.
If you’ll recall, he cut a TV spot for Quinn last time out.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 11:04 am
Ditka will also be voting for Erika…
Oh, wait. My bad.
Erika has gone from irrelevant to oddity to “what?”
Erika will be great on TV or Radio. This Dopey run is a perfect audition for hollowness of the talking heads.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 11:04 am
A vanity campaign lands a vanity endorsement.
Comment by Whatever Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 11:08 am
I still love “Coach Ditka”.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 11:09 am
–A Ditka endorsement might have a bigger impact if he wasn’t willing to cut one of his one-take ads for any product on the market.–
The legend in the Chicago ad business is that some of the lower end brands you’ve inexplicably seen Ditka and MJ cut spots for over the years are in lieu of cash to cover losses on the golf course or at the card table.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 11:38 am
That was full-on insane
Comment by Raising Kane Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 11:49 am
That is a thoughtful and well-written piece by Blake on Rauner. Good find, Rich.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 11:50 am
Yeah, that’s definitely not the thread I thought I was posting to. To quote Oswego Willy, Dope!
Comment by Formerly Known As... Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 11:53 am
Someone woke up Ditka?
Comment by Wumpus Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 12:17 pm
Give it up Erika - nobody is going to vote for you no matter how much someone yells at them.
Comment by Doooode Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 12:49 pm
Erika would have been a great candidate in several areas in Illinois. But the good ole boy Republican network through central Illinois ain’t gonna let it happen
Comment by Tough Guy Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 1:56 pm
===But the good ole boy Republican network through central Illinois ain’t gonna let it happen ===
Another victim heard from.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 2:00 pm
Erika is involved in a Fool’s Errand. Wether it was upstate, downstate, central or western Illinois, taking on an incumbent and expecting GOP help in doing do with voter file and monetary support, it shows a complete lack of political acumen, naive expectations, hubris, and the egging on by Johnson staffers begging to be relevant.
Erika deserves what she is sowing.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 2:02 pm
Erika could be a star in the Republican party; but she received bad counsel to run against Davis. She’s just burning bridges in doing that. Even though she would be very unlikely to win, I (and most conservatives) could get excited and strongly support her running against Durbin.
Comment by Logic not emotion Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 3:16 pm
Vanillaman: Sorry. I could have just said +1 for your comment if I hadn’t overlooked it.
Comment by Logic not emotion Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 3:18 pm
C. If it weren’t Ditka, it’d be a D. The only thing he rifled through faster was “take me out to the ballgame” at Wrigley.
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Mar 6, 14 @ 4:25 pm
That was painful. I don’t really care for Erika but I hope she isn’t paying a lot of money for that spot.
Comment by ronmexico Friday, Mar 7, 14 @ 12:19 pm