46 Comments - 47th Ward - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 12:17 pm: I read an interesting story on Politico about how McCain’s Ayres strategy has failed in driving down Obama’s favorables. In fact, after nearly a month of all-Ayres-all-the-time attacks, Obama’s favorables have slightly increased. I suspect that is more true in Illinois. So yes, I think there is merit to your point. - wordslinger - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 12:28 pm: For McCain, I think the negative stuff has been ineffective, not because going negative is ineffective, but that McCain has employed ineffective negative (I sound like Don Rumsfeld there). Having said that (you try, it’s not easy), I doubt if it has hurt Republicans here, for a few reasons. The socialism stuff has been bizarre, like from another era. I bet it has just flew over peoples’ heads. We buy most of our junk from China. They’re communists, right? As long as they’re not shooting at us, I don’t think people care. And now the U.S. government has extended lines of credit or is going to buy up it seems half of the Fortune 100. Is that socialism? What exactly is McCain talking about there? That Obama’s a communist — a $600 million one? The Bill Ayers stuff resonates with the base, if my beer-drinking buddies are any indication (believe me, I find the guy repugnant, too). Gen. Powell said he didn’t like it, but I don’t know that anyone else is paying that much attention to the connection with Obama. But I am thoroughly astounded that McCain did not play the Rev. Wright card. Dumbfounded, honestly. That was raw meat for suburban and rural America, made to order. And Father Pfleger, too, to a lesser extent. Perhaps the only thing more incredible is that Wright and Pleger have kept out of the public eye for so long. I would not have bet a dime on that happening. - Leroy - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 12:29 pm: With the complete destruction of the opposition party in Illinois, the only way to purge undesirable incumbents will be via coordinated media smear campaigns. (see Todd and Rod) The party will be responsible for handling miscreants, the voters will just be along to re-enforce the decisions of the party bosses. - Bill - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 12:32 pm: I agree. They all seem so angry all the time from McCain down to the right-wing talkers. The closer the election gets the more shrill and frenetic they all get. The name calling by McCain is infantile and cost not only him but the down ticket candidates as well. - The Doc - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 12:35 pm: Agree with Rich’s assessment. McCain’s talking points regarding Obama’s ties to various questionable characters have a whiff of desperation, even if they may have some validity. For example, McCain has disproportionately harped on the likes of Bill Ayres as compared to Obama drudging up the likes of the Keating Five. - Will - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 12:39 pm: Has anyone found a better way to deal with ugly attacks than Obama? It always ends up hurting his opponent more than it hurts Obama. We saw it with Keyes, Hillary and now McCain. I think the big question is whether infrequent and first time voters showing up for Obama will vote down the ballot. That will decide more than a few elections this year. If I were a candidate this year I would have people outside the polling places (beyond the legal distance of course) handing out palm cards to reach the new voters who are walking into the polling booth without knowing most of the names on the ballot. That may not be the best use of resources in most elections but it will be key in this one. A lot of these new voters didn’t get those mailings sent to old voter lists and many new people will show up to vote even though no one knocked on their door to remind them. That last minute personal contact will be crucial. - DOWNSTATE - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 12:41 pm: 600 Million can buy anything even friends. - OneMan - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 12:41 pm: I don’t think it is accurate. I think the hit from ‘beloved senator’ is there but I don’t think the attacks are adding to that hurt. Why, Well I think the ‘beloved senator’ factor is strong enough that if that isn’t getting people the idea that McCain is being hard on him isn’t going to push too many folks over the edge. Economic issues are going to be a stronger force. Also for what it is worth the number of cross party yard signs I am seeing makes me think that isn’t the case. I am seeing a large number of signs for a Republican local judge candidate showing up at homes and businesses where the rest of the signs are for Democrats. It may be and likely is wishful thinking, I just don’t think the hits Obama has taken will make much of a difference here in his favor. - Rob_N - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 12:43 pm: I think it feeds into a meme about Republicans in some races… McCain has gone over the top against Obama, and that puts the presidential race into a certain perspective for folks who have a contradictory, much more positive view of Obama from having seen him “first hand”. As 47th Ward noted, there’s actually been an uptick in Obama’s favorables (and a downward trend in McCain’s) in the wake of those attacks. A big part of that is the disconnect between the caricature of the darkly negative attacks and the reality of seeing Obama in the debates and in rallies. In some of the local races, like Chris Prochno (R) running for State Rep, the beyond-the-pale mailers she’s been sending out against Mark Walker (D) feed into that sense that the GOP is frantic and willing to do/say anything this year. One of her mailers published his driver’s license number and home address — in a district-wide mailing — for any would-be identity thieves to have a field day with. And it appears that such antics are turning voters off to the GOP in a lot of traditionally R areas. Nobody likes the smell of desperation. That’s my opinion, but I’m supporting both Obama and Walker so your mileage may vary. - Pot calling kettle - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 12:44 pm: I think that the accusations do not match the Obama who has been in the news for the past 6 years. (for most people, at least) When the accusation is (or appears to be) so far off the mark, it hurts the accuser. I also think that since we no longer have straight party voting, the coattail effects are limited. Local legislators usually win if they take the time to let the voters get to know them. It is amazing how accepting most voters are of a wide variety of positions on issues once they are personnally comfortable with an incumbent. - Wumpus - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 12:48 pm: Obama optimistic, he has the media in awe of him, has been more positive McCain has run an negative campaign, perhaps he is frustrated with the media being in awe of Obama. A lot of the issues are not as simple and harder to explain. The Ayers issue is distant. Plus, people want to be affiliated with a winner and that is what Obama is acting like. Right now, people are not caring about Acorn alleged voter fraud, Ayers, etc. They care about the economy and unicorns that Obama is offering. - RJS - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 12:48 pm: Will, a lot of the newer voting machines alert voters when they have not cast votes in all races. The new Obama voters will get these alerts and then vote for the person with “DEMOCRAT” next to their name. Palm cards like you describe won’t be needed in those precincts with newer voting equipment. - Frank - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 12:54 pm: During the Primary - Hillary came within striking distance (less than 5%) in 12/102 counties. Hillary won 14/102 counties. –In Bond County, Hillary lost by 5 votes. 48-47% Obama. –In Calhoun County, Hillary swept 53-39%. –In Clark County, Obama won by 5 votes. 46 to 46%. –In Clay County, Obama won by 3%. –In Clinton County, Obama won by 4%. –In Fayette County, Obama won 48-46% –In Franklin County, Hillary won 49-40% –In Gallatin County, Hillary won 52-40% –In Hamilton County, Hillary won 47-39% –In Hardin County, Hillary won 54-33% –In Jefferson County, Hillary won 46-43% –In Jersey County, Obama won 48-47%. –In Johnson County, Hillary won 52-39%. –In Lawrence County, Hillary won 48-45%. –In Marion County, Obama won 48-46%. –In Massac County, Hillary won 51-42%. –In Monroe County, Obama won 49-47%. –In Montgomery County, Obama won 49-46%. –In Perry County, Hillary won 50-44%. –In Pope, Hillary won 53-48% –In Saline, Hillary won 47-42%. –In Union, Hillary won 47-38%. –In Washington, Obama won 48-47%. –In Wayne, Obama won 47-45%. –In White, Hillary won by 8 votes, 46-46% –In Williamson, Obama won by 32 votes, 47-47% (How many counties in NY did Obama win against Hillary - 1! In only 4 counties he came within, 5 points.) Interesting enough, most of the counties that Obama lost are from deep Southern IL. - 47th Ward - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 1:03 pm: OK Frank, I’ll go ahead and give McCain all of the Hillary votes from the counties you’ve listed, even though they are all Democratic primary voters. That’s maybe 50,000 “extra” votes for McCain, tops. Fairly insigificant when you consider more than 3 million votes will be cast. Plus, even the Hillary voters aren’t likely to completely abandon the Democrats down ballot, so I’m not sure what point you were trying to make, but your argument doesn’t jibe with Rich’s point about the McCain-Obama effect on the rest of the ballot. - washmyhands - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 1:03 pm: Right on target. Rarely vote Dem, but couldn’t stop myself…Obama, Durbin, Harper(and kept going “D”)…it was like eating chips. Good thing there is no straight party voting, or the Illinois Republican Party Elephant would be searching for a quiet place to die. - Fortunato - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 1:04 pm: Great post Frank since it is fact and it shows that one should not assume all Democrats in Illinois are Obamiacs. McCain is helping the GOP in Illinois because he is saying things about Obama many of the GOP leaders, and certainly the Illinois press, has been unwilling to say or afraid to say. The base is motivated and I simply do not see conservatives supporting Obama. - Just Observing - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 1:07 pm: Agreed. I voted against McCain, not for Obama. - Squideshi - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 1:23 pm: Rich Miller wrote, “But voting for someone, regardless of his/her opponent, is a serious act of support.” Yes, yes, yes, and yes. - Levois - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 1:23 pm: Whether or not Republicans ought to be worried now is irrelevant. They knew Obama was running for President since February 2007, if they had a plan they wouldn’t be worried about the Senator’s popularity. They shouldn’t even worry about what’s going on nationally, but worried about the state itself. Although the task would be difficult since Obama is running very well against McCain. - shore - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 1:27 pm: When gasoline was $4 a gallon this summer and chicago was experiencing a murder rate above that of our soldiers in Iraq, Senator Obama went to Berlin, and Paris. He’s not special and if his tenure in the senate thus far and the experience of the democrats here and in congress are any indication the shine is going to fade fast. This of course really hasn’t been made an issue nationally because national republican operatives now mainly come from the south where they run social wedge issue campaigns. That doesn’t seem to work in Illinois and seems to be less successful now at the national level. - Rob_N - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 1:34 pm: Chicago’s not supposed to be a war zone, shore. That murder rate’s a symptom of the failure of everything from policing strategy to the economy…. Soldiers that are KIA in Iraq are dying because our president put them in harm’s way, not because they live in Iraq. And Rich’s admonition was to avoid thoughtless talking points, like conflating murder rates with KIA rates. - Rob_N - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 1:36 pm: Louis, If “no one candidate dares ask… for sacrifice” … why has McCain been lambasting Obama for weeks for wanting to bring the upper tax brackets back to Clintonian levels? Seems to me that the wealthy GOP candidate wouldn’t be complaining so much if Obama wasn’t proposing that he’d have to “sacrifice” for the good of the country. One man’s “sacrifice” is another’s “responsibility”. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 1:40 pm: Let’s get back to the question, please. Louis, your response was deleted because it had nothing whatsoever to do with the question. Try again. - Louis G. Atsaves - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 1:42 pm: Rob, Simply put, McCain’s lambasting on that issue isn’t resonating with Illinois (or national) voters because “95%” of them won’t have to pay for higher taxes according to Obama. The rich guys will. The average voter thus gets the promised goodies without paying the tab. They do not sacrifice a thing. Instant gratification achieved! - Louis G. Atsaves - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 1:43 pm: Sorry Rich, I’ll give it another shot in a few minutes. - Pickles!! - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 2:12 pm: Thge republicans died in Illinois the day they put Alan Keyes on the ballot. Nothing McCain has said will hurt the party here any more or less. If this was a toss-up state, McCain could have made a difference on the republicans here. - 312 - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 2:36 pm: This election, I am TOTALLY blown away by my Republican (with a capital R) family members — they’d usually vote for Satan if he had an “R” behind his name, and not even blink. Now they’re seriously considering voting for Obama, they’ve fed up with watching their investments wither under Bush-conomics. Going down the ballot, I’m not so sure. But the fact they’ve pushed away the kool-aid when it comes to the top of the ticket… - Plutocrat03 - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 2:42 pm: By this time in the campaign I believe the majority have made up their minds and the charges and countercharges become lost in the haze. Therefore, I don’t think that the socialist/communist comments will hurt Republicans in Illinois or elsewhere. As far as this state is concerned, will you consider it an erosion of confidence of BO gets less than 70% of the votes cast? - OurMagician - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 2:43 pm: I am missing all the good Obama did for the state while a Senator. Since he spoke at the 04 Convention before even serving as a Senator, he in essance was running for 2008. I missed all the leadership Obama provided after FutureGen was cancelled. Of course, Biden has said let China worry about clean coal but that was just in a walking line where answers aren’t scripted. - Carl Nyberg - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 2:48 pm: I don’t see the GOP losing non-affiliated voters in a big way over this. Many non-affiliated voters will punish Republican candidates b/c of Bush. But I have a hard time picturing a non-affiliated voter who isn’t holding Bush against the GOP, but will be angered by McCain’s attacks on Obama. If there were anti-abortion Black voters who hated Arabs or Muslims and hated the Dem Machine (they had reason to be in the Bush camp), I guess I could see them getting tipped by McCain’s campaign. But how many pro-Bush Black voters are there at this point? The group of voters McCain may be losing is pragmatic Republicans. The GOP has been courting the hardliners (extreme positions on taxes, regulation and social issues) and daring the pragmatic Republicans to leave the party. I can see some of these pragmatic Republicans accepting GWB as an aberration. McCain was supposedly the “pragmatic Republican” candidate in the primary. So the pragmatic Republicans were expecting to get a campaign that resonated with them. The pragmatic Republicans expected McCain to run on a pragmatic platform and to show leadership and seasoning. Instead McCain has shown that he’s not serious about issues and he’s erratic and generally not presidential. I could see McCain driving pragmatic Republicans out of the party, especially in Illinois. Is there any point to voting in the GOP primary anymore? The primaries are dominated by kooks and the GOP candidates don’t win the big races, so it’s kinda more practical to vote in the Dem primary. Summary: McCain isn’t killing Illinois GOP candidates with non-affiliated voters; he’s doing his damage with Republican voters. In part this continues the pattern of the past, but b/c of McCain being considered a pragmatic Republican it’s more damaging than Bush/Rove telling the moderates and pragmatists they don’t matter. - The Unlicensed Hand Surgeon - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 2:55 pm: I guess I take the approach that Obama’s popularity in Illinois was always a given, and that anybody who wanted to watch a real contest would have to look farther down the ballot (assuming they live in an area where there’s a contested race, or in an area of the state where Obama isn’t popular). If Obama has a mega coattail effect in Illinois, then I guess that means that Illinois is such a blue state that all you have to have is a pulse and a (D) behind your name to get elected. I tend to believe that voters in Illinois are smart enough to support the heck out of Obama and still find a way to kick dirt on the mess in Springfield. I’ll give you a personal example: my in-laws, staunch Dems, voted early for Barack and voted ‘yes’ on the con-con question. I asked them why they voted yes on the con-con, and they said “to get rid of Blagojevich.” Obama’s presences at the top of the ticket won’t be enough to cleanse all the sins of the Dems in Illinois. The voters are smart enough to support our favorite son for president and show disgust for Springfield at the same time. The only weapon that the state GOP has to stop the bleeding is the rampant anti-Blago sentiment, and that may just be enough to stave off disaster. - Fan of the Game - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 3:04 pm: I think you’re wrong, Rich. For the most part, negative campaign tactics help (sadly). There are a few things at work that give Sen. Obama a HUGE lift in Illinois: 1. He’s from Illinois. Home-state (sort of) boy does good. 2. Illinois is a Democrat state at the moment. All statewides and both houses controlled by the Dems. 3. McCain isn’t running a campaign in Illinois. He knows he’s lost here, so he isn’t going to spend any of those public campaign finance dollars in the LOL. 4. The IL GOP had their coattails eaten by the donkeys a long time ago. No one in Illinois is helping McCain (wasn’t it Roksam who is touting “Obama voters for Roksam”?), and McCain isn’t helping the IL elephants. John McCain and the IL GOP have a lot more serious issues than negative campaigning. - Boone Logan Square - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 3:05 pm: Flailing maniacs don’t inspire confidence in voters. If Mark Kirk goes down next Tuesday, he can in part blame his loss on John McCain disgusting suburban Republican voters with his scattershot attacks on the socialist/terrorist/celebrity senator. (Same goes for Roskam and Biggert, though both look considerably safer than Kirk in the final days of the campaign.) - Some Guy - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 3:17 pm: If these tactics were costing the GOP votes, how could anyone tell? They’ve been bleeding IL votes badly, especially in the suburbs, for 20 years now. - doubtful - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 3:38 pm: John McCain’s negative attacks are affecting Republicans in all areas of the country, and that’s why you seem some Republicans even running ads about how they support or have worked with Obama. The ‘why’ is mostly a question of perceptions. John McCain was unique among Republican Presidential candidates in this cycle in that he largely remained untouched by the general disdain for the Republican brand. Regardless of whether one thinks it was earned or not, he had a good reputation and was well respected by people of various political stripes. His campaign threw that good will away and ran counter to everything people thought they knew about him. The preponderance of negative ads, many of which have been repeatedly debunked by non-partisan fact-checking outlets, belied the numerous statements that he would run a postive and honorable campaign. The depths his own campaign, and not just PACs, have sunk on his behalf has been staggering and most people just can’t accept that much cognitive dissonance. Obama’s best campaign tactic was to never become the scary, outrageous person the McCain campaign tried to make him out to be. He was cool, calm, and even agreeable during the first debate, while McCain’s selection of Palin, his multiple and varied positions on the economic crisis, and his fake campaign suspension just made him look reckless. Ultimately, McCain’s campaign behavior and his past image created a dichotomy, and people stopped believing that McCain was a bi-partisan maverick and that he really was just more of the same. That revelation created a lot of new Obama supporters, and the most zealous advocate is often the most recently converted one. McCain started the campaign with the ability to raise other Republicans up with his endorsement, but the near universal distaste with his campaign tactics has sent many Republicans to the Obama camp from Colin Powell to Chris Buckley and even, I’ll bet, some plumbers named Joe. - train111 - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 3:45 pm: On another forum, I was confronting someone about whether Senator Obama was a communist or not. I dredged up the words to Bob Dylan’s “Talkin the John Birch Paranoid Blues” which seems to really fit alot of the real rabid anti-Obama folk this time around. train111 - train111 - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 3:53 pm: A few lines: Well I was lookin’ everywhere for thos gol-darned Reds. I got up in the mornin’ and looked under my bed, Looked in the sink, behind the door, Looked in the glove compartment of my car. Couldn’t find them… Was lookin’ high and lo’ for them Reds everywhere, was lookin in the sink an’ underneath the chair. I looked way up in my chimney hole, I even looked deep inside my toilet bowl. They got away… Well I was sittin’ home alone an’ started to sweat, Figured they was in my TV set. Peeked behind the picture frame, Got a shock from my feet, hittin’ right up in the brain. Them Reds caused it! I know they did .. them hard core ones. Yes, the song is silly, but I find it a hilarious take on the Red-scare of the 60’s and it is just as hilarious when contrasted with all the Socialist/Communist accusations against Mr. Obama today. train111 - Rob_N - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 4:29 pm: Louis, this is only tangential to the topic (inasmuch as it perpetuates McCain’s spin against Obama)…. The “95%” of us making less than a quarter mil a year already have been footing the bill as the tax burden was shifted away from those who use the most government services to those who use the least. And yes, I do believe in responsible investment in my country. I’m proud to live in this great nation and I want to do my part to cover the costs of running it. But, like everyone, I don’t want to be forced by people wealthier than I to pay for more than my fair share — which is what has happened the last 8 years. To the point of Rich’s question, your spin, Louis, is symptomatic of the McCain problem. Giving a tax break to 95% of working families isn’t “socialism”. It’s fair and balanced. - Big Mama T - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 5:30 pm: Of course McCain’s attacks will hurt republicans primarily due to the fact most voters do not understand what he is talking about. Obamadrones think any comment is an attack. Good or bad. There are so many “newbies” sucked in by wave they are shocked when Obama gets attacked and that is only because they have never paid attention to an election campaign before. I think this election has been more mild than previous presidential campaigns. Geez. Even Hill & Bill’s comments were nastier in the primary. This has been a crazy election with too many emotional supporters being surprised by nasty comments. - Joshua - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 7:36 pm: While Obama’s popularity is certainly a factor, the economic pain felt by people throughout the state (and nation) will likely hurt the Republican brand, not just Illinois members of Congress. Also, a lack of enthusiasm for McCain and frustration among Republicans caused by the coming federal electoral landslide may temper GOP turnout in the state - Ultra50k - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 9:27 pm: Obama’s populist tax platform is buying him his serious support. I don’t think it’s so much a serious act of support for Obama as it is his populist tactics and rhetoric. Like most people I’ll be anxiously waiting for my tax cut, or refund check. When it doesn’t arrive or my taxes go up as I suspect they will… Obama’s serious support will seriously erode. I voted for the other guy in the senate race. It wasn’t a vote for whatshisname…just a serious vote against Obama. - T.J. - Thursday, Oct 30, 08 @ 11:18 pm: I voted for Obama in 2004 and have never regretted it. But it is inconceivable to me the rest of the other forty-nine states can look at our track record and say, “I want me somma that.” - elgin - Friday, Oct 31, 08 @ 6:47 am: There are Obama signs all over the place around here, but it doesn’t have anything to do with McCain’s attacks. Why would you think there’s a backlash? The attacks are effective, truthful and must continue. Republicans are in danger, but this is an election where they are supposed to be in danger. I don’t think it has anything to do with the presidential campaign. McCain is doing very well for a Republican candidate in a race where the Republican is supposed to lose by a landslide. - elgin - Friday, Oct 31, 08 @ 6:48 am: I should say Palin’s attacks… - ValleyGal - Friday, Oct 31, 08 @ 8:38 am: There are McCain-Palin signs in my little corner of Illinois and there is no love for the U.S. Senator from Chicago. He’s seen as too tight with Blago and in this rural area, that will hurt the Dems but our area compared to metro Chicago doesn’t really count. The Republican party is broken but not gone in Illinois. The negative campaigning on Obama’s supposed terrorism/socialism leanings will prompt some Republican votes around here. - VanillaMan - Friday, Oct 31, 08 @ 8:51 am: I voted for Obama in the primary and in the General. He has done nothing except run for president. So, although he got my support in 2004 - he didn’t prove an ability to be good in the job I voted him into. So he doesn’t get my vote next week. He has done nothing in office. So all those voters who look at results and not rhetoric, who voted for Obama in 2004 will not blindly vote for him again. He hasn’t done anything to recommend a re-election to the US Senate, let alone a vote for the White House. So Rich, you are not correct. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.