69 Comments - Brennan - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 12:07 pm: The RNC is being urged to also withdraw any endorsement for Charlie Crist in Florida by former Governor Jeb Bush. The RNC must be getting a lot of backlash from supporters. - ...sigh - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 12:19 pm: I was at Pat Hughes’ announcement. The only people there who I recognized were the Jack Roeser crowd. And if the previous performance of Jack’s endorsed candidates is any indication, Hughes is doomed. - The Prophet - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 12:23 pm: It would be interesting to see anything of “epic proportions” coming from Andy. Something “epic” would surprise the bejeezers out of me. But, hey, what do I know? Maybe Bob Kjellander or Big Jim have agreed to serve as his campaign manager? - The Doc - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 12:24 pm: ==Republican National Chairman Michael Steele has withdrawn his sole endorsement for Mark Kirk for the U. S. Senate== Kirk’s candidacy just got more credible. It defies logic that, in a deep blue state, a proven GOP winner like Kirk would not be given every available resource to snatch a senate seat that has symbolic importance due to the Obama factor. If the GOP can embrace a moderate in Florida for an open senate seat, why not here? - Speaking at Will - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 12:27 pm: Mckenna and Epic. Those two words in the same sentence are only possible if the word “Failure” is also involved. - JonShibleyFan - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 12:29 pm: Steele is a joke. Small victory for Kirk. - shore - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 12:29 pm: rich did you delete my post? Steele should go to mississippi, talk to haley barbour and learn to repeat after him “you get power by learning to let republicans in liberal areas run as moderates”.Worked in 1994. - Brennan - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 12:31 pm: Politics in the era of hope and change: National Parties still listen to their contributors. Shocking. - proud vet - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 12:39 pm: Rich, did you find any source suggesting that Steele ever endorsed Kirk? I looked all over the web and the RNC site. I could only find something where Steele complimented Kirk as a candidate, but no official endorsement. If Roeser has no more than a claim, isn’t posting this here a little irresponsible? - ZC - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 12:40 pm: Hee. A year before the election is a long time. Not saying it _will_ happen, but there’s at least a 20-25% chance the Tea Baggers will turn on the Republican party, and eat it up in the name of principle, and wind up helping the Dems. Wouldn’t it be great, if the Tea Baggers helped Alexi win? Fingers crossed! - Rich Miller - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 12:46 pm: shore, yes, I deleted it. Profanity. - VanillaMan - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 12:51 pm: Tea Baggers Calling your neighbors this is disgusting and insulting. It is a dirty frat boy term that doesn’t enhance any meaningful debate. It was intended to be an insulting term, and it shouldn’t be used here. - VanillaMan - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 12:52 pm: Not that I am Rich - but it gets me angry. It isn’t right. - Greg - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 1:01 pm: I don’t know, Vman. Terms like “tea baggers” and “nobama” might actually do us a service–their use indicates that one should ignore the speaker. If rude people walked around with “rude” stamped on their foreheads, we’d all be better off. - Bubs - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 1:05 pm: McKenna’s campaign will be heavily reliant on two things: (1) expensive tv ads, and (2) Matt Murphy exciting crowds with his excellent stump speeches. But there are some major-league potholes ahead for these two. If what I’m hearing is correct, it ain’t gonna be pretty. - Segatari - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 1:18 pm: McKenna will not win, much of the IL GOP problems in this state can be traced back to his poor leadership pushing lackluster candidates that had no desire to win and abandonment of the conservative base. >It defies logic that, in a deep blue state, a proven GOP winner like Kirk would not be given every available resource to snatch a senate seat that has symbolic importance due to the Obama factor. No it doesn’t. Steele has figured out that Kirk has drawn too much fire from his dumb voting decisions in Congress. And conservatives are not gonna vote for a country-clubbing left-leaner that pretends to be a Democrat because Democrats are not gonna vote for him either. - Kane Conservative - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 1:21 pm: I’m not sure who mentioned Kjellander earlier, but my understanding is Kjellander is actually taking a quasi-active role in the Dillard race…I don’t know if anyone else heard that as well. - Red Ranger - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 1:30 pm: Kane I heard that too. I also heard Blago is really behind Dan Hynes to get back at Quinn and Che Guevara is advising Quinn. Again, Im just hearin’ that. - shore - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 1:31 pm: McKenna does nothing for the state party for 4 years or whatever it was, turns around says hey I’m the guy here are my ideas and money. Where was this the last few cycles? No thanks. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 1:32 pm: Kj was at the State Fair and I do believe he supports Dillard. Not sure what role he’s playing, if any. - The Doc - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 1:34 pm: ==No it doesn’t. Steele has figured out that Kirk has drawn too much fire from his dumb voting decisions in Congress. And conservatives are not gonna vote for a country-clubbing left-leaner that pretends to be a Democrat because Democrats are not gonna vote for him either.== Segatari, I think you’re being unrealistic, your Kirk characterization notwithstanding. I’m not a particular fan of Kirk, but the GOP needs to demonstrate how a Hughes candidacy stands a better chance in the general. It’s ultimately about wins and losses, right? - Deep South - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 1:35 pm: What is a “family businessman” and how is it different than a “businessman?” Are there any “non-family businessmen?” Just askin….. - Abe Froman - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 1:42 pm: Roeser is making stuff up to try and give an insider baseball boost to his fifth tier senate hopeful. Steele never issued a formal endorsement of Kirk. Steele said very supportive things about Kirk in media interviews that right wingers groused was an inappropriate “endorsement”. So, since Roeser doesn’t bother providing any substantiation of his “scoop” should Steele now make some sort of clarification like, “while I like Kirk, I have not, nor will I endorse anyone in the Illinois primary,” the wing nuts can run around their little tree fort claiming that the made the national GOP combine tremble at their might. What a load of garbage. There was no RNC “endoresement” and there is no “withdrawl” of an endorsement. - John Bambenek - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 1:42 pm: There is something that could be epic from McKenna’s candidacy. If he does manage to buy the primary somehow, he will accomplish something incredible. He’ll be the cause of both the Libertarian and Constitution Parties becoming recognized in Illinois. He will accomplish crushing defeats for GOP ILGA candidates ensuring a superminority in both chambers. He will accomplish allowing Mike Madigan to come in for the kill shot with redistrcting which will slaughter whatever talent is left and break the back of the ILGOP for a generation. Aaron Schock, for one, will be retired come redistricting. - Deep South - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 1:51 pm: John B. - I think you raise a very interesting point. The “mainstream” GOP candidates running in the next election and possibly in 2012, may not be conservative enough for the far-rightwing nutjobs. As a result, the Libertarian Party and the Constitution Party will see a resurgence in popularity. I would venture, if that were to be the case, that the Dems will have a very easy time of it. They would do well to promote the various splits in the GOP/conservative persuasion. - Needs to be ANON - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 1:53 pm: Mr. Bambenek speaks the truth. McKenna is not good for the party as his candidacy will mean a large portion of the base will sit on their hands in the Fall. - fedup dem - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 1:53 pm: Note to John Bambenek: If Cong. Schock had any common sense in him he would be working hard RIGHT NOW to build a bipartisan coalition for increasing the size of theUS House by about 30 members, effective with the 2012 elections. This can be justified by saying it’s a “7% increase in members to handle a 200%+ increase in population” since the House was set at 435 members (by Congressional action) shortly after the Chicago Cubs won their last World Series a century ago. Adding 30 House members insures that Illinois won’t lose any seats after the 2010 Census. Failure to do so insures that Schock’s district, located in the interior of the state, would be squeezed into oblivion as the adjacent districts are enlarged. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 1:56 pm: ===a large portion of the base=== Other than bloggers and commenters on the Internet, I’m not sure much of the base even knows who McKenna is or cares. I hate to be so dismissive of his critics, but their numbers aren’t exactly huge. - Red Ranger - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 1:56 pm: So John B., McKenna will finish what he started during his amazing tenure as IL GOP Chairman. He couldn’t quite kill the beast as party chair, but if you give him the nomination… - SangamoGOP - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 2:10 pm: “Businessman”, someone who has worked his/her way into a fine career; person who has started and built a successful business. “Family Businessman”, someone whose dad/mom is a “businessman”. - Arthur Andersen - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 2:21 pm: Big Bob has always excelled at raising money for himself. Let’s see what he can do for Dillard. - John Bambenek - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 2:24 pm: The base may not know who McKenna is in large numbers, but in a general they will find out. They do (even GOP rank-and-file) have a very low opinion of the party and its leaders, McKenna personifies that. All Quinn has to do is trot out Kjellander pictures with McKenna and say “Its time we say no to Blagojevich Republicans”. And after his gutting the party org to run his campaign, working to hold the money on the sidelines for his 11th hour announcement you can bet there will be quite a few of his competitors who simply won’t help him in November should he win. There are some stunts that just don’t get forgiven. - Roscoe Village - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 2:37 pm: It’s not just the right wingers who have historically been at McKenna’s throat who are gunning for him now. As John B. points out there is plenty of bad blood because of McKenna’s poor handling of his departure from the party, his flirtation with the Senate race, his manipulation of the finance committee to his advantage, his gutting of the state party staff for his own ego-driven run for office. There are plenty of garden-variety GOPers who are furious with McKenna. How he, his backers and his handlers figure he can win is and absolute mystery. - shore - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 2:50 pm: The most encouraging thing about his campaign chances of going nowhere is his hiring of the party org. What exactly have they achieved lately? The fact that McKenna’s district-ours in the 10th has become the 3rd most democrat held by a gop rep in congress under his watch says a lot about what his neighbors think of his party leadership. Too bad murphy bought in with this. - VanillaMan - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 2:57 pm: Terms like “tea baggers” and “nobama” might actually do us a service One term is soft porn, and the other isn’t. One term is used to slander citizens who speak up, and the other is doing what folks have been doing in the US since Washington was first elected - voicing disapproval to our presidents. While I do not feel a need to ever use such a term as “nobama”, I don’t consider it in the same class at all. If you do not like the President, it is your American right to voice that. Anyone willing to run for the Office has to be open to critics, even those using silly bumper sticker terms. I recall many frat boy slang terms pranking George Bush and Dick Cheney’s name, don’t you? But those are two guys who are in a position of power. It’s fair game. Name calling groups of Americans who differ from you politically is simply irresponsible and disrespectful. It wins no arguments. Using a soft porn frat-boy term is even worse. I will always defend citizens who speak out. We should always challenge the status quo. They do not deserve our insults. I don’t care who or what they are - we still have our freedoms, right? - curtis - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 3:06 pm: McKenna has no mass appeal (maybe the reason he placed dead last in his Senate race?). Expensive ads will only highlight that fact… - ArchPundit - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 3:10 pm: One term was used by the conservative activists: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLsKt4O4Yw8 - Kyle Stone - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 3:27 pm: Here’s a guy who’s done nothing but solid work in the face of unprecedented challenges. It’s amazing anyone can actually say with a straight face that McKenna hasn’t distinguished himself as party chairman. Here were are, in the roughest years of our party in this state, and he still raises 16 million bucks?!? That’s pretty impressive folks. That’s the ultimate goal of any party chairman. Not to mention, the foundation for bigger things for the GOP nationally has flourished during McKenna’s leadership…Kirk and Roskam’s reelection, and Aaron Schock now a prominent face for the party. C’mon now… that credit goes to Andy!! - fox40 - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 3:29 pm: I’m actually excited to see McKenna in the race. It’s refreshing to see someone NOT from Springfield step up to the challenge… - meghan kelly's boyfriend - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 3:33 pm: agree.. this dude has some real credibility– unlike the rest of the jokers. - nobody cares - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 3:37 pm: average voters don’t care about the state party - that’s inside baseball. they care about someone coming in to fix the mess and that’s what mckenna will have to deliver. - SalukiDog - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 3:38 pm: You all really like beating up on Andy…but as someone who follows the political scene regularly, I think he’s improved on TV quite a bit since his 2004 race. I say let’s give him another look this time around. - Without Sports All We'd Have to Talk About is Politics - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 3:39 pm: I think McKenna is the best candidate to help unite the republican party here in Illinois. He has the experience in dealing with the entirety of our State and its people. - wolverine83 - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 3:40 pm: I just want a guy who will get stuff done.. if you really wanted a showman in office, than Blago shoulda been your guy…McKenna is a results-oriented guy.. that’s what the state will go for - MembershipOnly - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 3:43 pm: YES! He knows the inside baseball stuff. that’s right! And that’s why he’s the guy for the job..he’s got no connection with the BS of Springfield over the last several years, but all the no-how on how to handle it. - Without Sports All We'd Have to Talk About is Politics - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 3:44 pm: McKenna has mass appeal Vanilla. Unlike the other candidates who only appeal to the suburbs or “down state.”…McKenna is known, recognized, and loved from Cook, to Champaign, to Carbondale! - Rich Miller - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 3:45 pm: This little comment spurt looks planned to my eyes, but whatever. Enjoy. - ABCBoy - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 3:51 pm: I’ve gotta agree w/ the most recent posters about McKenna. I’m not saying he’s the end-all-be-all… I haven’t decided who my candidate is yet. But to blame him for the depths of the IL GOP from 2002 through 2008 is simply silly. First we get slammed by the George Ryan scandal. Then the country gets Bush & Iraq War fatigue. Then Illinois is ground-zero for Obama-mania in the 2008 election cycle. All of these things were entirely out of McKenna’s control. In fact, he was one of the few who stepped up to the challenge to lead the IL GOP through one of the roughest patches in Illinois history. He raised a boatload of $$ for the state party and didn’t make any massive gaffes. He strongly supported Schock and Roskam who are both solid conservatives. I say we should give the guy a chance before jumping down his throat. - Anon - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 3:55 pm: Which spurt Rich? Seems like two different ones from opposite angles. Both are correct in some ways, IMHO. McKenna is not popular with some in the GOP, true. The dozen or so people that care about that inside baseball stuff already have their candidate “running” for office. However, 99.9% of the rest of the voting population couldn’t care less about it and will decide on McKenna based on a normal campaign, and we’ll have to wait and see what he and his staff put together this time around. - VanillaMan - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 3:55 pm: McKenna has mass appeal Vanilla. I deliberately avoided commenting on this particular posting because I just wish McKenna would just take his money and disappear. So, I don’t know what you are talking about. I made no earlier comments about this guy. His performance over the past several years as the GOP leader is enough proof to consider another candidate. If that was the best Andy could do, then he needs to consider another line of work. He has shown no ability to appeal to any mass over the past several years. So you must be going on faith here. More power to ya! - MembershipOnly - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 4:03 pm: I’m so sick of this “mass appeal” argument. Do you really want a gov with all the bells and whistles? I just want someone who is serious about the job, has no connection to corruption, and is trustworthy. I know Andy aint perfect, and I’m not sure what’ll happen in the coming months, but Andy fits that bill. - HoosierDaddy - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 4:05 pm: McKenna 2004 = 6% McKenna 2010 = 6% Given the performance of the ILGOP over the past few years, I would be surprised to see much more out of McKenna’s campaign staff. - wordslinger - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 4:16 pm: “Tea Baggers” in the context of politics is not a naughty term. The protesters are drawing on the tradition of the glorious Boston Tea Party, the first direct smack in the mouth from the colonists to the British Empire. Whatever your message, excellent symbolism. They’ve have used tea bags as props in their communications many times, including tossing them over the White House fence last April. Tea bags, in and of themselves, are not offensive. Words can have different meanings. Get your mind out of the gutter and check the dictionary. - It's Megyn Kelly, stupid - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 4:23 pm: 2004 wasn’t a good year for most of our own here in IL. whoever jumps out ahead in the gov race will need a fresh message, and McKenna can do that if he plays his cards right… we’ll have to wait and see how he does… but anyone who says he doesn’t have a shot just doesn’t understand anything about the rest of the field - Illinifan - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 4:24 pm: 2004 was a very different year than 2010….I think McKenna knows this state better than any candidate. lets see what he can do! - ABCBoy - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 4:24 pm: People need to at least acknowledge that from 2002 to 2008, the political environment for Republicans was absolutely TOXIC in our state–AND that those factors were 100% beyond the control of the current and recent IL GOP leadership. McKenna was essentially handed an IL GOP on it’s death bed. He stabilized it and put it in a position where we can win in 2010. - muon - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 5:16 pm: I’m going back to the posts by John Bambanek and fedup dem before 2:00 on the impact to Schock’s district. fedup dem has one suggestion that would change things at federal level. There also is the likelihood that creating a district that took Peoria into a Dem-friendly district will leave another central Ill district available to Schock. He is free to relocate, or even run from outside a new district. - Dnstatanon - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 5:17 pm: McKenna-So the machine that let Blago win last time has decided there candidate this time Dillard can’t beat Brady so they now want to stick in McKenna. What did McKenna do as Chairman not a bad guy but not really a great chairman? The democrats have been in a tailspin which is the only thing that has given the republican an opportunity to win the governor office. To bad there is a group of people that would want to take a chance we are going to replay the last election and end up with the joke of a state government we have now. - Illinifan - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 5:57 pm: As Chair McKenna raised 16 million as state party chairman during roughest years of the party…party successes include:Mark Kirk re-elections and Peter Roskam election Also, Mckenna investigated elections across the state. During tough times McKenna came through. I look forward to what he can do for Illinois - wordslinger - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 6:02 pm: –Also, Mckenna investigated elections across the state.– Huh? What did he find out? - T.J. - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 6:08 pm: This is a victory for Hughes because it tells people he’s running. Up to now, he’s been below the radar. - 4 percent - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 6:13 pm: McKenna is a joke. Andy McKenna “lost” $4 million in 2004. Andy McKenna was named GOP Chairman. Illinois lost congressional seats. Illinois lost state senate seats. Illinois lost state house seats. Andy McKenna wants to spend millions to buy the Gvernor’s office… PRICELESS! - Sebastian - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 6:27 pm: Andy McKenna did an amazing job as Chair in the worst time to be a republican in years. All republicans lost seats across the US. McKenna did a great job in trying to keep and gain seats here. Like Roskam, Kirk, and Shock! - Okay Then... - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 7:05 pm: I’ve been reading Cap Fax all day. I was trying not to opine, but some of you really take the cake! I agree that Andy McKenna is a nice guy, but to hold up Roskam, Kirk and Shock as his succeses is a bit much don’t you think? It’s not as if he masterminded those wins personally. Besides, the state is blue. What happened? I’m not trying to suggest that McKenna could make the state purple all by himself, but c’mon. The state IS blue. Holding up three U.S. congressional seats ain’t really sayin’ a whole heckuva lot. Just sayin.’ I don’t really know what McKenna is hoping to approve or accomplish, but he won’t be strong enough in a general election against Quinn or Hynes. He won’t. We need someone with solid and established Springfield cred. Really WE do! Neither Quinn nor Hynes have any legislative experience and we see how that hurt Quinn. He tried to play hardball and failed. Hynes would get no legilsative love either if he similarly tried to play hardball, but I’m guessing that he wouldn’t make the mistakes that Quinn did. But the point is WE don’t need someone in the Governor’s office trying to learn on the job ala Quinn. And as for Matt it came to me one Sunday night that I should run for governor Murphy Need I say more? Really, need I say more? - curtis - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 7:13 pm: -This little comment spurt looks planned to my eyes- I agree Rich… McKenna staff on the clock. Too bad their product doesn’t live up to the hype. - Anonymous - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 7:26 pm: Mckenna hired most of his staff from the state party, well except for one who is now Matt Murphy’s Campaign Manager, hmm. They all did nothing while running the IL GOP, I do not expect much more than TV ads and a fancy website when they run his Gubernatorial campaign. I wonder if Mckenna feels like Gidwitz at this point, with a bunch of hanger ons that need a job using him for a paycheck. - Red & Green - Thursday, Sep 24, 09 @ 9:39 pm: Interesting bit on the senate race. RNC came out foursquare for Kirk to begin with, even trying to clear the field. Now that they have seen with their own eyes that Kirk has to avoid Illinois Republican events for fear of being booed, they have backed off and say they are neutral. Then after Roeser states the obvious, they talk again about what a great guy Mark Kirk is, but reiterate they are neutral. Sounds like political speak for , Hey Kirk, we love you but you better show us what ya got. I don’t know if Hughes is the beneficiary of the RNCs calibration back from full-scale support, but when the FEC reports hit next month, we will know who the real alternative to Kirk is. That poll the other day that Hughes did had to shake some people up in Washington. The bad thing for them was not that Kirk is only at 24%, but if you look hard at the numbers, it looks like Kirk may only have a 35-40% ceiling in a Republican Primary. If the RNC does not identify a credible challenger and quietly help him while still saying, “Hey Mark, we love you…really…we just gotta be neutral until you float to victory.” they could be dealing with another Sauerburg or Keyes fiasco. - Anonymous - Friday, Sep 25, 09 @ 2:24 am: While I agree that there has been no endorsement, I wonder whether Tom Roeser’s scoop has something to do with the “GOP suit to prevent Paul Kirk from taking office”. Some goof on Twitter can’t get his Kirks straight and just posted a comment claiming that the GOP are trying to stop Mark Kirk. Ya. NOT. - Red & Green - Friday, Sep 25, 09 @ 5:46 am: Ha, well, looks like you’re going to get a liberal Senator Kirk. Why demand two of them? Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.