32 Comments - Adam Smith - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 11:52 am: Ratings in descending order of their probability of being nominated today as opposed to Feb. 2… Kirk 100% Brady 30% Quinn 20% Plummer 20% Alexi 10% Cohen 0% - fedup dem - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 11:56 am: There is no question that had the primary campaign lasted another two weeks, much less have been held now, the Democratic nominee for US Senator would be David Hoffman, not Alexi Giannoulias. It is also certain that if the primary would have been held now (with the facts now at the electorate’s disposal), Art Turner would now be the Democratic nominee for Lt. Governor. Different outcomes may have also resulted in the Democratic primaries for Comptroller and State treasurer, as well as the Republican primaries for Governor and Lt. Governor. - John Bambenek - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 11:58 am: Cohen would have still been nominated… the press had the goods on them, they simply waited until his election was called to unload it. - Ahoy - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 11:59 am: The only changes I see happening are this: Art Turner woudl have been nominiated for Lt. Governor Kirk Dillard would have won the Republican Governor’s race. I don’t see the Democratic Senator’s race changing because of the weekness of the other two candidates (Hoffman’s with name recognition and Jackson with Blago). - Joe from Joliet - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 12:00 pm: Dillard would be the Republican nominee for governor. Upstaters did not know Brady and downstaters did not know Dillard. I don’t know how many gunners I have spoken to who did not know Dillard got the NRA and ISRA endorsements. I think the downstaters just assumed the downstate guy had to be the one who did. - 47th Ward - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 12:02 pm: I hate hypotheticals like this, but it’s clear that Dillard beats Brady if the tax return issue is out before the primary. I think Quinn took Hynes’ best punch and managed to hold on, so I don’t think a later primary changes that outcome. Hoffman probably knocks off Alexi though and Cohen certainly loses in a later primary. But we’ll never know, will we? - Pot calling kettle - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 12:03 pm: I think it would be very different. Kirk & Dillard & Hynes & Hoffman The trends at the time were in favor of Hynes and Hoffman and recent developments would have easily put them over the top. The only one I am not so sure about would be Dillard. He should have won, but ignored Brady. Brady has gotten negative attention for some things that would probably not have gotten much play if we were still in primary season. Dillard could have gotten the puppy-killing and tax stuff out there, but since he did not discover and publicize similar issues when he could, perhaps Brady would not have suffered. Cohen and Plummer would still be in because they were ignored until they got the nod. - ZC - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 12:04 pm: It’s interesting how on some issues (refusing to admit any cuts in spending, while demanding cuts in taxes) a majority of the electorate can get it so wrong, while on others (Alexi stepping down) they can demonstrate so much more common sense than more informed media and political elites. I think maybe it comes down to that: common sense. That doesn’t help them understand our budget crunch, but when it comes to something like the Broadway Bank hysteria, the IL electorate redeems itself. Democracy: pros and cons… - shore - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 12:05 pm: No. some of those campaigns started last april-9 months is enough time. They had enough time to make the sell and get their message out. Hughes, proft, and andrewski couldn’t get mainstream party activists to drink their tea. Coulson, hastert, dillard, mckenna, ryan, and murphy got the beat down that establishment republicans have gotten across the country and which they deserved. brady, plummer, quinn and alexi ran better campaigns against candidates who didn’t get it. cohen who knows, remember that stuff only broke AFTER the fact. the only one I think who would have had a shot is hamos because she closed on seals so quickly and was outraising him to such an extent that a little more time to get her name out and I think she goes over the top. - ZC - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 12:06 pm: And yeah, that didn’t answer the question. Probably the Broadway Bank bust might have hurt Alexi and put Hoffman into the lead, but who the heck knows? It’s impossible to say. Hoffman is an asterisk in the news now, -because he lost-. Ditto for Dillard. It can’t be fully known, because the media has no incentive anymore to be writing negative exposes about the #2 also-rans. - Montrose - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 12:08 pm: If a couple of polls over time had shown Cohen in real striking distance, the press would have started running stories on him. He would have then been toast. Dillard would get the nod over Brady. The margin was so slim that the tax bit would have made the difference. Of course, that assumes Dillard’s taxes look all fine and dandy. I just don’t know if the bank collapse would have done Alexi in. My gut says that Hoffman did not have the money or name recognition to capitalize on it. - OneMan - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 12:14 pm: Taking the post election background stuff the only change I might see is Dillard might have won because Adam would have played well as the tea party events around the state and taken some votes off of Brady - Amalia - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 12:16 pm: Dillard. Hoffman. Turner. All would be winners. Brady and Alexi have been exposed, roasted. The media did the work that Turner should have done….expose SLCohen. - just sayin' - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 12:22 pm: At a minimum David Hoffman would have beaten Alexi. All the polls showed Hoffman was surging while Alexi was falling. Alexi barely ran out the clock. And that was even before the bank failure. Brady would have been in trouble too if polls started coming out showing he might win. Even a little attention to hitting Brady would have stopped him. As it was, no one thought Brady was worth mentioning in a hit piece. All he did was spend five years playing to the worst prejudices of downstaters, telling them that Chicagoland was evil. It worked, but just barely. - wordslinger - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 12:23 pm: The bank failure would have sunk Alexi. Hoffman was getting his media act together late in the game after some terrible early spots. - Tom B. - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 12:29 pm: As one of the guys who was heavily involved in this primary season, let me say something definitively to everyone on both sides. If the rules or dates are different, the campaigns would have been different. It’s dramatically oversimplifying to just say “two more weeks and it’s a different outcome.” Two weeks of TV in Chicago is a million bucks. That requires a much different approach to the whole campaign– from the beginning. To answer Rich’s question: this is about as useful as saying if Bartman wasn’t at that game or if AJ didn’t run to 1st base on the drop third strike the outcomes of those respective series would have been different. - Chathamite - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 12:31 pm: Given how close the democratic primary was to begin with, I’d say that with the new developments surrounding Giannoulias, David Hoffman could have easily won that primary. Losing the primary in February did give him more of a name though, so who know’s what is in his future. - Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 12:38 pm: A June primary would have had a dramatic influence on a bunch of campaigns. A few that come to mind: Democratic race for Governor. Democratic race for Lt. Governor. Democratic race for U.S. Senate. Democratic race for Comptroller. Republican race for Governor. Republican Race in 8th Congressional District. A “normal” (but still way too early for my taste) Primary date in March would have influenced Democratic Governor, Republican Governor, U.S. Congress 8th, Democratic Lt. Governor. The Democratic U.S. Senate would have tightened quite a bit but Alexi would probably have won in a squeaker. But alas, the “reform” bill that would have pushed back the primary date to say, June, didn’t include that provision. Nor was the primary returned to March. Thus is our “Winter of Discontent” bred by the February 2, 2010 primary in Illinois. Enjoy Illinois. And remember the political party that arranged for all this to go down on February 2, 2010. - VanillaMan - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 12:51 pm: If the Democratic and Republican primaries were held today instead of in February, do you think the same people would’ve been nominated No. My candidates would have won and we’d have a better chance this November. But NOOooo! The status quo just had to have these guys. My fellow Democrats refused to read the writing on the wall - even though the writing was in neon flashing lights and half the party was shouting at the other half to remove their craniums from their posteriors and read the flashing neon writings on the gosh-darned walls! And here is another way of looking at this - the winning candidates hid their shortcomings, and they would have continued to hide them until after the primaries - regardless of when the primaries were held. A party comfortable with the status quo sleeps, offers nothing new and assumes everyone else is sleeping too. It is beyond my imagination why after a decade of sandbagging the Illinois budget, being a deadbeat, and watching a general decline in this state, the Democrats decided voters would accept the status quo which caused all of it. When Blagojevich won in 2006, it rewarded the worse people and released an abhorrent idea that voters would stomach anything the Democrats shoved down our throats. He set the bar so low, it is now a parking curb. - Anon - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 12:54 pm: So Dillard would have had the nomination after his sugar daddy hero Edgar all but endorsed the need for a tax increase? Not likely. It still would’ve been razor thin between Brady, Dillard, and McKenna - Segatari - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 1:03 pm: >Dillard would be the Republican nominee for governor. Upstaters did not know Brady and downstaters did not know Dillard. I don’t know how many gunners I have spoken to who did not know Dillard got the NRA and ISRA endorsements. I think the downstaters just assumed the downstate guy had to be the one who did. Uh…we did know Dillard, and we didn’t like what we saw in being yet another RINO candidate pushing liberal Democrats. - Team Sleep - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 1:08 pm: Alexi would not have been the nominee. However, and I say this with a tongue-in-cheek observation, he was semi-lucky the FDIC didn’t come down on Broadway Bank in December. But maybe they would have done him and Dems a favor had they pulled the proverbial trigger a bit earlier and caused less of a panic two months AFTER the primary vote had been taken. But I digress. I’m sure Mark Kirk is happy. Brady could have used his tax returns as another way to build up his base. The people who supported and volunteered for Brady between early 2007 (the first round of the rubber chicken circuit) and the primary were already anti-tax, anti-government types who don’t like paying their taxes and believe government is corrupt and inefficient. Brady could have easily protrayed himself as someone who was fighting to keep his business alive and his employees working. It might have even gotten him another percent or two. No way SLC would have won. Art Turner would have surely been the nominee. - wordslinger - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 1:10 pm: –I wonder if it is too late to get an initiative on the November ballot that would allow parts of the state to secede from Illinois and join neighboring states. Illinois government, candidates, and our elected officials are an embarrassment.– Not as embarrassing as ridiculously ignorant comments like that. The national government determines state borders and admittance to the union. - Anon - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 1:15 pm: ==Not as embarrassing as ridiculously ignorant comments like that. The national government determines state borders and admittance to the union. == Doesn’t mean it is impossible, just really really hard to do. See West Virginia. - VanillaMan - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 1:19 pm: Oooh! You just had to say that! Do you know how many of us are just aching to show off our wealth of useless trivia regarding the formation of states, statehood and history? Let’s find out! - Anon - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 1:23 pm: Also see the failed attempted State of Franklin - Lee - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 1:24 pm: This poll looks totally meaningless. Most of the 22% are probably republicans who decided they didn’t like the Democratic candidate before the primary. - wordslinger - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 1:29 pm: The creation of West Virginia was hardly a response to popular sentiment, although there was that. It was punishment by the national government against the Virginia rebels as well as a military strategy. After all, there were a number of states at that time that believed they had the right to set their own destiny. They found out they were wrong, the hard way. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 1:30 pm: Let’s get back to the question, please. - Captain Flume - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 2:10 pm: Brady may still be the Repub choice–he would not have released his tax returns until after the election. And the press and the rest of us still would not think he had a chance of winning the primary. Quinn and Hynes are still a toss-up in my opinion. The Governor is acting no different now than late last year and early this year, no extraordinary gaffes on the Governor’s part that were not already part of the negatives against him in February. Hynes would still be the same type of campaigner and not excite a whole lot more people. Giannoulias probably would have a tighter outcome and may have lost if the bank failure had happened prior to the later primary. Lt. Governor, I don’t know. Would the press have paid any more attention to Cohen if there had been more time to pay attention? Assuming his candidacy (like Brady’s) would still have been viewed through the wrong end the telescope, he still may have won. The only reason he is getting any attention now is that he did in fact win the primary. Hendon still would have split the Turner vote. And Cohen received only 10,000 less votes than Turner in Cook. Outside of Cook, who is Art Turner and what is his platform? But, as was said in a previous post, a longer campaign means a much different strategy, and a lot more money to make an impact. - T.J. - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 3:32 pm: There is no reason but hubris to assume Dillard and Murphy would have been the beneficiaries. McKenna, Ryan, and Andrzejewski all would have been as likely to benefit, and Plummer still would have won, boring blogosphere fantasies notwithstanding. - TJ - Wednesday, May 5, 10 @ 1:32 am: That depends….. Hoffman would’ve definitely beaten Alexi if the primary was after his family’s bank was closed. Hynes would’ve probably beaten Quinn if the primary happened later in the year, as Quinn was hemorrhaging support and arguably was helped by the fact that a few thousand people early voted for him that might have otherwise voted against him as he continually flip flopped and acted as anything but a leader. Cohen probably would’ve still won as, let’s face it, the rest of the Dem Lt. Gubernatorial slate was too incompetent to even raise SLC’s past during the campaign, so not like giving them an extra month or two would’ve made that any different. And the media’s failure to report Cohen’s past would’ve likely continued as well, as they would’ve exclusively focused on the Senatorial and the Gubernatorial races while bemoaning the fact that Illinois can’t seem to get good candidates. For the rest of the seats, no clue, likely would’ve been the same. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.