47 Comments - Ravenswood Right Winger - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 10:03 am: Is Jehan Gordon a Tier 1 targer for Tom Cross and the IL House GOP? - Dirt Digger - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 10:04 am: We seem to have two vanity candidates and two bankrupt candidates in this race, there being different strains of each quality. Okay maybe three vanity candidates. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 10:04 am: RRW, they’d like the seat back, but it’ll be tough to win that one. - bored now - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 10:18 am: the green party never was a serious political party and their lack of interest in fund-raising is all the evidence one needs to see that… - Louis Howe - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 10:20 am: In 2004 when Aaron Schock won the Peoria 92nd House seat, John Kerry carried the district by 7,400 votes and Schock beat Ricca Sloan by 235 votes. The local Democratic Party didn’t do Madigan any favors when they slated Jehan Gordon in 2008, but you really have to screw-up to lose a 60% Dem democratic district to a republican. - The Captain - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 10:27 am: Food for thought, Alan Keyes at 29% got about three times as much support as Rich Whitney at 10%. - soccermom - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 10:28 am: Why oh why doesn’t Governor Quinn explain to people that a tax increase would SUPPORT jobs in the private sector? We keep hearing about agencies that are forced to lay off staff and small businesses that are owed thousands of desperately needed dollars by the state. Not to mention schools that are laying off teachers because the state is behind in its payments. A tax increase would make it possible for the state to start getting caught up on its overdue bills, and protect thousands of people from losing their jobs. What’s worse for our state economy — a modest tax increase that keeps people employed, or thousands of jobs lost in communities that need them most? - RMW Stanford - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 10:29 am: Well I guess Whitney was wrong raising 30,000 during the first half of the year was a sign that he wouldn’t be competetive. The Greens totally and completely misunderstood why Whitney got 10%, but either way it bought them a chance at being a “major” party in Illinois and maybe to build some real support and they squandered it - Frank - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 10:35 am: I agree that in a perfect world, senior citizens in Cook County should not have to apply for Senior Citizen exmemptions yearly. But until the Assessor’s office can prove that it can effectively monitor that only seniors are receiving this exemption, the new law makes sense to me. I was looking over an MLS listing in my condo the other day, and the realtor pointed out in the listing that the property already had a senior exemption on the property. And then there is the case of State Rep candidate Kelly Burke, who for YEARS was receiving the senior citizen exemption because the assessor never removed the exemption obtained by the previous owner, who had since DIED. - Vote Quimby! - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 10:39 am: Whitney got 10% in 2006 because that many Dems were fed up with Blago. There were many (OK, not too many) who supported Ed Eisendrath in the primary, as well as those who felt sympathetic to the Greens to get them above the threshold. The charge to Whitney became what to do with that momentum, and what does he do? Send out an email request a month and a half before the general election. He had, what…$26,000 cash in hand on 6/30? How about a stunt like Dan Walker did…ride your bike across the state? Oh…you did? Huh… And, finally, instead of saying “it absolutely kills me” how about “I feel like I have a knife to my throat”. - Patrick Boylan - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 10:40 am: I string for one daily and run a neighborhood hyper local. The only Green who has consistently returned calls in my experience has been Tom Tresser, Green Party candidate for Cook County Board President. I expect that shortly I’ll be reading a Green Party candidate, writing in a European party site that the American media ignores the party. - wordslinger - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 10:47 am: This would have been the year for the Greens to get serious, considering the mood of the electorate. - Reo Symes, M.D. - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 10:50 am: @Frank - The legislators who did this to Cook County seniors cite “anecdotal” evidence of problems, yet the only anecdote anyone’s come up with is Kelly Burke. This thing was pure political payback, as Kristen McQueary has written… I’ve yet to hear anyone explain why the new law applies only to Cook County seniors. Meanwhile, you-know-who sent some poor shlub from Marion to the Cook County Board meeting yesterday to defend what the GA did to Cook County seniors. Pathetic. - Lefty Lefty - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 11:01 am: I agree with all the Green Party slamming. It’s blowing a big chance in IL. I personally know a lot of people here in IL-14 with comparable views and fat wallets. I doubt Whitney even figured out where they live. No presence on DailyKos, no emails to us left types (I get them from Toni Preckwinkle though!), no presence at all. - Dirt Digger - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 11:09 am: For the sake of argument, how was Whitney supposed to figure out how to raise money? Any political professional knows dozens of examples nationwide of MAJOR party candidates at all levels who have no idea how to raise money and wind up as broke as the hapless Greens. The big chance they’re “blowing” is one they never had to begin with. Campaigns take intellectual capital and experience, and frankly no one with either has any incentive to work with a minor party absent a self-funding candidate. - Living in Oklahoma - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 11:14 am: I have known Rich Whitney for about 10 years and he isn’t running for Governor because of his own vanity, he actually believes in the Green party Message. - RMW Stanford - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 11:18 am: # “I expect that shortly I’ll be reading a Green Party candidate, writing in a European party site that the American media ignores the party.” I am sure will despite the fact that Greens have gotten far more media coverage this time around than at point in the past, The Peoria/Bloomington Media has had new story several times about Leann Jones and Whitney being in the are for campaign stops. The Greens problem is the Greens, they have no idea how to run a campaign or raise money. For that matter they should of been out raising money from the day after the 2006 election. - RMW Stanford - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 11:21 am: Dirt Digger, I think part of the problem with the Greens is that they do not want to build up the intellectual capital in area like fundraising because to many of their candidates see it as a dirty thing. In 2008 they had one congressional candidate that flat out refused to raise more than 10,000 dollars. - The Captain - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 11:24 am: VQ it’s an often repeated fallacy that Whitney’s 2006 vote was largely a protest vote against Blagojevich. In 2002 Blagojevich beat Jim Ryan 52-45 (with 3% going to others). In 2006 Blagojevich beat Topinka 50-40-10 (well Blagojevich got 49.9%, keeping him just under 50%). The Whitney vote was made up of 2% from Blagojevich’s 2002 total, 5 of Jim Ryan’s 2002 total and the 3% that Cal Skinner and other third party candidates were already getting. Third party candidacies in Illinois have a history of taking more votes away from the Republicans than the Democrats even when the third party candidate in question has more policy positions in common with the left than the right. This was true of Whitney and was true of Perot in 1992. If you compare the Presidential results from 1992 to the Senate race you’ll see that the bulk of Perot’s vote comes out of Bush’s pocket, despite the fact that Perot was also pro-choice, opposed the 1991 Iraq War, believed in protectionism, opposed the outsourcing of jobs and supported gun control. Yet in that race Clinton did about 4.5% worse than Mosely Braun, while Bush did almost 9% worse than Williamson. For some reason, and I can’t exactly explain why, the numbers show that strong third party candidates in Illinois statewides, even lefty third party candidates, hurt Republicans more than Democrats. - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 11:45 am: The Captain said, “For some reason, and I can’t exactly explain why, the numbers show that strong third party candidates in Illinois statewides, even lefty third party candidates, hurt Republicans more than Democrats.” I’ll take a stab at this. In my post in the Brady thread, I take exception to those that say a conservative cannot win in Illinois. The general meme, even with Republican insiders and elected officials, says the same thing. Because of the insistence on thinking conservatives cannot win in Illinois, conservative Republicans hold themselves back, or are held back by the GOP establishment. So we end up with milquetoast Republicans running state-wide (e.g. Mark Kirk) or with conservatives who win the primary by the skin of their teeth (e.g. Brady, who wins because his opponent is obviously perceived as incompetent). If Illinois Republicans were to put forward decent conservative (or even moderate Republican) candidates that know how to fundraise and campaign, the Republicans can make a strong comeback. Unfortunately, the meme survives and is believed by the establishment. - Dirt Digger - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 11:46 am: RMW- One could just as easily say that about a good many major party candidates. If a campaign isn’t raising any money anyway of course it will treat fundraising as a dirty word. I see what you’re saying, but I hesitate to hang much responsibility on Whitney when there really isn’t much he reasonably could have done anyway. - JBIlla - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 12:13 pm: Tell you what, Rich. Take shots at Whitney’s issues. That is fine. Laugh at him for not being independently wealthy while caring about the future of the state, and you just lost a reader for life. Whitney has genuinely good ideas. You know it, everyone knows it. What’s your problem with him? Not enough clout to warrant an interview or a write up? You feel betrayed because he doesn’t vote Democrat or Republican so you can’t understand his values? Do you think he won’t be included in a debate because of money? Look at Delaware. He won’t be included in a debate because the powers that be in Illinois don’t want him to speak truth to power. Welcome Rich, you are now a power that be. - Dirt Digger - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 12:22 pm: I can’t speak for Rich but I for one don’t understand his values because I have heard nothing about him, because he has neither the infrastructure nor the money to explain it to me. It’s not a moral failing on Whitney’s part but neither is it anyone else’s. - Bill - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 12:22 pm: He won’t be invited to the debate because he can’t poll 5%. == speak truth to power== You sound like Pat Quinn. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 12:24 pm: JBIlla, take a breath. You can take policy seriously all you want, but you also have to take campaigning seriously if you want to win. But if you want to leave for good, feel free. I won’t mind losing such a blinded partisan as yourself. - Ghost - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 12:59 pm: Simon: who is this lady??? Or if you prefer the colbert angle: Simon, worse, or worstest campaign running mate for Quinn? - Phineas J. Whoopee - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 1:13 pm: There is one green guy named Brock Merk who is running a very interesting campaign and, I think, making the most of his lack of funds. I bet he gets lots of votes. - Bring Back Boone's - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 1:41 pm: ====Um, maybe you should’ve done this a year ago, Rich. ==== BWWAAAAHAHHHHAHAHAHAHA. Hilarious. - JBIlla - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 1:53 pm: Thanks for the response. And I know you have been fairer than most including articles on actual issues effecting the state (and not just Blago trial news). I couldn’t leave even if I wanted to, this blog is my daily fix. My main concern is the untenable debt we are in, and no ability by any other candidate to treat the budget as important. Until I hear an actual plan from Brady or Quinn to get the state out of debt, I can’t take either of their campaigns seriously. I guess my main issue with reporting in the state is that these guys get a free pass. They have repeated “after the election we will unveil our plan” so often, that the media is fine with it! We are in serious debt, our bond ratings might skip B and go straight to C. Then we will truly be in bankruptcy territory. We have an election coming up, and jobs and debt are the only issues that matter. And I’m not totally partisan, matter of fact, I’m hoping Manny Flores runs for Mayor, I think Kirk is more qualified than Giannoulias, I was for the Republican led attempt at immigration reform with Bush and Kennedy, against the bank bailouts, for the climate bill. In Illinois, holy redundancy batman! Any bus route change needs to consult CDOT, IDOT, CTA, RTA, CMAP, DCEO. Where does it end? And where is my Year long CTA Pass? While Whitney won’t win this time, to keep him off the debate stage only hurts Illinois. That’s my main point. I know its not fair, but I expect more from this blog than I do from anyone in the mainstream media to focus on best policy. Again, Thanks, ~J - PFK - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 2:02 pm: Speaking as a Green Party member, I have to say, I think this is a message Green Party people need to hear, and I applaud Whitney for saying it. To answer Rich Miller’s commentary, Whitney HAS been raising money for more than a year. He’s been to dozens of fundraisers and house parties, but people tend to contribute small amounts — both in money and volunteer time. But Whitney supporters need to recognize that a lot of things just can’t get done on a volunteer basis, and grassroots campaign in a large state requires a certain cash flow to be competitive. Meanwhile, Brady and Quinn are accepting mountains of cash from corporations and special interests. The ONLY way Whitney is going to compete is if his supporters get out of their comfort zones right now and put in more money and volunteer time — otherwise the things we all want to see happen in the next four years simply aren’t going to happen. For instance, instead of a push toward education funding reform that will move our schools off property taxes, we’re going to get Quinn and Brady basically continuing the policy of underfunding schools, laying off teachers and more privatization of education. Hey, anyone who thinks the current direction of our government is acceptable, then Quinn and Brady are definitely your guys, and don’t even worry about which one you’re going to vote for because they are two sides of “more of the same”. Those who want a government that works need to go from passively supporting Whitney and put their money (AND their time) where their mouth is. - Ghost - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 2:04 pm: === to keep him off the debate stage only hurts Illinois ==== No more then keping any other non-viable person with an opinion off the debate stage… It seems this idea of having Whitney drive certain discussions is more a throw back to lazy journalism. Instead of reporters pushing stories and questions about certain issues whitney is discussing directly, we want whitney on the stage to drive the bus? We dont need whitney, we need the newspapers to stop abandoning their local politcial coverage for cookie cutter AP stories. - Sacks Romana - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 2:55 pm: “No more then keping any other non-viable person with an opinion off the debate stage…” So, basically the voters get to watch Brady talk to himself? Whitney was more than a protest vote in 2006. Mere ballot-qualified candidates that do no campaigning typically get 0-2% in Illinois. Whitney broke 10% by being a serious candidate with a movement behind him. He remains a serious candidate even if his campaign finances are… what everyone thought they were up to this point anyway. Miller commented a couple days ago on a SLC thread that he doesn’t take SLC the candidate seriously, but takes SLC the campaign seriously because of the money the guy is threatening to throw around. I take Whitney the candidate seriously, and he’s earned my vote. I wish he could afford to proverbially “buy” more but that doesn’t affect my decision. Whitney has already polled over 10% throughout the race. He’s taken more votes statewide than Bill Brady ever has. The Green Party is a legally established party in Illinois. I can’t imagine Whitney not being part of the debates this election cycle, and I imagine there’s very few voters, even Quinn and Brady supporters, that wouldn’t want to hear what he has to say. - Sacks Romana - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 2:59 pm: Also Ghost, the idea that Whitney would be primarily driving the discussion if he was included in the debates speakes despairingly to how few real ideas we’re getting from Quinn and Brady. I know everyone in the capitolfaxosphere already hates Quinn.. and Brady.. and Whitney.. and everyone. I just think the reaons for hating Whitney (little money) is lamer than the hate for Quinn and Brady (budget plan?). - Dirt Digger - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 3:25 pm: PFK- Your post, on a blog, is not how to raise money. Whitney on a phone, to people with a history of donations to causes/candidates similar to him, saying “write me a $X,000 check today,” is. I am not unsympathetic to your candidate but I am to your campaign and party. - PFK - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 3:37 pm: Hey Dirt Digger, did it ever occur to you that maybe I was responding to the original post, which was about Rich Whitney’s fundraising? - hisgirlfriday - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 4:28 pm: Why is Whitney so upset about his campaign being broke when he is trying to win a job governing a state that is broke? He should think of this campaign as practice. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 4:37 pm: Pretty funny, hisgirlfriday. - greenerthanthou - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 6:15 pm: Interesting responses. The onus is all on Rich Whitney to explain himself to people who are interested enough in politics to follow this blog! Ever think of taking the time to click onto his website, Dirt Digger? Or does the dirt have to be planted onto your shovel? LeftyLeft, you know rich people who would support Rich Whitney if he’d only figure out who they are and call them? Really? Is there a website of very shy rich left people that Rich could access? How is he supposed to just “figure out” who they are? Are you guys for real? The belief that only rich people or people who know rich people can run for office may be part of the reason we’re in such deep trouble right now. Yes, the system is set up so that it takes a lot of money to get a candidate’s message out. Instead of looking to other countries to get some ideas, such as, 6 week campaigns, free media time for all candidates, etc., the US model is assumed to be Number One, and people are proactively sneering at the Greens for complaining about lack of media access. - RMW Stanford - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 6:25 pm: “Whitney broke 10% by being a serious candidate with a movement behind him. He remains a serious candidate even if his campaign finances are… what everyone thought they were up to this point anyway.” I am going to have disagree with the statement that Whitney had a movement behind him in 2006. If there was a true movement behind Whitney’s votes you would expect there to have been at least some spill over to other Green party candidates running statewide and there was none. All of the other Green party candidates ran far behind Whitney’s total and that is pretty strong evidence that a substainal share of Whitney votes was not a vote for Whitney but a protest vote against JBT and Blago. I dont think that Whitney has polled over 10% throughout the race, If I recall correctly the only poll in which he was above 10% was the Aug PPP poll which had a 11%. The Tribune Poll had him in the low singles, behind SLC, and the most recent Rasmussen Poll has had him, with leaners, in the low singles. People should take SLC seriously because he does have money to throw around, the kind of money that could in theory make him competive, though he will not be. Whitney does not have the resources to be competive. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 6:34 pm: ===you would expect there to have been at least some spill over to other Green party candidates=== Exactly. - Dirt Digger - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 7:08 pm: Yes, greenerthanthou, that is how campaigns work. The onus is on the candidate to explain himself to potentially/probably interested people. If he does not like that he does not have to run. No one owes a politician support regardless of how marvelous his ideas are. If you want to be taken seriously, start with not blaming “how the system is set up” when you don’t get what you want. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 7:09 pm: As they say in Parliament, “Hear, hear!” Or is it “Here, here!”? I dunno. - JBIlla - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 7:37 pm: ===you would expect there to have been at least some spill over to other Green party candidates=== I would take a look at Jeremy Karpen’s campaign, he’s gunna win in November: http://www.jeremykarpen.org/ - Park - Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 8:19 pm: Rich, it’s ‘hear hear’. Don’t know why, just kind of like ‘oyez oyez’, which is still used in some other states’ courts. Anyway, maybe the Greens could do a better job of explaining their ideas. I still don’t understand why Whitney’s in the race. Just to have Green Party candidates like they do in Europe? Only thing I’ve seen of him is when he hits the news on some anti-establishment case involving some tangencial and minor religous issue semi-related to government. If that’s all you need to qualify for governor, we’re in trouble. He’s a protest vote, nothing more. - Obamarama - Friday, Sep 17, 10 @ 12:06 am: ===I would take a look at Jeremy Karpen’s campaign, he’s gunna win in November=== Uh, homeboy ran in 2008 and lost by almost a 4:1 margin. There were also only 100 Green primary ballots pulled in the Primary. On top of that, Toni reported with $80K+ on hand while Johnny or Jimmy or Jeremy, or whatever had a little over $6K. What do you see that causes you to believe he is “gunna” win? - debate forum - Friday, Sep 17, 10 @ 4:47 am: You can really tell how heavily the country is against illegal immigration when even in Illinois a mainstream candidate is running against it. - Roger - Squideshi - Saturday, Sep 18, 10 @ 1:46 am: Anyone suggesting that the Green Party is somehow opposed to fund raising is way off the mark. It’s just that Greens aren’t very good at fund raising. Plus, Greens have a self-imposed handicap–no corporate money accepted. The Greens I know appear to be fully aware of these issues, but they’re a young political party. Most of the people involved are new to the political process and don’t have a tradition of campaigning experience upon which to draw. They’re trying new and different things all the time; and sooner or later, they will hit upon something that works. It seems to me that Greens KNOW it will be an incredible amount much harder to win elections with these disadvantages, but that won’t stop them from doing the right thing and trying anyway. I personally think that Greens’ refusal to accept corporate money is also a major advantage–it’s something they can use to campaign that none of the other candidates can. WHEN they are able to get their message out, people really seem to appreciate this principled stance. Something Greens have been doing, and I think it’s exactly the right thing to do, is learning how to make good use of public relations (earned media) rather than advertising (paid media.) I see Greens in the media all the time here in Illinois. That’s something that was NOT the case even 4 years ago. The problem is that Green Party candidates rely almost entirely on unpaid volunteers. Yes, there have occasionally (rarely) been some paid people. I was one of them for a short period of time. These unpaid volunteers usually have families and full-time paying jobs. In addition, the volunteers are often young and without the benefit of ANY prior professional experience in the areas they work (Again, this is not always the case.) Greens tend to learn on the job. Yes, they make some mistakes; but they’re also almost universally better at what they attempt to do the next time around. They have no idea “how things are done” or “how they have been done” in the other parties for ages; so they’re not afraid to break the rules and try new things. Of course, not everything works as planned. I’ve always been amazed at how, despite all this, the Green Party does as well as it does. Sure, perhaps the fund raising piece hasn’t been fully figured out yet; but it will get sorted, and this will be just yet another piece in the puzzle. It’s no coincidence that I’m starting to see the turtle pop up in various places as the symbol of the Green Party. Slow and steady eventually wins the race, or so I have heard. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.