|
When “reformers” hurt themselves and their causes
Tuesday, Oct 23, 2012 - Posted by Rich Miller * The State Journal-Register editorial board wrote about something today which has been on my mind for the past week or so…
Every time Poshard bent or broke his self-imposed ban on PAC contributions, the media - especially the Tribune - pounced on him. George Ryan was able to cast himself as the clean candidate in that race because Poshard was always so desperate for cash that he had to constantly try to find a way to get around his own contribution limits. * First, you win. Then, you can change the laws. Poshard didn’t think that through when he ran for governor. It cost him dearly. Gill has made the same problem for himself. When Gill was the lone wolf out on his own, decrying big DC and New York money was fine because he was never gonna get any of that loot. Now that he’s in the big show and in a race that appears to be going down to the wire, Gill needs every dollar he can find. But he can’t tap it because he’s tied one hand behind his back. The SJ-R dismissed the controversy and went ahead and endorsed Gill anyway. * I really doubt that this particular issue itself will lose the race for Gill. But what it very well may do is prevent Gill from spending the kind of money he needs from now until election day. And if Gill loses to Rodney Davis by a handful of votes in a district that was drawn to elect a Democrat, that pledge of his will likely be pointed to as the reason. And if he can’t take New York money and still vote against New York money, then maybe he doesn’t deserve to win anyway. It’s not like Davis will be tougher than him on Wall Street. Win first, change second. * Related…
|
 |
|
|
|
|
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Oct 23, 12 @ 11:42 am:
–And if he can’t take New York money and still vote against New York money, then maybe he doesn’t deserve to win anyway.–
Channeling the ghost of Big Daddy Unruh? As he once admonished some weak-kneed Cally legislators in Sacramento:
“If you can’t take their money and turn around and —- them, you shouldn’t be up here.”
Also the source for: “Money is the mother’s milk of politics.”
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Oct 23, 12 @ 11:54 am:
Like Royko said “Lord, save us from the reformers”
- Madison - Tuesday, Oct 23, 12 @ 11:56 am:
Beginning to wonder where the DNC is here…I would like to believe they have firemen available for the duckworths and gills of the world. Both should be beating their opponents handily at this point.
- CircularFiringSquad - Tuesday, Oct 23, 12 @ 12:01 pm:
We can only image how bad RapidRodney, valet of the hedge fund hustlers must have been with the SJR edit board to blow the endorsement
Yikes
BTW anyone looking to see where all the Rebooters cash ended up? Some went to Rove’s speaking fee, but looks like a lot stayed with Gags Brady. Is he spending or holding?
- The Captain - Tuesday, Oct 23, 12 @ 12:02 pm:
Minor but important point, IL-13 was not drawn to elect a Democrat. It was drawn to give the Dems a fighting chance by incorporating many of the Dem-leaning areas of central IL but it’s not a Dem district.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Oct 23, 12 @ 12:11 pm:
===but it’s not a Dem district. ===
It is in presidential years.
- The Captain - Tuesday, Oct 23, 12 @ 12:16 pm:
Obama won it by about 10, Quinn and Giannoulias lost it by about 20. It’s plausible that it could be won by a Dem but I wouldn’t call it a Dem district.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Oct 23, 12 @ 12:21 pm:
Quinn ran in a non-prez year, captain. Because of the large student vote in this district (UIUC, ISU, UIS, SIUE, etc., etc., etc.) , it’s a decent D seat in presidential years and not good at all in off years.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Oct 23, 12 @ 12:42 pm:
who cares it ain’t a Chicago district>>> the winner couldnt even qualify as a mushroom in Madigan’s den…talk about insignificant in the fish bowl
- Irish - Tuesday, Oct 23, 12 @ 1:06 pm:
This is something that I find very troubling. The fact that outside groups, PACs, National Comittees, and the like can post ads that the candidate has not seen, has not approved, and probably might not want run. I know Gill’s ad was partially paid for by his campaign so it doesn’t quite qualify. But shouldn’t the candidate be able to decide how his campaign is going to be run? I also understand that a candidate turning down an ad by someone else would probably mean that he might not get offered help again from that group, but the fact that he turned down a tasteless ad might be a plus in some cases.
- Disconnect - Tuesday, Oct 23, 12 @ 2:24 pm:
I believe Bush won 13 in ‘04. at the very least it was very close.