Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar » *** UPDATED x2 - Cable buy deets - Duckworth says Kirk acts “how enemies like ISIS want us to act” *** Mark Kirk uses Syrian refugee issue in new attack on Duckworth
The Kirk For Senate campaign launched its second television ad of the 2016 U.S. Senate race, titled “Trust”. The ad highlights the contrast on national security issues between Senator Mark Kirk and Rep. Tammy Duckworth. Since the Paris attacks, Rep. Duckworth has called on the United States to accept 200,000 Syrian refugees–20 times more than the President has requested–while simultaneously voting against the America SAFE Act that would require greater screening of refugees to ensure none are associated with ISIS. The statewide ad buy begins today.
Statement from Kirk For Senate Campaign Manager Kevin Artl:
“The facts remain that ISIS used the Syrian refugee crisis to smuggle its terrorists into France and carry out their tragic and deadly acts. Yet Rep. Duckworth continues to ignore the concerns of the Director of the FBI, Director of National Intelligence and the Director of the National Counterterrorism Center about our government’s flawed vetting process which cannot ensure that these refugees are not part of ISIS. Instead of listening to the experts, Rep. Duckworth is doubling down on a reckless plan to let in 200,000 Syrians - 20 times more than the amount the Obama Administration is requesting. Rep Duckworth’s plan demonstrates a complete lack of judgment and creates unnecessary security risks for American families.”
In 2009, the flawed vetting system allowed two al Qaeda terrorists disguised as Iraqi refugees to settle in Kentucky, according to an ABC News Investigation. This investigation resulted in the temporary halt of the refugee program by the Obama Administration.
Less than a month ago, Rep. Duckworth voted against the American SAFE Act. This bipartisan measure requires the FBI Director, DHS Secretary and Director of National Intelligence to certify that each refugee admitted to the United States from Syria or Iraq poses no national security risk.
· Mr. Valls Said Some Of The Paris Attackers Had Taken Advantage Of The Massive Influx Of Migrants Into Europe Fleeing Conflict. (”These Individuals Took Advantage Of The Refugee Crisis… Of The Chaos, Perhaps, For Some Of Them To Slip In” to France, He Told French TV. “Paris Killers Used Refugee Crisis To Slip In,” SKY News, 11/20/2015)
· Two Of The Terrorists Bought Ferry Tickets From Leros To Continue Through Europe With Syrian Refugees. (”Paris Attacks: BBC Names Stade De France Bombers As M Al-Mahmod,” BBC, 11/22/2015)
Amazingly, Tammy Duckworth still wants to bring 200,000 Syrian refugees to America, even though the FBI says they cannot be safely screened.
Citations:
· But U.S. Rep. Tammy Duckworth, D-Schaumburg, said at a separate event that the country needs to “have confidence in our intelligence services” and not put up walls. “Our nation is better than that,” Duckworth said, underlining her support for a measure to allow up to 200,000 refugees from the war-plagued country in the U.S. (Greg Hinz, “Stark Political Split Opens Up On Syrian Refugees,”Crain’s Chicago Business, 11/16/15)
· The Head of the FBI Said The Screening Process Is Not 100% Accurate. “I can’t sit here and offer anybody an absolute assurance that there’s no risk associated with this,” Comey said. (Jerry Markon, “Senior Obama Officials Have Warned of Challenges In Screening Refugees From Syria,” Washington Post, 11/17/2015)
Duckworth supports 20 times more refugees than the President.
Citation:
· Obama Said He Will Continue With His Plan To Allow 10,000 Syrian Refugees Over The Next Year. (Eric Lichtblau, “White House Affirms Syrian Refugee Pan Despite Paris Attacks,” New York Times, 11/18/15)
DUCKWORTH CLIP
“I signed on for 200,000 refugees.”
Citation:
· Duckworth Says Publicly She Wants 200,000 Refugees Allowed Into The U.S. (Fox Chicago News: “Reporter on Senator Mark Kirk and Rep. Tammy Duckworth addressing the Syrian refugee crisis” FOX Chicago, 11/15/2015)
ANNCR:
Mark Kirk opposes more Syrian refugees until it can be done safely.
Citation:
· Kirk Calls On Obama To Pause Intake of Syrian Refugees Until There Is 100% Guarantee With Vetting Process (Mark Kirk, “We’ve Already Let Terrorists In As Refugee,” Chicago Tribune, 11/24/215)
For your family’s safety: Who do you trust?
KIRK:
I’m Mark Kirk and I approve this message.
Rate it.
*** UPDATE 1 *** Response…
Good morning. In response to Sen. Mark Kirk’s new ad, please see the following statement, attributable to Matt McGrath, deputy campaign manager. Please also see the attached document, which goes point-by-point on Sen. Kirk’s uncertainty and dishonesty on this matter:
“We agree this is a crucial difference in this campaign. Tammy Duckworth believes leadership comes through strength, not fear. Mark Kirk’s worldview, on the other hand, is driven very much by fear and a willingness to compromise American values and to act how enemies like ISIS want us to act.
He has called for the mass incarceration of African Americans and suggested we just drive faster through African American neighborhoods. He suggested the President’s goal was to arm the Iranians with nukes, and compared the Iran peace agreement to Nazi appeasement. He wanted to place coffins outside the offices of his political opponents. Now, like Donald Trump, he’s appealing to base xenophobia, sowing fear of refugees in the midst of one of the largest humanitarian crises of our time. His ad is false, and he knows it, but worse yet it appeals exclusively to fear and the lowest common denominator. He should be ashamed. Illinois deserves better.”— Matt McGrath, campaign spokesman
Yep. That’s the moderate, middle of the road, heckuva guy we all know and love. Donald Trump would give the ad an ‘A’ if only Kirk would have mentioned his name. I give it an ‘A’ for fear mongering the old people that were going to vote for him anyway. And an ‘F’ for human decency.
Oh my…. Oh my…. We should all be so afwaiiiid! Neocons are such frightened children. I know that I’m insulting children but that is the closest comparison I can make…
Good move by Kirk. Focus on national security and tie duckworth into an issue where the vast majority of voters disagree.
- Cook County Commoner - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:43 am:
Effective. Not shrill. Lack of a cohesive strategy in the Middle East by western powers and lack of reported and verifiable degradation of any Muslim extremist groups may make this approach effective with room for a volume increase.
“For your family’s safety: Who do you trust?” - Not Mark Kirk.
The recent events in Colorado Springs should be evidence that we are in greater danger from home-grown loner nut jobs than we are from Syrian refugees.
“The facts remain that ISIS used the Syrian refugee crisis to smuggle its terrorists into France and carry out their tragic and deadly acts.”
No. All of the attackers identified so far are either French or Belgian nationals.
- Not quite a majority - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:54 am:
Dog whistles. Just like when the Jews were trying to escape Hitler. If you think that refusing refugees will ‘keep us safe’ I hope you enjoy living in that bunker in the backyard.
It’s a well produced, slick ad with excellent pacing and disruptive information. It also has Tammy indicting herself with the line about “I’m on the record for 200K refugees”.
It will be very effective and it will drill right into her base. Security is one of the very few issues that will cause a bloc of people to cross over vote. This has the potential to be devastating. It’s a very, very effective ad.
===I stand by my prior statements — Duckworth is a flawed candidate.===
Totally. Flawed candidate. Still, when you have a person who actually lost her legs fighting for America being criticized by a guy who lied about his service record, the flawed candidate label should probably be won by the incumbent.
What is the logic behind Congresswoman Duckworth calling for 200,000 Refugees when the President is only calling for 10,000?
This wouldn’t happen without the President’s approval so why is she asking for more than he is when the public does not even support allowing 10,000? The polling on this is not even a close call without more assurances we are not letting in single males
- Handle Bar Mustache - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:00 am:
I agree with Oswego Willy, having a clip of Tammy saying that makes the ad so much more effective. I give it an “A.”
America is proudly a land of immigrants, but what’s the harm in just saying “hold on, let’s just be sure” when ISIS has said it would take advantage of the refugee crisis and has proven that in Paris? Especially when the director of FBI, counter terrorism, NSA etc all agree?
Good ad, Duckworth is clearly trying to outflank her opponents on the left to get past the primary. I can’t believe she is calling for 20 times more refugees than the Obama administration. Going to be hard for her to come back to the middle after this
Agree with Handle Bar Mustache; good response from McGrath. There is no credible, definite evidence at this point that Syrian refugees were involved in the Paris attacks. Sad that the macho party resorts to fear, bed-wetting and trashing out country’s ability to protect itself (but, hey, Rauner constantly trashes the state, so it’s a thing with them).
Will be interesting to see the Kirk campaign unfold. He’s in no physical condition to actually campaign or probably debate, so they are going to have to try and win it all on TV.
And don’t think ISIS doesn’t want to get their hands on Coal City or Cairo. The refugees fleeing their religious paradise is a real threat to ISIS’s power. Way to help them out Kirk.
It is unfortunate that the first sentence of the statement from Kirk’s campaign manager is a lie. Carly F. lied about Planned Parenthood selling baby parts, and arguably the Colorado killer bought into that falsehood. This is why I loathe politicians.
I like that Kirk is standing up for what’s right. Vetting is a difficult process. A large influx of refugees creates enough vulnerabilities on its own, and given current considerations from extremist groups in the ME, it makes sense to make this process even more deliberate than standard procedure.
- Who's the Boss? - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:15 am:
Where does public opinion enter into Duckworth’s reasoning? According polls, the American people do not want Syrian refugees resettled in the USA.
Why is it that none of the Arab nations want accept refugees?
427 murders to date in Chicago, almost 4 times what happened in Paris….. and the security focus is on limiting starving beleagured people based on national origin or beliefs…. people jilled by syrian refugees to date 0…. not sure we can fer safer then zero…. but blocking jewish refugees was such a good plan to help during ww2 why not return to it……
Guy, what Duckworth “base” will this spot “drill into?”
The Bloomberg and NBC polls taken right after the Paris attacks showed the 53% of Americans who wanted to ban Syrian refugees were overwhelming Republican.
Kirk is trying to lock down his own shaky base by jumping on the Trump bandwagon.
Crust, you are completely misrepresenting the positions of the FBI director and intelligence chiefs. They all opposed the House legislation.
Meanwhile, the French and Belgian citizens who actually pulled off the Paris attacks could have easily entered the United States without a visa or even visiting a U.S. consulate. They’d just have to show their passports at customs and they’d be good for 90 days, no questions asked.
Syrian refugees to the United States must wait two years and speak to the FBI, State Department, Homeland Security, etc.
That might explain why there’s never been any acts of violence attributed to the 800,000 refugees admitted to the United States since Sept. 11, 2001.
And not a one-of-them committed any of the more than 1,000 mass shootings in the United States in the three years since Sandy Hook. Those were homegrown terrorists.
But, obviously, facts and reason have no place in a fear-mongering political ad.
A diversion from the far more serious issue of visa waivers, which allow millions of foreigners into the US from certain countries without having to get a visa and the screening that goes along with it. In turn, we US citizens get to go there w/out visas.
As many others have pointed out, the Paris attackers were citizens of countries with visa waivers into the US. I don’t know if any were on the no-fly list, but I imagine at least some of them could have come here without a visa. They didn’t.
Dialing back the visa waiver program would hurt the lucrative US tourist industry though. Politicians would feel its wrath. The US economy would suffer. This isn’t all about security. So, what to do? I don’t know. That’s for the US govt and Congress to decide. But the Syrians refugees appear to be the least of the problem.
– Why is that none of the Arab nations want accept refugees?–
What do you think Jordan, Iraq and Lebanon are? Samoan?
Lebanon, 1.1 million, Jordan, 650,000, Iraq, 250,000, and all growing, according to the U.N.
Turkey, though not an “Arab nation,” 2.2 million.
But some in the world’s sole superpower plotz about taking in even 10,000 of the world’s most oppressed people, despite years of demonstrated experience that refugees in America are a lot less dangerous to the public safety than Americans in America.
Guy, what Duckworth “base” will this spot “drill into?”====
Urban and suburban Democrats who are not “all in” on the immigration issue in general. There are a lot of them.
Millions of people will see the ad. Hundreds of people will see the McGrath response. First group is still making their minds up. Second group already has.
Complain all you want about how this ad is unfair, but Duckworth has decided to support an unpopular decision which is definitely tone deaf and will hurt her politically.
It is a no-brainer. Kirk gets it, Duckworth doesn’t.
Whining about how the majority of voters are fools doesn’t change the fact that they are in the majority, and you will be the loser with the position you are taking.
The quote from Duckworth effectively catches her looking formulaic and inflexible, but the framing by Kirk makes him look like a cheap two-bit sensationalist. This is the kind of ad to drive down election turnout.
Sling, go back to rating the ad. He tapped into an emotion that already exists, Trump or whoever. I’m not speaking to the humanity or the correctness of the ad, simply the effectiveness of it. It stings.
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 11:18 am:
Kirk isn’t the first to appeal to fear and he won’t be the last. That doesn’t mean you have to applaud when he does it or think it’s reasonable, especially when the evidence shows that it is not.
Back in the day, George Wallace was considered one of the more liberal politicians in Alabama, but he couldn’t win the big one until he changed his tone.
“I tried to talk about good roads and good schools and all these things that had been part of my career and nobody listened. And then I began talking about n—— and they stomped the floor.”
Mark Kirk’s worldview, on the other hand, is driven very much by fear and a willingness to compromise American values and to act how enemies like ISIS want us to act.
Duckworth uses fear differently, but still uses it just the same. Her style however, is off-key and isn’t going to help her.
== Kirk would be just as comfortable as a Dem as a GOPer==
The political litmus test police have spoken.
==When a Republican is on good terms with someone like Durbin, their political compass is certainly off base.==
Yes, because politicians of different parties should never get along with somebody of the opposite party and certainly never work with them. This kind of attitude is exactly the problem in Washington.
==I’m so happy I have a choice between much better candidates on election day….==
If Duckworth really got the politics of this, then she ought to be very concerned about her public statements. Because portraying Kirk as a fear monger is a loser for her, except for those totally committed to accepting her stand regarding this issue, which is a minority position.
If she thinks this stuff is crazed and embarrassing, she isn’t going to win. She has to begin respecting the majority opinion and respond better. Voters won’t replace an incumbent who is concerned about their safety, with someone who denies their concerns and claims that the incumbent is wrong. Duckworth cannot prove a negative, and has to pander, or she is going to lose big.
It’s a good ad. Nothing like a little fear mongering to stir up the masses. People eat this sort of stuff up, especially in the middle of a panic like is going on now.
There isn’t a single moment in the Duckworth response when she attempts to unite with the majority of voters concerned about the refugees. There isn’t a single comment in the Duckworth response where she attempts to understand the concerns being voiced by the majority.
She is going to lose them if she continues to make fear the issue, because FEAR IS NOT THE ISSUE! The issue is security and safety. If she continues to pretend that her position is the right one without explaining to those concerned over the real issue here - she is going to lose big.
Address the real issue here, or go home. Attacking Kirk isn’t going to work when he is clearly voicing the majority view as the incumbent in this race.
Hoping that nothing happening to continue triggering the majority’s concerns about safety is not going to win this election for her. She has to address the real issue and console those concerned about their safety. Insults will not win votes!
Sling, you’re delusional if you think Trump is only resonating with Republicans. (For the record, he doesn’t resonate with me) Reagan Democrats were people for whom National Defense was their swaying issue. Not to mention an anemic economy, but when he put a missile in Qadaffi’s bedroom, the Dem’s switched over.
Kirk isn’t the only one here with a “shaky” base. The base of everyone in this race is shaky at best.
“Duckworth uses fear differently, but still uses it just the same. Her style however, is off-key and isn’t going to help her.”
VanillaMan has very accurately identified a problem that the Duckworth campaign needs to acknowledge and address.
A message of fear stained by jingoism is less repellent than a message of fear soured by contempt. The Duckworth campaign needs to either treat the fear as legitimate, or get out of the fear game.
The last Gallup poll among all citizens had Trump at 31% favorable, 57% unfavorable. The only group in which he was above water was self-described “strong conservatives.”
And don’t liken Trump to Reagan, okay? And don’t diminish Reagan’s appeal with shallow analysis and flat-out wrong “facts.”
Reagan bombed Libya on April 15, 1986, long after he had won his second election as president, so that was hardly the reason for his electoral support among Democrats.
The last Gallup poll on whom Trump is popular with?
Or your unique theory that Reagan was popular among Democrats in the elections of 1980 and 1984 because he bombed Libya in 1986, “and the Dems switched over?”
I know this is not a US politics blog but Reagan won 49 states only losing Minnesota home of his opponent Mondale (a lot of Democrats voted for Reagan for a number of reasons national security being one of them) the Iran hostage crisis was still fresh in everyone’s mind. Trump is not a conservative supporting in the past single payer and currently higher taxes on the wealthy. He is attracting blue collar support from those workers who appreciate his bluntness on China and what they are doing to our blue collar manufacturing economy.
Democrats are alienating private sector unions with their open borders and refusal to build the Keystone pipeline.
Sling, you’re taking this too far afield. I’m sorry I ever brought up the Reagan example in supporting a point. What Reagan did that Democrats liked, was promise to build our military to greatest on the planet (he did). This, after the Resident Democrat in the White House at the same presided over an operation where our equipment fell apart in the middle of the dessert. Here we are in the exact same region again. Kirk has taken the populist view, as has Trump and others. It’s one of the few issues that cause Dems to switch over on a ballot. Just as zealotry will cause many GOP voters to do the opposite.
Point is, Kirk has an effective ad that will strongly resonate with a lot of people of both parties or self proclaimed liberals. People don’t feel safe. There are plenty of polls that indicate that.
Or, you’re just wrong on where the populist opinion is on this one. Tough to be the only great thinker among the huddled masses. Must be a burden for you.
- Cheryl44 - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:31 am:
Mark Kirk is an embarrassment who should just go ahead and resign now.
- Handle Bar Mustache - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:32 am:
0/10 .
Pandering of the most crass, cynical and desperate nature.
- Dome Gnome - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:35 am:
Smells like desperation, there, Kirk campaign.
- olddog - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:35 am:
Welp, Kirk just lost a crossover vote (but that was probably going to happen anyway in today’s political climate).
- walker - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:36 am:
Effective for right now. Nothing like fear =”For your family’s safety”= to drive behavior.
This will fade over time, unless we get an attack here — then all irrationality will flourish.
- Ducky LaMoore - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:36 am:
Yep. That’s the moderate, middle of the road, heckuva guy we all know and love. Donald Trump would give the ad an ‘A’ if only Kirk would have mentioned his name. I give it an ‘A’ for fear mongering the old people that were going to vote for him anyway. And an ‘F’ for human decency.
- DecaturGuy - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:38 am:
why would Duckworth go so far out there on 200k refugees? seems like a bad play by here. pandering to the left because she’s worried about primary?
- Belle - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:39 am:
Playing for fear. Who knows how long this will hold out?
Disgusting.
- Dick Cheney - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:39 am:
I approve this message.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:39 am:
It’s a “B+”
“Why?”
The quote, by Duckworth that you see and hear, in this vacuum of today and playing to fear and trust and that is what will make it effective.
“The facts are not pertinent”, but the fear and the quote in this vacuum make this Ad effective.
- PMcP - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:40 am:
They weren’t in Syrian refugees, the ad is a lie on the face of it.
- The Velour Nail - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:40 am:
I stand by my prior statements — Duckworth is a flawed candidate.
- Triple fat - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:40 am:
Oh my…. Oh my…. We should all be so afwaiiiid! Neocons are such frightened children. I know that I’m insulting children but that is the closest comparison I can make…
- CornerGuy - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:40 am:
Good move by Kirk. Focus on national security and tie duckworth into an issue where the vast majority of voters disagree.
- Cook County Commoner - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:43 am:
Effective. Not shrill. Lack of a cohesive strategy in the Middle East by western powers and lack of reported and verifiable degradation of any Muslim extremist groups may make this approach effective with room for a volume increase.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:44 am:
“For your family’s safety: Who do you trust?” - Not Mark Kirk.
The recent events in Colorado Springs should be evidence that we are in greater danger from home-grown loner nut jobs than we are from Syrian refugees.
- Sharon - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:46 am:
really disappointed in Duckworths pandering. kirk is making the responsible call
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:49 am:
Grabbing on to Trump’s coattails. Trump’s message has proven to move the needle in some circles.
- Robert the Bruce - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:50 am:
Using fear in a campaign ad is hardly a new tactic.
Effective. B+. The polling I’ve seen on Syrian refugees is sadly in Kirk’s favor.
- Caitie - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:51 am:
Thank you kirk for looking out for America
- sal-says - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:54 am:
== For your family’s safety: Who do you trust? ==
Hmmm. To Kirk’s question:
a) A recent war vet?
… or …
b) A guy that regularly puts his foot in his mouth with troublesome consequences & can’t find ways to get it out?
- Nick Name - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:54 am:
“The facts remain that ISIS used the Syrian refugee crisis to smuggle its terrorists into France and carry out their tragic and deadly acts.”
No. All of the attackers identified so far are either French or Belgian nationals.
- Not quite a majority - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:54 am:
Dog whistles. Just like when the Jews were trying to escape Hitler. If you think that refusing refugees will ‘keep us safe’ I hope you enjoy living in that bunker in the backyard.
- A guy - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:54 am:
It’s a well produced, slick ad with excellent pacing and disruptive information. It also has Tammy indicting herself with the line about “I’m on the record for 200K refugees”.
It will be very effective and it will drill right into her base. Security is one of the very few issues that will cause a bloc of people to cross over vote. This has the potential to be devastating. It’s a very, very effective ad.
- Ducky LaMoore - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:56 am:
===I stand by my prior statements — Duckworth is a flawed candidate.===
Totally. Flawed candidate. Still, when you have a person who actually lost her legs fighting for America being criticized by a guy who lied about his service record, the flawed candidate label should probably be won by the incumbent.
- Lucky Pierre - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 9:56 am:
What is the logic behind Congresswoman Duckworth calling for 200,000 Refugees when the President is only calling for 10,000?
This wouldn’t happen without the President’s approval so why is she asking for more than he is when the public does not even support allowing 10,000? The polling on this is not even a close call without more assurances we are not letting in single males
- Handle Bar Mustache - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:00 am:
Very effective response from McGrath
- Crust - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:05 am:
I agree with Oswego Willy, having a clip of Tammy saying that makes the ad so much more effective. I give it an “A.”
America is proudly a land of immigrants, but what’s the harm in just saying “hold on, let’s just be sure” when ISIS has said it would take advantage of the refugee crisis and has proven that in Paris? Especially when the director of FBI, counter terrorism, NSA etc all agree?
- WIlliamJohns - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:05 am:
Good ad, Duckworth is clearly trying to outflank her opponents on the left to get past the primary. I can’t believe she is calling for 20 times more refugees than the Obama administration. Going to be hard for her to come back to the middle after this
- Willie Stark - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:07 am:
Agree with Handle Bar Mustache; good response from McGrath. There is no credible, definite evidence at this point that Syrian refugees were involved in the Paris attacks. Sad that the macho party resorts to fear, bed-wetting and trashing out country’s ability to protect itself (but, hey, Rauner constantly trashes the state, so it’s a thing with them).
Will be interesting to see the Kirk campaign unfold. He’s in no physical condition to actually campaign or probably debate, so they are going to have to try and win it all on TV.
- Lucky Pierre - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:08 am:
Has anyone ever seen Matt Mc Grath driving slow through Englewood with the top down?
- Arizona Bob - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:08 am:
Once again Illinois voters have two TERRIBLE choices for Senator. Do you vote for tweedle dumb or tweedle dumber?
Duckworth is a complete political hack, and Kirk would be just as comfortable as a Dem as a GOPer, perhaps more so.
When a Republican is on good terms with someone like Durbin, their political compass is certainly off base.
I’m so happy I have a choice between much better candidates on election day….
- walker - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:08 am:
McGrath’s response quick, but overcooked, with references to issues not at hand. Jumped right in the tar pit with Kirk. A bit early for that.
- Al Frankenstein - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:10 am:
Think Kirk made the right move here. Good for national security and good politics.
- Carhartt Representative - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:11 am:
And don’t think ISIS doesn’t want to get their hands on Coal City or Cairo. The refugees fleeing their religious paradise is a real threat to ISIS’s power. Way to help them out Kirk.
- illinoised - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:11 am:
It is unfortunate that the first sentence of the statement from Kirk’s campaign manager is a lie. Carly F. lied about Planned Parenthood selling baby parts, and arguably the Colorado killer bought into that falsehood. This is why I loathe politicians.
- illinoised - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:12 am:
P.S. Yes, the add is effective. But that is trumped by the lie which drives the ad. Again, loathesome.
- Sen. Blutarsky - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:14 am:
I like that Kirk is standing up for what’s right. Vetting is a difficult process. A large influx of refugees creates enough vulnerabilities on its own, and given current considerations from extremist groups in the ME, it makes sense to make this process even more deliberate than standard procedure.
- Who's the Boss? - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:15 am:
Where does public opinion enter into Duckworth’s reasoning? According polls, the American people do not want Syrian refugees resettled in the USA.
Why is it that none of the Arab nations want accept refugees?
- Gooner - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:17 am:
Kirk sounds like a paranoid and borderline bigoted freak, but that’s probably the smart play today.
If you can get people afraid of others, you can win.
- King Maker - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:18 am:
Very powerful ad. I give it an A+.
- walker - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:19 am:
A political statement starting with “The fact remains that…” is almost always followed by a lie. Otherwise they wouldn’t bother with the preemption.
- Rahm'sMiddleFinger - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:25 am:
Disgusting. Fear mongering at it’s worst.
This is a message to the base. They’ll already be out to oppose Hillary Clinton.
- Ghost - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:29 am:
427 murders to date in Chicago, almost 4 times what happened in Paris….. and the security focus is on limiting starving beleagured people based on national origin or beliefs…. people jilled by syrian refugees to date 0…. not sure we can fer safer then zero…. but blocking jewish refugees was such a good plan to help during ww2 why not return to it……
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:35 am:
Guy, what Duckworth “base” will this spot “drill into?”
The Bloomberg and NBC polls taken right after the Paris attacks showed the 53% of Americans who wanted to ban Syrian refugees were overwhelming Republican.
Kirk is trying to lock down his own shaky base by jumping on the Trump bandwagon.
Crust, you are completely misrepresenting the positions of the FBI director and intelligence chiefs. They all opposed the House legislation.
Meanwhile, the French and Belgian citizens who actually pulled off the Paris attacks could have easily entered the United States without a visa or even visiting a U.S. consulate. They’d just have to show their passports at customs and they’d be good for 90 days, no questions asked.
Syrian refugees to the United States must wait two years and speak to the FBI, State Department, Homeland Security, etc.
That might explain why there’s never been any acts of violence attributed to the 800,000 refugees admitted to the United States since Sept. 11, 2001.
And not a one-of-them committed any of the more than 1,000 mass shootings in the United States in the three years since Sandy Hook. Those were homegrown terrorists.
But, obviously, facts and reason have no place in a fear-mongering political ad.
- david - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:37 am:
this ad is different. independents can have a strong stance on foreign policy - kirk seems to get that.
- Cassandra - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:38 am:
A diversion from the far more serious issue of visa waivers, which allow millions of foreigners into the US from certain countries without having to get a visa and the screening that goes along with it. In turn, we US citizens get to go there w/out visas.
As many others have pointed out, the Paris attackers were citizens of countries with visa waivers into the US. I don’t know if any were on the no-fly list, but I imagine at least some of them could have come here without a visa. They didn’t.
Dialing back the visa waiver program would hurt the lucrative US tourist industry though. Politicians would feel its wrath. The US economy would suffer. This isn’t all about security. So, what to do? I don’t know. That’s for the US govt and Congress to decide. But the Syrians refugees appear to be the least of the problem.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:48 am:
– Why is that none of the Arab nations want accept refugees?–
What do you think Jordan, Iraq and Lebanon are? Samoan?
Lebanon, 1.1 million, Jordan, 650,000, Iraq, 250,000, and all growing, according to the U.N.
Turkey, though not an “Arab nation,” 2.2 million.
But some in the world’s sole superpower plotz about taking in even 10,000 of the world’s most oppressed people, despite years of demonstrated experience that refugees in America are a lot less dangerous to the public safety than Americans in America.
- A guy - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:49 am:
=== wordslinger - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:35 am:
Guy, what Duckworth “base” will this spot “drill into?”====
Urban and suburban Democrats who are not “all in” on the immigration issue in general. There are a lot of them.
Millions of people will see the ad. Hundreds of people will see the McGrath response. First group is still making their minds up. Second group already has.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 10:54 am:
Guy, I cited polls. What do you have?
By the way, “immigration” and “refugee” are not interchangeable words, despite what Trump says.
For example, Jesus, Joseph and Mary were refugees in Egypt, fleeing persecution, they were not immigrants.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 11:07 am:
Complain all you want about how this ad is unfair, but Duckworth has decided to support an unpopular decision which is definitely tone deaf and will hurt her politically.
It is a no-brainer. Kirk gets it, Duckworth doesn’t.
Whining about how the majority of voters are fools doesn’t change the fact that they are in the majority, and you will be the loser with the position you are taking.
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 11:07 am:
The above is me.
- Angry Chicagoan - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 11:14 am:
The quote from Duckworth effectively catches her looking formulaic and inflexible, but the framing by Kirk makes him look like a cheap two-bit sensationalist. This is the kind of ad to drive down election turnout.
- A guy - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 11:18 am:
Sling, go back to rating the ad. He tapped into an emotion that already exists, Trump or whoever. I’m not speaking to the humanity or the correctness of the ad, simply the effectiveness of it. It stings.
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 11:18 am:
That ==200000== comment will leave a mark.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 11:23 am:
VMan, everyone gets the politics, believe me.
Kirk isn’t the first to appeal to fear and he won’t be the last. That doesn’t mean you have to applaud when he does it or think it’s reasonable, especially when the evidence shows that it is not.
Back in the day, George Wallace was considered one of the more liberal politicians in Alabama, but he couldn’t win the big one until he changed his tone.
“I tried to talk about good roads and good schools and all these things that had been part of my career and nobody listened. And then I began talking about n—— and they stomped the floor.”
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 11:27 am:
Mark Kirk’s worldview, on the other hand, is driven very much by fear and a willingness to compromise American values and to act how enemies like ISIS want us to act.
Duckworth uses fear differently, but still uses it just the same. Her style however, is off-key and isn’t going to help her.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 11:30 am:
== Kirk would be just as comfortable as a Dem as a GOPer==
The political litmus test police have spoken.
==When a Republican is on good terms with someone like Durbin, their political compass is certainly off base.==
Yes, because politicians of different parties should never get along with somebody of the opposite party and certainly never work with them. This kind of attitude is exactly the problem in Washington.
==I’m so happy I have a choice between much better candidates on election day….==
I think we all are. It means you aren’t here.
- @MisterJayEm - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 11:31 am:
‘Urban and suburban Democrats who are not “all in” on the immigration issue in general. There are a lot of them.’
A Republican giving lessons about about the Democratic base? That reminds me, we need more salt.
– MrJM
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 11:33 am:
If Duckworth really got the politics of this, then she ought to be very concerned about her public statements. Because portraying Kirk as a fear monger is a loser for her, except for those totally committed to accepting her stand regarding this issue, which is a minority position.
If she thinks this stuff is crazed and embarrassing, she isn’t going to win. She has to begin respecting the majority opinion and respond better. Voters won’t replace an incumbent who is concerned about their safety, with someone who denies their concerns and claims that the incumbent is wrong. Duckworth cannot prove a negative, and has to pander, or she is going to lose big.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 11:39 am:
It’s a good ad. Nothing like a little fear mongering to stir up the masses. People eat this sort of stuff up, especially in the middle of a panic like is going on now.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 11:40 am:
– I’m not speaking to the humanity or the correctness of the ad…–
LOL, why not? Are those minor subjects off limits?
The request from the host was “Rate it.” That seems to be rather broad, and can encompass more than alleged “effectiveness.”
But, like I said, the spot is more about Kirk appealing to his shaky base by jumping on the Trump bandwagon.
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 11:54 am:
There isn’t a single moment in the Duckworth response when she attempts to unite with the majority of voters concerned about the refugees. There isn’t a single comment in the Duckworth response where she attempts to understand the concerns being voiced by the majority.
She is going to lose them if she continues to make fear the issue, because FEAR IS NOT THE ISSUE! The issue is security and safety. If she continues to pretend that her position is the right one without explaining to those concerned over the real issue here - she is going to lose big.
Address the real issue here, or go home. Attacking Kirk isn’t going to work when he is clearly voicing the majority view as the incumbent in this race.
Hoping that nothing happening to continue triggering the majority’s concerns about safety is not going to win this election for her. She has to address the real issue and console those concerned about their safety. Insults will not win votes!
- A guy - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 12:22 pm:
Sling, you’re delusional if you think Trump is only resonating with Republicans. (For the record, he doesn’t resonate with me) Reagan Democrats were people for whom National Defense was their swaying issue. Not to mention an anemic economy, but when he put a missile in Qadaffi’s bedroom, the Dem’s switched over.
Kirk isn’t the only one here with a “shaky” base. The base of everyone in this race is shaky at best.
- @MisterJayEm - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 1:04 pm:
“Duckworth uses fear differently, but still uses it just the same. Her style however, is off-key and isn’t going to help her.”
VanillaMan has very accurately identified a problem that the Duckworth campaign needs to acknowledge and address.
A message of fear stained by jingoism is less repellent than a message of fear soured by contempt. The Duckworth campaign needs to either treat the fear as legitimate, or get out of the fear game.
I would strongly suggest the latter.
– MrJM
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 1:16 pm:
Guy, you mistake “delusional” with fact-based.
The last Gallup poll among all citizens had Trump at 31% favorable, 57% unfavorable. The only group in which he was above water was self-described “strong conservatives.”
And don’t liken Trump to Reagan, okay? And don’t diminish Reagan’s appeal with shallow analysis and flat-out wrong “facts.”
Reagan bombed Libya on April 15, 1986, long after he had won his second election as president, so that was hardly the reason for his electoral support among Democrats.
- A guy - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 1:29 pm:
You’re misread on this is epic. Even for you.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 1:37 pm:
LOL, Guy, what am I misreading, exactly?
The last Gallup poll on whom Trump is popular with?
Or your unique theory that Reagan was popular among Democrats in the elections of 1980 and 1984 because he bombed Libya in 1986, “and the Dems switched over?”
- Lucky Pierre - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 1:52 pm:
I know this is not a US politics blog but Reagan won 49 states only losing Minnesota home of his opponent Mondale (a lot of Democrats voted for Reagan for a number of reasons national security being one of them) the Iran hostage crisis was still fresh in everyone’s mind. Trump is not a conservative supporting in the past single payer and currently higher taxes on the wealthy. He is attracting blue collar support from those workers who appreciate his bluntness on China and what they are doing to our blue collar manufacturing economy.
Democrats are alienating private sector unions with their open borders and refusal to build the Keystone pipeline.
- A guy - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 2:27 pm:
Sling, you’re taking this too far afield. I’m sorry I ever brought up the Reagan example in supporting a point. What Reagan did that Democrats liked, was promise to build our military to greatest on the planet (he did). This, after the Resident Democrat in the White House at the same presided over an operation where our equipment fell apart in the middle of the dessert. Here we are in the exact same region again. Kirk has taken the populist view, as has Trump and others. It’s one of the few issues that cause Dems to switch over on a ballot. Just as zealotry will cause many GOP voters to do the opposite.
Point is, Kirk has an effective ad that will strongly resonate with a lot of people of both parties or self proclaimed liberals. People don’t feel safe. There are plenty of polls that indicate that.
It’s a solid effort on the ad. Ciao.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 2:33 pm:
–You’re taking this too far afield.–
No, I was just responding to what you wrote with facts. The fact that you can’t follow or support your own line of thought is your problem.
- A guy - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 3:19 pm:
Or, you’re just wrong on where the populist opinion is on this one. Tough to be the only great thinker among the huddled masses. Must be a burden for you.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 3:35 pm:
Guy, I respond with facts, you respond with unsupported nonsense and insults. That, too, is your problem.
- @MisterJayEm - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 3:52 pm:
I’m not at all convinced that Kirk should hitch his wagon to Trump. Even among Republicans, Gallup shows Trump with a net favorability rating of just 20%. http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/186878/rubio-cruz-vie-carson-best-liked-gop-candidate.aspx
– MrJM
- Dupage Bard - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 5:17 pm:
Good Ad -today. Let’s see if it’s the same ad after the primary.
- Blue dog dem - Tuesday, Dec 1, 15 @ 7:59 pm:
DoneKirk and Duckworthless. Two of The Land O Lincolns most uninspiring politicians!