Sen. Mark Kirk’s campaign released an ad attacking challenger Rep. Tammy Duckworth’s lawsuit settlement. The ad charges that Duckworth ‘humiliated and bullied’ employees and spent $26,000 of taxpayers’ money to fight the suit.
A preliminary review of federal television station records show what appears to be a limited buy for the ad, with only $35,000 being spent alone on Chicago stations ABC-7 and NBC-5.
Unless they up the buy, this is essentially a press release ad.
Those numbers are just through this Tuesday and the ad was just trafficked so it isn’t showing up on all the stations. It will have sufficient points behind it to drive the message.
Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois, widely considered to be the most vulnerable Republican senator up for re-election this year, raised only $1 million in the second quarter of 2016, his campaign announced, a modest sum for a highly competitive race.
Rep. Tammy Duckworth, Mr. Kirk’s Democratic opponent, raised $2.7 million. She ended the second quarter with $5.5 million cash on hand, compared with Mr. Kirk’s $3.1 million.
Though the race is considered a toss-up by the Cook Political Report, Mr. Kirk has all but lost the financial backing of national Republicans, with groups like the National Republican Senatorial Committee and One Nation sitting the race out entirely.
*** UPDATE 2 *** Press release…
In response to Mark Kirk’s desperate new attack ad — which is in reality a $35,000 press release that won’t be widely seen by Illinois voters — Duckworth deputy campaign manager Matt McGrath issued the following statement:
“Tammy Duckworth served 23 years in the National Guard and nearly lost her life in service of her country, and she has made fighting for Veterans her life’s work, with tangible results. Mark Kirk, on the other hand, lies with such ease and frequency, both about his own military record and his political opponents, it’s hard to keep up. Here he is once again overhyping a civil case that a federal judge called a ‘garden variety workplace case’ before dismissing it, and which was eventually settled at ‘nuisance value,’ saving taxpayer dollars.
“This dishonest attack is also plainly an attempt to distract from his abysmal fundraising, which he released Friday night, and which indicates that even though Kirk always does the bidding of Wall Street and the corporate special interests that have funded his campaigns for 16 years, the gravy train is running dry.” — Matt McGrath, campaign spokesman
Does anyone else find it very odd that Team Rauner has let Team Kirk swing this long? There’s a lot of personnel overlap between the two, and I always figured that some significant amount of Rauner cash would slop over into Kirk’s cup.
I guess it could still happen, but it won’t be as effective now that his party’s fund-raising apparatus has pegged Kirk as a dud.
B. That’s a decent ad chipping away at one of Duckworth’s supposed selling points. Team Tammy wants voters to assume that since she herself is a wounded veteran she therefore automatically is the choice of veterans and the best option for assuring veterans’ care. This ad shows why with her past performance as an agency administrator that is not necessarily the case.
It’s such a dispiriting senatorial match-up. So far, neither she nor Kirk are giving voters much reason to have confidence in either of them or much reason to vote for either of them.
McGrath’s response and intent on trying to tie Kirk to special interests is laughable. I guess Duckworth’s lofty contributions lobbyists and PACs don’t count.
Duckworth’s spokesman protests too much. It would have been better to ignore the attack ad than to overreact to yesterday’s news (Duckworth ought to have settled this suit years ago).
If the Democrats had nominated any other candidate with political gravitas, Kirk would be finished today. His marginal prospects are between slim and none only because Duckworth is a lackluster opponent.
- Michael Westen - Monday, Jul 11, 16 @ 9:20 am:
Give it up already. $26,000 is a pittance and no wrongdoing was found. Most voters will view this as the nothing that is. Find a real issue.
- A guy - Monday, Jul 11, 16 @ 9:23 am:
It packs a punch. They must be hoping the small settlement gets lost in the overall message. It might.
- EI and U - Monday, Jul 11, 16 @ 9:23 am:
Decent ad. While the dollar figure is trivial I think the messaging is consistent with what the Kirk crew is trying to do. I expect more of the same.
- wordslinger - Monday, Jul 11, 16 @ 9:30 am:
–Most voters will view this as the nothing that is.–
Most voters will never view it at all. Kirk can’t raise money.
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/07/08/gops-vulnerable-sen-mark-kirk-posts-weak-fundraising-take/
- downstate hack - Monday, Jul 11, 16 @ 9:54 am:
Kirk is lucky Duckworth is such a weak candidate. Otherwise he would be toast.
- @MisterJayEm - Monday, Jul 11, 16 @ 10:18 am:
Does anyone else find it very odd that Team Rauner has let Team Kirk swing this long? There’s a lot of personnel overlap between the two, and I always figured that some significant amount of Rauner cash would slop over into Kirk’s cup.
I guess it could still happen, but it won’t be as effective now that his party’s fund-raising apparatus has pegged Kirk as a dud.
– MrJM
- Responsa - Monday, Jul 11, 16 @ 11:16 am:
B. That’s a decent ad chipping away at one of Duckworth’s supposed selling points. Team Tammy wants voters to assume that since she herself is a wounded veteran she therefore automatically is the choice of veterans and the best option for assuring veterans’ care. This ad shows why with her past performance as an agency administrator that is not necessarily the case.
It’s such a dispiriting senatorial match-up. So far, neither she nor Kirk are giving voters much reason to have confidence in either of them or much reason to vote for either of them.
- A guy - Monday, Jul 11, 16 @ 11:21 am:
Mr. McGrath, OVER-defending is not a sign of strength.
You might have just said “the size of the buy is symbolic of the strength of the charge”
…and leave it at that. The hard reactions are doing you no favors. Yikes dude.
- Anonymous - Monday, Jul 11, 16 @ 11:21 am:
The ad is okay, but it also has a last gasp feel to it. Not much more mileage in this attack, so Kirk needs to find something else to campaign on.
- walker - Monday, Jul 11, 16 @ 11:35 am:
Claiming that a candidate humiliates and bullies doesn’t seem to work in today’s races.
- Huh? - Monday, Jul 11, 16 @ 12:38 pm:
Nope. Still won’t vote for him.
- Clark - Monday, Jul 11, 16 @ 12:38 pm:
McGrath’s response and intent on trying to tie Kirk to special interests is laughable. I guess Duckworth’s lofty contributions lobbyists and PACs don’t count.
- wordslinger - Monday, Jul 11, 16 @ 1:44 pm:
–Does anyone else find it very odd that Team Rauner has let Team Kirk swing this long?–
Can’t seem to find his checkbook for Kirk. I’d say that’s pretty revealing.
- Soccermom - Monday, Jul 11, 16 @ 3:50 pm:
Mr JM and Word — I’ve been wondering about that, too.
- Anonymous - Monday, Jul 11, 16 @ 4:57 pm:
Duckworth’s spokesman protests too much. It would have been better to ignore the attack ad than to overreact to yesterday’s news (Duckworth ought to have settled this suit years ago).
If the Democrats had nominated any other candidate with political gravitas, Kirk would be finished today. His marginal prospects are between slim and none only because Duckworth is a lackluster opponent.
- Facility Scheduling Software - Tuesday, Jul 12, 16 @ 8:34 am:
your blog sharing remarkable information. Thanks for sharing with us.