Linda Chapa LaVia Nonpartisan 2,821 25.6%
Richard Guzman Nonpartisan 3,131 28.4%
Richard Irvin Nonpartisan 3,502 31.8%
Michael Saville Nonpartisan 1,566 14.2%
* Subscribers know a big reason why this happened. It’s the anti-Madigan meme…
This mailer on the #Aurora Mayor's race is correct because Linda Chapa-LaVia is running for the political mafia of Chicago and Springfield. pic.twitter.com/v8tEo9uSMO
Telling Catholic voters that you’re Pro-Life and voting for Planned Parenthood afterwards is not really a smart move either and that’s on Chapa-LaVia herself.
Can’t run from Madigan. He’s become more toxic than nuclear waste. This has got to make suburban democrats at least a little jumpy heading into 2018. Love it!
It was a 13% turnout, and Chapa LaVia list by less than one vote per precinct.
This is an indictment on three things…
1) Chapa LaVia wasn’t prepared to get her pluses out.
2) A low turnout race with a huge base of operation should generate mode votes.
3) Failing at “1)” and “2)”, the “Because… Madigan” was able to beat a very poor organization and an equally poor turnout that Chapa LaVia couldn’t use to her advantage.
If anyone thinks for “Half” a second I’m defending Linda Chapa LaVia, do a “Full” search on my feelings.
A poorly run campaign, marked by “Madigan” with what should be an advantage with low turnout cost Chapa LaVia by less than one vote a precinct.
I wouldn’t hang my hat 100% on “Because… Madigan”, but with the other factors, yes, 100% the negative mail made the difference.
- NorthsideNoMore - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 7:44 am:
In local elections 13% turnout ain’t bad perhaps Folks are still hung over from November and maybe now Mardi Gras. State work and local gov knowledge don’t equate.
- Echo The Bunnyman - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 7:47 am:
I don’t know if it is Madigan issue or people can see she is for her. Because it’s pretty obvious, all the time. No matter the reason the result is deserved.
The 13.9% turnout, “high” or “low”… the mere fact that a candidate with significant winning electoral history couldn’t generate and vote enough “Pluses” to place second… That’s a reflection on a poor organization and a poorly run Election Day to get the necessary pluses.
Those 2 important misses by Chapa LaVia and her Crew exaserbated what turns out to be the difference… the “because… Madigan”.
A seasoned electoral winner loses by One vote a precinct in an election with a 13.9% turnout? Awful.
The negative pieces worked due in part… Chapa LaVia couldn’t get it done.
Seemed Susana Mendoza was also a loser here. Clearly she has here eye in bigger things…and is still showing up around the state, including Aurora, as if she was in campaign mode.
The two losers are Chapa LaVia and Saville, and Chapa LaVia and Saville only.
… them and their Crews.
Oh! Conptrollers, they travel the state, being a statewide officer, in campaign mode or not. Ask Bruce Rauner. Ask any statewide in the history of… ever.
- Put the fun in unfunded - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 8:05 am:
A weak candidate. There were 4,387 votes cast in the township Democratic primary, and she only got 53% of that number for mayor. Plus in a nonpartisan race: Name ID, top ballot position, and only woman on the ballot, and can’t finish in top two?
And this doesn’t at all automatically translate into Chapa LaVia losing her State Rep seat to a Republican. An Aurora voter can simultaneously both not want Mike Madigan’s Chicago Machine to take over their city and prefer progressive Democratic policies in Springfield.
I wouldn’t call Chapa LaVia “progressive”, I’d probably call her aggressive towards others she measures as Half or not.
When you have to apologize a second time, because the first time was really not about seeing herself as her words exposed her, Chapa LaVia is progressing towards reminding me this campaign was Half the battle in her comeback.
Apologist “analysis” notwithstanding, Chapa lost because she is a careerist without a good record and because she was appropriately attached to Madigan, who is less popular than no one.
That recipe, which ain’t a secret, will be repeated.
I had the totals on the website, with Chapa LaVia “only” down 50. Chapa LaVia lost by 300ish, with 73 precincts, a 4 voters a precinct loss, with 85% or so not even voting!
I still think this…
===I wouldn’t hang my hat 100% on “Because… Madigan”, but with the other factors, yes, 100% the negative mail made the difference.===
… the negative pieces were 100% the difference, given where Chapa LaVia failed in my Numbers 1 and 2. I don’t believe that “because… Madigan” worked as the sole reason on the loss, but “because… Madigan” was the difference. That’s just true.
===That recipe, which ain’t a secret, will be repeated.===
And why wouldn’t it be repeated? No matter your opinion of Madigan’s work in the House, there is no denying he has marketed himself (and ILDEMS for that matter) poorly and doesn’t even realize it.
I would like to know how helpful the apparatus Weisner had left helped Guzman to drag him over the line and finish second. Another reason Chapa LaVia had to do a better job getting votes banked.
- Curl of the Burl - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 9:58 am:
Willy - to be cynical the “price” she paid was the potential for a $30,000 pay increase and getting paid on time. Oh - and being in control of a large staff and running the 2nd biggest city in Illinois.
Don’t read to much into this, but do read something into this….
Turn out it always low in municipal races in Aurora, when it just aldermanic races in some parts of town it is terrible. Unless you were taking a primary ballot in Aurora township this was the only race on the ballot so you had to be interested and motivated.
Some other things that might have been factors (because most people who are political in town likely thought the race was to come into second after Linda so this is a surprise)
The democrats had a township primary in Aurora township with contested races so that likely helped turn out a bit in that part of the city which helped her.
Here is the interesting thing, Guzman only beat her 52 votes in the Kane, Kendall and Will county portions of town, he beat her much more significantly (and also beat Irvin) in the DuPage county part of the city where turnout was lower 6.7% vs 13.9% in the rest of the city.
It wasn’t just the Madigan thing, I will agree with OW on that, but it did play a role. With an election that ended up this close, I would say that the Madigan card was likely the difference maker.
I did hear about it from people who asked me about the race. The mail worked and she was making robo calls to try and counter it, not saying it was the only factor but it did have an impact. There were also instances where the other candidates teamed up against her about the Madigan support as well and that got some local press coverage (not sure how many people read the local paper anymore).
The unions worked this race hard as well, had a friend who got a visit as a union household (her sons are in the grocery union) and was told they were getting a visit because they were a union household (she didn’t even realize they were one). The unions are players in Aurora (the painters have been spending money on elections here as long as I have lived in town) so this didn’t do them any favors.
The other thing that was a little funny, is I got mail for the D primary as well. No D voters in the house, we are about as hard R when it comes to primaries as it comes.
It’s going to be interesting to see if Guzman turns around and takes money from Madigan now.
Didn’t Chapa LaVia win an election in November? For an office where she’d have to directly vote on Madigan’s Speakership? And she won that race, yeah?
Not sure “Because Madigan!” was the deciding factor here, then. Gonna take OW’s side- if she hadn’t screwed up other things, it wouldn’t have mattered.
Here isn’t the real issue. Chapa is out of touch with what local voters want in a local candidate. She is a Springfield candidate and operates in a Springfield fashion. She touted her endorsement of Dick Durbin, Tammy Duckworth, Suzanna Mendoza and all those other Springfield people - no one in a local race cares about that stuff. The other candidates were local guys. Guzman had tons of small house “talks” and Irvin is on the City Council. You simply can’t run a Springfield type election for a local office. She never truly got down to the level
If the people and I would bet she never personally knocked on anyone’s door. The Madigan flier contributed to that Springfield type election style that people don’t want; not necessarily all about the “blame Madigan” but the level of negative campaigning. She lost the race because she is out of touch with the local electorate; but I’m confident she can stay in Springfield all she wants.
I was turned off by her bragging about her million dollar war chest as where many others. Madigan is starting to hurt IL democrats that are tied to him.
We have had a hard time finding a legitimate candidate to run against her since the first race (that time it was an Alderman at Large) since then I think we have had one person run against her who was legitimate. We have had some others who haven’t had a snowballs chance in heck….
Don’t know if you live here in Aurora or not, but the Madigan stuff did hurt her. I find it unlikely she picked up any votes due to people going “That Mike Madigan, he is a fine fellow” also there were not explicit party labels on anyone running. The Aurora township portion of Aurora has gone much harder D as time has gone on.
I would say the results from DuPage would kind of show the effectiveness of the Madigan stuff and her district isn’t in the DuPage county portion of town.
- Curl of the Burl -, if she lost her seat and was out of the game, that’s a loss. Serge reached to climb, but stays where she is. To-May-To, To-Mah-To.
- OneMan -
===It wasn’t just the Madigan thing, I will agree with OW on that, but it did play a role. With an election that ended up this close, I would say that the Madigan card was likely the difference maker===
My 308 friend… I said…
===I still think this… … the negative pieces were 100% the difference, given where Chapa LaVia failed in my Numbers 1 and 2. I don’t believe that “because… Madigan” worked as the sole reason on the loss, but “because… Madigan” was the difference. That’s just true.===
Always with respect, - OneMan -
- Arsenal -
Yeah, it’s hard to say you can’t find 400 or so votes to win solely because of “Because… Madigan” solely when 85% of people didn’t even vote. You’re on it.
- Paul -
You make great points, that local municipals have they’re own flavor and requirements and running like a member of the GA does makes winning in the muni a challenge, let alone “Because… Madigan”, but I’d add this to a great comment, reiterating and agreeing with you in this… you can’t leave 85% of voters on the table no matter how you decide to run a race. Lots of campaign choices can be questioned.
Great comments, all. This race is one that will cause more thinking and head scratching but it’s not as “simple” and not as “complex”… it’s a good mix of both.
Lol, the one man apologist continues on, in vain. But whatevs.
The facts: Chapa Lavia was the first name on the ballot, and was the only woman. She had name recognition and a huge money and organizational advantage over her opponents.
Given those advantages, she was actually badly beaten by coming in third.
To say the Madigan effect wasn’t a significant factor is to ignore reality.
Funny how the losers cling to “bad candidate” or “poor turnout” to explain away the obvious. If you are a subscriber to Cap Fax, you’d know that the Madigan ties were fatal to Chapa LaVia in this race.
First of all, read my comment. If you want to deconstruct it, lest have that argument.
I made clear that I felt the mailers made the difference, but leaving 85% of the electorate at home when Chapa LaVia only needed 400 votes to move on, that’s a campaign failure, way outside the mailers.
Your drive-by only makes sense if those 85% decided to stay home because… “Because… Madigan”
The 85% stayed home because more or less, they always do. Especially after a very large November election. Lot of voter fatigue. We’ll see more of it on 4/4. Especially in the places where there was a primary. People just tire of it all.
If there’s a big hot referendum on the ballot, maybe there’s a blip. Otherwise, be prepared for the sound of a flat tire.
Chapa should have been able to carry the day no matter what kind of turnout there was. She clearly didn’t work hard enough. She lost.
The fact that 85% of the people didn’t vote is a bad organization. Chapa’s on the ballot every two years, whether she has an opponent or not. She should have won that race just her plus lists for Rep. Her Field/GOTV was obviously poorly done. Also “Because….Madigan”
The negative pieces were the work of a scared opponent, who lacks the common decency to act like a man and run a clean race! Lets just remember Geneva contruction company had to protect thier cash cow contracts!
Now the other guy Guzman has serious ties to Springfield! 2of his last bosses are in jail!
- Grand Avenue - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 12:52 am:
I got the feeling the Independent PACs were getting involved in this race as a heat check on the anti-Madigan message, and boy is it still hot.
- Bored Chairman - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 5:11 am:
Wow! IMA and road builders are big winners here. Madigan and unions are the big losers. Blood in the water.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 5:52 am:
Telling Catholic voters that you’re Pro-Life and voting for Planned Parenthood afterwards is not really a smart move either and that’s on Chapa-LaVia herself.
- P. - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 6:26 am:
It’s true. She was part of the mafia. We called her Don Linda.
- Rabid - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 6:38 am:
The angrier voter showed up
- Big Muddy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 6:51 am:
Can’t run from Madigan. He’s become more toxic than nuclear waste. This has got to make suburban democrats at least a little jumpy heading into 2018. Love it!
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 7:18 am:
(Sigh)
Let’s look at the numbers…
It was a 13% turnout, and Chapa LaVia list by less than one vote per precinct.
This is an indictment on three things…
1) Chapa LaVia wasn’t prepared to get her pluses out.
2) A low turnout race with a huge base of operation should generate mode votes.
3) Failing at “1)” and “2)”, the “Because… Madigan” was able to beat a very poor organization and an equally poor turnout that Chapa LaVia couldn’t use to her advantage.
If anyone thinks for “Half” a second I’m defending Linda Chapa LaVia, do a “Full” search on my feelings.
A poorly run campaign, marked by “Madigan” with what should be an advantage with low turnout cost Chapa LaVia by less than one vote a precinct.
I wouldn’t hang my hat 100% on “Because… Madigan”, but with the other factors, yes, 100% the negative mail made the difference.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 7:18 am:
“lost”
- Big Muddy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 7:29 am:
“Half” and “full” = well played by OW
- NorthsideNoMore - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 7:44 am:
In local elections 13% turnout ain’t bad perhaps Folks are still hung over from November and maybe now Mardi Gras. State work and local gov knowledge don’t equate.
- Echo The Bunnyman - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 7:47 am:
I don’t know if it is Madigan issue or people can see she is for her. Because it’s pretty obvious, all the time. No matter the reason the result is deserved.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 7:51 am:
- NorthsideNoMore -
The 13.9% turnout, “high” or “low”… the mere fact that a candidate with significant winning electoral history couldn’t generate and vote enough “Pluses” to place second… That’s a reflection on a poor organization and a poorly run Election Day to get the necessary pluses.
Those 2 important misses by Chapa LaVia and her Crew exaserbated what turns out to be the difference… the “because… Madigan”.
A seasoned electoral winner loses by One vote a precinct in an election with a 13.9% turnout? Awful.
The negative pieces worked due in part… Chapa LaVia couldn’t get it done.
(Tips cap to - Big Muddy -)
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 7:55 am:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailyherald.com/amp-article/20140410/news/140419859/
- Mendoza Watch - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 8:00 am:
Seemed Susana Mendoza was also a loser here. Clearly she has here eye in bigger things…and is still showing up around the state, including Aurora, as if she was in campaign mode.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 8:04 am:
- Mendoza Watch -
Again, a 13.9% turnout, for a Primary…
The two losers are Chapa LaVia and Saville, and Chapa LaVia and Saville only.
… them and their Crews.
Oh! Conptrollers, they travel the state, being a statewide officer, in campaign mode or not. Ask Bruce Rauner. Ask any statewide in the history of… ever.
- Put the fun in unfunded - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 8:05 am:
A weak candidate. There were 4,387 votes cast in the township Democratic primary, and she only got 53% of that number for mayor. Plus in a nonpartisan race: Name ID, top ballot position, and only woman on the ballot, and can’t finish in top two?
- Dee Lay - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 8:10 am:
Per Rich: “(The Mailer was) Sent out of Elgin from a PAC not registered w the state.”
I’d say this looks like a proft thing, but nothing is misspelled.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 8:19 am:
Um… “ok”….
Chapa LaVia… still in the House
Kifowit … still in the House
Mendoza… newly minted Comptroller.
It’s too early for such silliness, lol.
- Grand Avenue - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 8:23 am:
If the PAC spent less than $5,000 on the mailer, legally they don’t have to register with the state.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 8:34 am:
the results are a clear sign that 87% of aurora voters don’t give a hoot about any of the candidates
- Grand Avenue - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 8:37 am:
And this doesn’t at all automatically translate into Chapa LaVia losing her State Rep seat to a Republican. An Aurora voter can simultaneously both not want Mike Madigan’s Chicago Machine to take over their city and prefer progressive Democratic policies in Springfield.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 8:41 am:
- Grand Avenue -
I wouldn’t call Chapa LaVia “progressive”, I’d probably call her aggressive towards others she measures as Half or not.
When you have to apologize a second time, because the first time was really not about seeing herself as her words exposed her, Chapa LaVia is progressing towards reminding me this campaign was Half the battle in her comeback.
- Grand Avenue - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 8:44 am:
One of her opponents - Guzman - is half-white/half-Filipino & she didn’t attack him for it. I call that progress! LOL.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 8:48 am:
===One of her opponents - Guzman - is half-white/half-Filipino & she didn’t attack him for it. I call that progress!===
Well, you have me there. Chapa LaVia should take wins where she can…
- Deft Wing - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 9:11 am:
Apologist “analysis” notwithstanding, Chapa lost because she is a careerist without a good record and because she was appropriately attached to Madigan, who is less popular than no one.
That recipe, which ain’t a secret, will be repeated.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 9:14 am:
I did make a mistake. I apologize.
I had the totals on the website, with Chapa LaVia “only” down 50. Chapa LaVia lost by 300ish, with 73 precincts, a 4 voters a precinct loss, with 85% or so not even voting!
I still think this…
===I wouldn’t hang my hat 100% on “Because… Madigan”, but with the other factors, yes, 100% the negative mail made the difference.===
… the negative pieces were 100% the difference, given where Chapa LaVia failed in my Numbers 1 and 2. I don’t believe that “because… Madigan” worked as the sole reason on the loss, but “because… Madigan” was the difference. That’s just true.
- Ducky LaMoore - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 9:16 am:
===That recipe, which ain’t a secret, will be repeated.===
And why wouldn’t it be repeated? No matter your opinion of Madigan’s work in the House, there is no denying he has marketed himself (and ILDEMS for that matter) poorly and doesn’t even realize it.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 9:20 am:
Oh - Deft Wing -,
When 85% of the electorate fail to show up, with a poorly run campaign finding and voting pluses, it’s not “because… Madigan” driving that bus solely.
With 54,000+ not voting and her incumbent background, they couldn’t find 400 votes somewhere? That’s .07% of 54,000.
The mailings were the difference because Chapa LaVia didn’t do what good campaigns always do, get their voters out to vote
- winners and losers - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 9:21 am:
It is a local election for mayor.
Chapa LaVia is still a State Rep.
Lighten up a little on her. She lost. That is enough of a price to pay.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 9:41 am:
Ugh. 0.7%… Poor typing.
Yes, she lost. It’s an upset. What “price” has she paid? It’s commentary on a Post in a race. Lighten up?
- Jake From Elwood - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 9:50 am:
OW, I think she has been outworked by Richard Irvin, who has been everywhere. I fully expected Linda to come in second however, so good for Guzman.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 9:57 am:
- Jake From Elwood -
Nicely said.
I would like to know how helpful the apparatus Weisner had left helped Guzman to drag him over the line and finish second. Another reason Chapa LaVia had to do a better job getting votes banked.
- Curl of the Burl - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 9:58 am:
Willy - to be cynical the “price” she paid was the potential for a $30,000 pay increase and getting paid on time. Oh - and being in control of a large staff and running the 2nd biggest city in Illinois.
- OneMan - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 9:59 am:
As the Aurora guy, where to start on this…
Don’t read to much into this, but do read something into this….
Turn out it always low in municipal races in Aurora, when it just aldermanic races in some parts of town it is terrible. Unless you were taking a primary ballot in Aurora township this was the only race on the ballot so you had to be interested and motivated.
Some other things that might have been factors (because most people who are political in town likely thought the race was to come into second after Linda so this is a surprise)
The democrats had a township primary in Aurora township with contested races so that likely helped turn out a bit in that part of the city which helped her.
Here is the interesting thing, Guzman only beat her 52 votes in the Kane, Kendall and Will county portions of town, he beat her much more significantly (and also beat Irvin) in the DuPage county part of the city where turnout was lower 6.7% vs 13.9% in the rest of the city.
It wasn’t just the Madigan thing, I will agree with OW on that, but it did play a role. With an election that ended up this close, I would say that the Madigan card was likely the difference maker.
I did hear about it from people who asked me about the race. The mail worked and she was making robo calls to try and counter it, not saying it was the only factor but it did have an impact. There were also instances where the other candidates teamed up against her about the Madigan support as well and that got some local press coverage (not sure how many people read the local paper anymore).
The unions worked this race hard as well, had a friend who got a visit as a union household (her sons are in the grocery union) and was told they were getting a visit because they were a union household (she didn’t even realize they were one). The unions are players in Aurora (the painters have been spending money on elections here as long as I have lived in town) so this didn’t do them any favors.
The other thing that was a little funny, is I got mail for the D primary as well. No D voters in the house, we are about as hard R when it comes to primaries as it comes.
It’s going to be interesting to see if Guzman turns around and takes money from Madigan now.
- Arsenal - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 10:12 am:
Didn’t Chapa LaVia win an election in November? For an office where she’d have to directly vote on Madigan’s Speakership? And she won that race, yeah?
Not sure “Because Madigan!” was the deciding factor here, then. Gonna take OW’s side- if she hadn’t screwed up other things, it wouldn’t have mattered.
- Paul - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 10:16 am:
Here isn’t the real issue. Chapa is out of touch with what local voters want in a local candidate. She is a Springfield candidate and operates in a Springfield fashion. She touted her endorsement of Dick Durbin, Tammy Duckworth, Suzanna Mendoza and all those other Springfield people - no one in a local race cares about that stuff. The other candidates were local guys. Guzman had tons of small house “talks” and Irvin is on the City Council. You simply can’t run a Springfield type election for a local office. She never truly got down to the level
If the people and I would bet she never personally knocked on anyone’s door. The Madigan flier contributed to that Springfield type election style that people don’t want; not necessarily all about the “blame Madigan” but the level of negative campaigning. She lost the race because she is out of touch with the local electorate; but I’m confident she can stay in Springfield all she wants.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 10:30 am:
===And she won that race, yeah?===
Hard to lose when you’re unopposed.
- Rocky Rosi - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 10:44 am:
I was turned off by her bragging about her million dollar war chest as where many others. Madigan is starting to hurt IL democrats that are tied to him.
- Arsenal - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 10:45 am:
==Hard to lose when you’re unopposed.==
Right. I don’t know why “Because Madigan” was such a non-factor last year that Republicans couldn’t even find a candidate against her.
- Oneman - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 11:09 am:
Arsenal…
We have had a hard time finding a legitimate candidate to run against her since the first race (that time it was an Alderman at Large) since then I think we have had one person run against her who was legitimate. We have had some others who haven’t had a snowballs chance in heck….
Don’t know if you live here in Aurora or not, but the Madigan stuff did hurt her. I find it unlikely she picked up any votes due to people going “That Mike Madigan, he is a fine fellow” also there were not explicit party labels on anyone running. The Aurora township portion of Aurora has gone much harder D as time has gone on.
I would say the results from DuPage would kind of show the effectiveness of the Madigan stuff and her district isn’t in the DuPage county portion of town.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 11:22 am:
Some house cleaning…
- Curl of the Burl -, if she lost her seat and was out of the game, that’s a loss. Serge reached to climb, but stays where she is. To-May-To, To-Mah-To.
- OneMan -
===It wasn’t just the Madigan thing, I will agree with OW on that, but it did play a role. With an election that ended up this close, I would say that the Madigan card was likely the difference maker===
My 308 friend… I said…
===I still think this… … the negative pieces were 100% the difference, given where Chapa LaVia failed in my Numbers 1 and 2. I don’t believe that “because… Madigan” worked as the sole reason on the loss, but “because… Madigan” was the difference. That’s just true.===
Always with respect, - OneMan -
- Arsenal -
Yeah, it’s hard to say you can’t find 400 or so votes to win solely because of “Because… Madigan” solely when 85% of people didn’t even vote. You’re on it.
- Paul -
You make great points, that local municipals have they’re own flavor and requirements and running like a member of the GA does makes winning in the muni a challenge, let alone “Because… Madigan”, but I’d add this to a great comment, reiterating and agreeing with you in this… you can’t leave 85% of voters on the table no matter how you decide to run a race. Lots of campaign choices can be questioned.
Great comments, all. This race is one that will cause more thinking and head scratching but it’s not as “simple” and not as “complex”… it’s a good mix of both.
- Oneman - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 12:02 pm:
OW
That’s what happPens when you read on the phone on the plane…
Paul
== If the people and I would bet she never personally knocked on anyone’s door. ==
I’ll take that bet, then again she knocked on my door so it wouldn’t really be fair to take that bet.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 12:05 pm:
- Oneman -
Not one worry. I figured “as much”. I was just clarifying. Nothing more, bud. OW
- A guy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 12:16 pm:
==Hard to lose when you’re unopposed.==
True. So far that’s only happened in Arlington Heights.
- Deft Wing - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:14 pm:
Lol, the one man apologist continues on, in vain. But whatevs.
The facts: Chapa Lavia was the first name on the ballot, and was the only woman. She had name recognition and a huge money and organizational advantage over her opponents.
Given those advantages, she was actually badly beaten by coming in third.
To say the Madigan effect wasn’t a significant factor is to ignore reality.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:18 pm:
- Deft Wing -
So 85% of the possible voters survey vote at all because of “Becsuse… Madigan”?
LOL
You’re right, “whatevs”
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:21 pm:
===So 85% of the possible voters decided not to vote at all because of “Becsuse… Madigan”?===
- phocion - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:24 pm:
Funny how the losers cling to “bad candidate” or “poor turnout” to explain away the obvious. If you are a subscriber to Cap Fax, you’d know that the Madigan ties were fatal to Chapa LaVia in this race.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 1:31 pm:
- phocion -
First of all, read my comment. If you want to deconstruct it, lest have that argument.
I made clear that I felt the mailers made the difference, but leaving 85% of the electorate at home when Chapa LaVia only needed 400 votes to move on, that’s a campaign failure, way outside the mailers.
Your drive-by only makes sense if those 85% decided to stay home because… “Because… Madigan”
- A guy - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 2:09 pm:
The 85% stayed home because more or less, they always do. Especially after a very large November election. Lot of voter fatigue. We’ll see more of it on 4/4. Especially in the places where there was a primary. People just tire of it all.
If there’s a big hot referendum on the ballot, maybe there’s a blip. Otherwise, be prepared for the sound of a flat tire.
Chapa should have been able to carry the day no matter what kind of turnout there was. She clearly didn’t work hard enough. She lost.
- MrsA - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 8:12 pm:
One key issue missed here….. Linda never intended to vacate her IL seat. As such, she would have more than doubled her pay!
- DuPage Bard - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 9:10 pm:
The fact that 85% of the people didn’t vote is a bad organization. Chapa’s on the ballot every two years, whether she has an opponent or not. She should have won that race just her plus lists for Rep. Her Field/GOTV was obviously poorly done. Also “Because….Madigan”
- From aurora - Wednesday, Mar 1, 17 @ 10:02 pm:
The negative pieces were the work of a scared opponent, who lacks the common decency to act like a man and run a clean race! Lets just remember Geneva contruction company had to protect thier cash cow contracts!
Now the other guy Guzman has serious ties to Springfield! 2of his last bosses are in jail!