* My weekly syndicated newspaper column was written before news emerged that Gov. JB Pritzker had contributed $5 million to the super PAC supporting Juliana Stratton…
The top three Democratic U.S. Senate candidates faced off twice last week.
The first debate wasn’t televised, so the live audience was quite small. The second debate was televised, so the audience was bigger.
However, these debates don’t attract even a smidgen of the audience of presidential debates, when half the country often tunes in.
The object here is to generate video clips for TV ads and social media promotion and to manage conventional news coverage, which can then be used in ads. Like it or not, that’s where most people will be exposed to the debates.
Effectively conveying those messages requires money and creativity. U.S. Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., has so far raised and spent the most money. And while he has a substantial lead in the polls, it’s unclear yet if his wide support is paper-thin, meaning he could be taken out with some strong attacks.
Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton really took it to her two opponents during Monday’s debate, which was sponsored by the Chicago Sun-Times, WBEZ and the University of Chicago’s Institute of Politics.
Krishnamoorthi especially seemed caught off guard at Stratton’s aggressiveness, including on his refusal to completely abolish ICE.
Stratton repeatedly dissed the other two candidates for taking corporate PAC money, forcing them to explain their positions.
Voters don’t generally do nuance, so when you’re explaining in campaigns, you’re not winning.
Both pointed in response to Stratton’s backing by a “dark money” super PAC. She didn’t explain, but that committee will actually be reporting its contributors.
Stratton has lately taken Krishnamoorthi to task on a host of issues, including his rather meaningless vote for an antisemitism resolution that, in passing, congratulated immigration enforcement. But she forced him to explain it.
After Krishnamoorthi and U.S. Rep. Robin Kelly, D-Ill., struggled long and hard with a question on whether they agreed with Trump on anything, Stratton said, “I’m not going to the United States Senate to find something to agree with Donald Trump on.”
When asked if they backed him, both Krishnamoorthi and Kelly said they hadn’t made up their minds about reelecting Chuck Schumer as the Democrats’ Senate leader. Stratton said: “No.”
Polls have shown for months that Democratic voters hold their party’s congressional wing in low esteem. This ain’t rocket science.
But by Thursday’s ABC7 debate, the putative front-runner seemed to have regained some of his bearings.
Krishnamoorthi tried to turn the tables on the ICE question, accurately saying that his position of wanting to “abolish Trump’s ICE” is identical to Gov. JB Pritzker’s. The governor is popular enough with his party members to help blunt the ICE attack at a time when polls show strong Democratic support for abolishing the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency.
“I’d be curious if my colleagues agree with this position,” Krishnamoorthi said, gesturing at Stratton, who did not explain herself.
But Krishnamoorthi then upped the ante: “Rick Pearson asked Lt. Gov. Stratton if she were to abolish ICE, where should the duties be transferred? She said, ‘CBP.’ I think that would be a grave mistake. CBP is who employs Greg Bovino. CBP is who actually shot and killed Alex Pretti.”
I would assume that if Stratton’s numbers start to move up or she directly attacks Krishnamoorthi on ICE, her unwise U.S. Customs and Border Protection comment will come back to haunt her.
Meanwhile, when asked about the Senate confirmation process, Stratton said she will not vote for any nominations made by Trump. Kelly made the same pledge.
Krishnamoorthi, instead, focused only on the appointment of federal judges in Illinois and gave a very D.C.-centric answer involving independent review panels and “blue slips.”
As we saw with ICE, he can learn, but Raja just exudes “congressman.” Kelly has the same affliction, although it’s less pronounced. It’s almost like a nearly incurable disease, and Dem voters at least say they’re looking for something more authentic these days,
Authenticity, however, can be stretched. When asked by ABC7’s Craig Wall, “What specific actions would you take in the Senate to help working families struggling with affordability?” Stratton said she and her spouse “have to sit down and we have to budget every single week.”
“We have to think through, what are we bringing in? What’s going to go out?” Stratton said.
My associate Isabel Miller decided to check the numbers, and Stratton and her spouse make a combined $283,000 a year.
The Stratton campaign was not amused by this observation. “What’s the salary cap for being allowed to budget for weekly expenses?” OK, good point. And it is possible that she may not have a job in a year. But still.
If Raja decides to use it, Stratton’s answer about the border patrol is a potentially fatal error.
- Frida’s Boss - Monday, Feb 2, 26 @ 9:40 am:
Politicians who are in the top 1% of income need to stop playing the “I’m regular people” card. Claiming having to struggle with what groceries to buy when making over a quarter million a year as a “look at me, I struggle” moment is tone deaf and disrespectful.
- JS Mill - Monday, Feb 2, 26 @ 9:50 am:
=Claiming having to struggle with what groceries to buy when making over a quarter million a year as a “look at me, I struggle” moment is tone deaf and disrespectful.=
To some degree, I disagree. $283,000 is a nice living but it is not silicon valley/venture capitalist territory. I highly doubt the Lt. Governor struggles to put food on the table but disrespectful? No. And $283,000 i n the western suburbs is not a stand out income.
- Loop Lady - Monday, Feb 2, 26 @ 9:52 am:
Stratton imho will be out of a job soon.
Jumping from Lt Gov to Congress is a pretty big leap.
JB has enough cash to back who he wishes, but I sense an ulterior motive in his huge push for Stratton.
I’m not saying it’s not his prerogative , but obviously, this will play well with a certain demographic.
- Friendly Bob Adams - Monday, Feb 2, 26 @ 9:58 am:
I don’t think most voters are aware of the distinction between ICE and CBP. Not sure it’s a big error.
- @misterjayem - Monday, Feb 2, 26 @ 10:17 am:
To inflict any damage using Stratton’s ICE/CBP gaff, Raja would have to educate voters about by explaining the distinctions and their roles — and I have it on good authority that “if you’re explaining, you’re losing.”
– MrJM
- Candy Dogood - Monday, Feb 2, 26 @ 10:27 am:
===“What’s the salary cap for being allowed to budget for weekly expenses?” OK, good point. And it is possible that she may not have a job in a year. But still.===
This isn’t a great response even if it is a good point. When a household is making more than three times the median income of the state those budgeting conversations are quite a bit different than in households in the bottom half that median income.
The issue is that $283,000 is still not wealthy, but no one wants to explain to someone that’s struggling on $15 an hour than one can still struggle on $283,000 a year because those struggles look a lot different.
===“abolish Trump’s ICE” ===
I am not overly confident that voters will see the distinction between “Abolish ICE” and “Abolish Trump’s ICE.” It’s good fence sitting language and that’s why that’s where our Governor is sitting.
=== “I’m not going to the United States Senate to find something to agree with Donald Trump on.”===
More of this.
===Both pointed in response to Stratton’s backing by a “dark money” super PAC.===
The LT Governor has zero control over what billionaires and millionaires create a super PAC to support her.
While a blanket criticism of PAC money may not be fair because all PACs aren’t created equally, those other folks get to decide which checks to cash and suggesting no one should care who is paying their campaign bills is a hard sell.
- Interim Retiree - Monday, Feb 2, 26 @ 10:32 am:
–Obviously this may play well with a certain demographic.–
I’m not saying this is right or wrong, but perhaps it’s also a sign of loyalty?
- JS Mill - Monday, Feb 2, 26 @ 10:41 am:
=The issue is that $283,000 is still not wealthy, but no one wants to explain to someone that’s struggling on $15 an hour than one can still struggle on $283,000 a year because those struggles look a lot different.=
Well stated.
- Alton Sinkhole - Monday, Feb 2, 26 @ 11:09 am:
==The LT Governor has zero control over what billionaires and millionaires create a super PAC to support her.==
hahahahahahaha
- DuPage Saint - Monday, Feb 2, 26 @ 11:14 am:
People can argue that an income of over 250 thousand is not rich but I don’t think most voters would agree
What I deeply resent when all these politicians cry ordinary people on a budget is what do they budget for insurance what does they budget for retirement income or is that all taken care of. No politician should get any health insurance that is better than the average voter
- Responsa - Monday, Feb 2, 26 @ 11:38 am:
== Stratton said, “I’m not going to the United States Senate to find something to agree with Donald Trump on.”
This not only came across as unnecessarily snarky toward the reporter but seems like a somewhat strange approach to a job interview for someone who wants to join the ranks of the Worlds Greatest Deliberative Body.
- Pundent - Monday, Feb 2, 26 @ 11:38 am:
==The LT Governor has zero control over what billionaires and millionaires create a super PAC to support her.==
I think she’s at least vaguely familiar with the governor and his political funding apparatus. I’m also not sure that voters understand or possibly even care about corporate vs PAC funding. The distinctions only matter to politicians who aren’t getting one or the other.
- Pundent - Monday, Feb 2, 26 @ 11:44 am:
=People can argue that an income of over 250 thousand is not rich=
More importantly, it ain’t poor.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Feb 2, 26 @ 11:48 am:
===the Worlds Greatest Deliberative Body===
I was in dire need of a hearty laugh this morning. Thanks for supplying it.
- Responsa - Monday, Feb 2, 26 @ 12:00 pm:
My pleasure, Rich.
- Politix - Monday, Feb 2, 26 @ 1:40 pm:
I don’t know if they have children, but my husband and I take in a bit more than that. With one kid in college, a mortgage, property taxes in a HCOL burb, insurance, regular home maintenance, car payment, groceries, and other ordinary operating expenses, we don’t have a lot left over.
- ZC - Monday, Feb 2, 26 @ 5:29 pm:
If you’re making over 250K per year, you are indeed rich. You’re just not wealthy, is my crude summation. A lot of everyday stuff you want, you can just buy it and not worry about reviewing your checking account. I’ve gone in my own life to living on around 60K in Chicago to being rich, but I’ve tried not to forget what it was like, to sort of have to carefully plan out all my monthly expenses so my checks didn’t bounce. It was a near thing at times.