Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Flop sweat
Next Post: Joe Walsh’s way gets rocky - Roskam advertising spending meeting with tax money
Posted in:
* I’m running the question early because the State Board of Elections will release their final vote tally today in the GOP governor’s race. And Sen. Kirk Dillard has a 1:30 pm press conference scheduled. From Crain’s…
Mr. Dillard has been saying he won’t go on to the next step — a partial recount — unless the certified total shows him within about 100 votes. He’d asked only that everyone wait until all the votes were counted and the totals double-checked.
Something could change at the last second, but insiders say there is no sign of that.
* The Question: Considering the problems Sen. Bill Brady has had on the campaign trail during the past month, do you think Dillard should ask for a recount even if the spread is more than 100 votes, but his advisers say he still has a legit shot at winning?
A plea to non-Republicans: Try to remain intellectually honest here.
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 8:40 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Flop sweat
Next Post: Joe Walsh’s way gets rocky - Roskam advertising spending meeting with tax money
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Unless Dillard has an honest and legitimate reason to believe that a recount would result in a different outcome I think he should and will back off a recount effort for the sake of the party. I think a recount would negatively impact both his and Brady’s chances of a win in the general election.
Comment by Fed Up Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 8:50 am
That’s a real tough call for Dillard. He has an unfortunate habit of laying down markers, like sundown, and the 100 votes.
Still, if it’s a legitimate chance, he has to take the legal process to the end and go for it. A lot of people invested time and money in his candidacy to not take the chance.
But I don’t think he’ll do it.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 8:50 am
I don’t see Brady’s performance as being a relevant factor.
If I’m with a campaign and the candidate has a chance to win from a more detailed count of the votes I say push for a more detailed count of the votes.
It’s hard to argue that the short timeline until the general election creates time pressure. Dillard isn’t sniping at Brady.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 8:50 am
I wouldn’t think that he should continue. I am trying to think of an incident when the “loser” has ever prevailed in a recount. Do we know the counties where he thinks he can make votes?
Recounts are expensive.
I am Republican.
Comment by PPHS Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 8:52 am
No way. There would be too much backlash from people who took him at his word and have praised his graciousness since the primary.
Comment by T.J. Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 8:53 am
Sen Dilliard was pretty strong in his conversations this week about running Bill the Builder around the block a few times
Looks like he could use the schooling as we used to say a the stable.
My guess is that it won’t be enough
Now the QOTD the day is the over/under on the numbers times BilltheBuilder and CommandoKirk are in the same area code between now and November
Those of us in the CFS bunker HQ are hoping for lots. It will be very entertainng to watch Bill explain as his social reform planks to the Commando as the commando dons his invisibility cloak.
Comment by CircularFiringSquad Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 8:53 am
Senator Dillard is the only viable GOP candidate
Comment by butie Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 8:55 am
Seriously, is there a Dillard/Turner possibility. I can’t imagine a better set of circumstances or candidates for a viable 3rd party run.
Comment by 3rd Party Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 8:57 am
It would help to know who these “advisors” are. If they are sycophants who can’t let go then, no, Dillard should not ask for the re-count. Only Dillard knows for sure. Given Brady’s early stumbles Dillard could be forgiven for taking his case as far as he can. The challenge is how to frame it so that the party is not hurt beyond repair in nov. Tough call. I think Dillard backs off. I want to be wrong.
Comment by dupage dan Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 8:58 am
I think Dillard needs to do what is best for the party and for our chances in November. If the vote total is not less then 100 votes, as he has stated, he should immediately concede and offer his support up for Brady. For thos of you who say Brady can’t win, Bull Pucky, with that attitude, no he won’t, if we all united behind him and work toward one goal of taking our state back from the democrats who have ruined it, then we can win and will win. Just look at the elections around this country….. a Brown win in MA was more of a long shot then a Brady win…. Perry in Texas…. democratic problems around the country…. This is the year, if we unite….
Comment by Antiochian Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 8:58 am
Regardless of what Senator Brady is doing, Dillard should ask for a recount.
The questions are independent of each other. Brady’s lead is razor thin. I did pull a GOP ballot, but didn’t vote for either candidate. The margin is close enough to constitute a recount.
Comment by Brennan Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 8:58 am
Dillard needs to stick to his word. To have a chance the Republicans need to quickly coalesce behind one candidate. Any problems* over the last month by Brady should be able to be overcome and, I think, would be less of an issue than a protracted recount struggle.
*I’ve been totally out of the loop Rich. What problems?
Comment by BeFree Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 9:07 am
I agree with dupage dan.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 9:08 am
NEWS FLASH
Dillard made many blunders himself in primary. The idea that he’s a better candidate than Brady is an opinion based on no facts.
Comment by Curt Fellini Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 9:09 am
The statistics of recounts are tricky. Dillard should have experts who can say what the likelihood of a success will be for different official margins. He would then have to weigh that likelihood of a switch against the political difficulties that a recount creates.
Many states have an automatic recount provision. That removes the political calculation from the process, and might be worth considering in Illinois.
Comment by muon Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 9:09 am
I consider myself independent, but lean left. I pulled a Republican ballot. I voted for Dillard, making my decision the night before. So sure, I might be a little bias.
But that said, I simply love the political process.
I’ve said since Election Night — Dillard HAS to ask for a recount. The margin is so close that human error may play a factor — never mind the slight possibility of intentional voter fraud (I have NOT seen evidence of this, I’m just saying…TII, after all).
Flip the numbers…Brady should ask for a recount too.
But that doesn’t mean this has to go to court. If a recount happens and Dillard still loses, even if it’s by two votes, then that’s it.
Comment by Concerned Observer Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 9:10 am
If I remember correctly, forcing the issue would be hugely expensive. He could spend a ton of cash and still not win, while hurting himself with Brady’s downstate supporters. Were I advising him (which I wouldn’t, being a dem, but still) I’d tell him to keep on the high road, bow out gracefully, save his money; then, in four years (or two, if he wants to run for national office)he can be the party favorite for whichever office he wants.
Comment by Lester Holt's Mustache Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 9:12 am
If I lost a statewide eletion by 193 votes out of what, 700,000 cast, and the CW was that I was the most formidable candidate my party could nominate, and I watched the guy on top get off to a miserable start, I would ask for a recount. I’m not sayin, I’m just sayin.
Comment by Mark Buerhle Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 9:16 am
Curt’s point is on the mark: Just because Brady has stumbled recently doesn’t mean Dillard would be a better candidate. Dillard ran a terrible primary campaign, wasted a lot of money on “consultants”, had no message except Edgar likes him and he can get along with Barack and Dems.
Comment by Whatever Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 9:30 am
There would be a cost (financial and otherwise) to a recount by Dillard if he should attempt it. I am not sure of the financial cost? Actually, although I did not vote for Dillard, he has been a pretty decent guy so I would be surprised if he would demand a recount unless the vote difference in under 100 votes. Then again, he may want to ask his “good friend” Jim Edgar for his advice on this one as well? Just teasing.
And, I am not aware of any major screw-ups made by Brady so far? Most of the stuff has been minor “piddly stuff” that is politically driven like voting to allow dog shelters to euthanize more than one dog at a time. It always amazes me that something like this (incidentally, I have a dog) gets people upset but killing a human developing fetus for some reason doesn’t with some folks? Oh, well. I guess that is what makes the world so interesting. We don’t all think alike. Bill Brady will turn out to be a good GOP candidate and a good Illinois governor (although I didn’t vote for him). However, the bar for Illinois governors is set “pretty low” so he won’t have to be “great” to be “good” (or at least to turm out being “better”).
Comment by Beowulf Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 9:41 am
We’re talking about the Illinois Republican Party here. You know, the one that has a losing streak longer than CSI has been on television. You know, the one that had it’s party leader spend what little cash it had to float his own name as a gubernatorial candidate before jumping into the race. You know, the one that had to recruit a weirdo from Maryland to run for the US Senate. The party that makes the Green Party, and the Whigs, appear viable. A party so bad, that the “Know Nothings” are suing them for using their campaign tactics and slogans.
If Lincoln was alive today, he would have returned to floating a flatboat full of hogs down the Sangamon just to get away from Brady and Plummer.
The Illinois Republican Party is so bad, that Galena’s Ulysses S. Grant would have fought for the Confederates out of his in-law’s mansion in St. Louis if he was alive today.
Everett Dirksen would have joined the communists.
So, what are they trying to protect here? You folks sound like you are discussing a viable, normal policial party. It isn’t!
Dillard isn’t going to hurt anything by asking for a recount. He cannot hurt what is so wormy, disheaveled and flea-bitten, it only exists as a post office box in downtown Morris.
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 9:42 am
It’s true that Dillard’s primary campaign left much to be desired. The short span of time before the primary made it difficult for alot of candidates to get into a groove. Primary sould be moved up. However, that has little to do with this present situation. Modern vote tallying technology leaves little wiggle room, as Rich and others have pointed out. That’s why Dillard chose such a small number as a tipping point. A good sport concedes and throws his weight over to the standard bearer. That should go for Brady, too, if Dillard takes his shot and pulls it out. The GOP has a great opportunity at getting back to the mansion. Given the present scenario, it will be a rough summer.
Comment by dupage dan Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 9:42 am
VanilliaMan - How do you really feel? So much for intellectual honesty!
Comment by Fed Up Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 9:46 am
VM,
You paint a dismal, if accurate, picture with your prose. Oy gevalt.
Comment by dupage dan Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 9:46 am
With the final count so close (within the “margin of error” perhaps), it makes sense to ask for a recount. However, in so doing, he risks alienating a lot of potential ground troops he will need in the fall. On the balance, Dillard should probably just let it go.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 9:47 am
What’s your word worth?
As much as I would like to see Dillard in the hunt, he gave his word. As bad as Brady appears to be, he is the apparent nominee.
We can only hope Brady learns to think before he speaks, to choose the right battles, and to educate himself on what the mainstream wants. Not likely to happen but at least Quinn will be racing to the bottom with him. The difference is that Quinn is very, very personable and always seems to recover.
Gonna be an interesting season!
Comment by Justice Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 9:53 am
==I wouldn’t think that he should continue. I am trying to think of an incident when the “loser” has ever prevailed in a recount. ==PPHS
Al Franken beat Norm Coleman in the recount.
Al Gore would have beaten George W. Bush had the Republicans appointed to SCOTUS not blocked the Florida recount.
And Deborah Graham got the Dem nomination in 2002 by working the post-election appeals process, although that race was technically a tie based on late returns that looked like discovered votes.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 9:55 am
If the GOP had a political coup, few would know or care.
Go for the coup, Kirk!
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 9:55 am
I heard the democrats just sent a bouquet of flowers to Andy McKenna.
Comment by dupage dan Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 9:55 am
dd - they might want to send some flowers to Jim Ryan also!
Beowulf - Dillard would have to pay for the recount himself, and unless his “buddies” Jack Roeser and Ron Gidwitz want to pony up more money, it probably can’t happen. And speaking of those two, I think they “loaned” Dillard the money the first time, so they probably are waiting to get paid back.
Comment by Whatever Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 10:00 am
Illinois has the finances of a banana republic, so I say Dillard should grab a pearl handled revolver and put on an old Khadafi uniform and show up at the governor’s mansion with a fast accelerating Toyota Pick-Up with a machine gun mount in the back, and a small troop of overweight suburban lawyers dressed in band uniforms.
It is about time Illinois leads this country in something! Imagine how folks will cheer when Fox News reports that Illinois government finally had a coup!
Most Illinoisans would probably say, “About freakin’ time!”
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 10:03 am
whatever,
Yup, Jim Ryan bears responsibility for this debacle, as well. That has been just couldn’t help himself. What a mess.
Comment by dupage dan Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 10:03 am
VM, if Brady keeps talking, Illinois may produce such an excess of stupid we can export the stuff.
The Tea Parties have created more demand than usual this year.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 10:11 am
Who pays for the re-count? The State or the candidate? If it’s the State, Dillard should consider the cost.
Comment by Dead Head Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 10:12 am
The candidates pay for the recount.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 10:13 am
Maybe Cross and Radogno can come together and pay for the recount. Dillard would beat Quinn by a comfortable margin….Brady is on a course to kill House and Senate targets in the suburbs. An investment in a recount might be the best thing those two caucus’s ever did.
Comment by raising kane Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 10:21 am
The Tea Parties have created more demand than usual this year.
hey - Hey - HEY!
I support citizens who gather and express their political viewpoints. Why don’t you? Listen - I will hold my tongue when the Left holds their rallies for their causes - (and have done so for decades), so you should do likewise.
It is kinda nice to see folks who never protested before, out there learning to do so.
Don’t make fun of your neighbors! You need them to pay for your wacked-out government programs.
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 10:23 am
There are 2 factors that come into play here for Dillard just on the recount; 1) Dillard has stated a vote total needs to be in a range that makes sense for him to ask for a recount, and 2) if he does a recount, all the goodwill each man had could be thrown out the window as they fight to be on the ballot.
While they would be counting and recounting, whomever wins after this process has left Plummer out there all alone and exposed more and more each day to an intese scutiny that he may not face at that level of intensity with a governor nominee already in place. Since no one has made the smart move of sending him on vacation until May or June. You win, but now you are left cleaning up the mess Plummer has made during the weeks of the recount because Plummer can’t help himself but to talk and NOT think before he speaks.
The other issue, seperate in my opinion - Brady’s not ready for prime-time player status.
Again 2 factors come into this decision to persue only to try to take Brady out. 1) The primary is over, so ANY negativity or lack of unity by the ILGOP at this point it literally throwing votes away. Obviously, we can agree there are more registered Dems then Repubs, so slighting a possible bona fide elected nominee, while only days ago calling him a freind and respected collegue will destroy any possible healing, and look like the blatent heartless coup it is.
2) If Dillard does pull off a coup, lets just say so we can play this game to an end game, what does he gain? The downstate base will turn on him. Do not say downstate Plummer could help with that, because as we open the first week of March, people on this board have found lawsuits against his Dad’s company directly against the platforms Plummer is runinng on (cite - Wordslinger, I believe, yesterday), let alone what the press will find during this coup period. The media will hit Plummer so bad, it will make it look as thought the press loved a Dan Quayle. This is not any easy anchor to have on your neck, while organizing after the coup of a candidate you thought was not ready to lead.
Example? “Brady was not ready, so I am going to be the nominee. But, don’t worry. If something happens to me, Plummer can step right in”…What????? Impossible to justify with Plummer in the wings and not addressing his credentials to be governor.
Can you see that logic at the editorial boards; “Mr. Dillard, you rationalized your coup of the GOP nomination by stating Brady is unready to lead our state, yet you are criss-crossing IL with Jason Plummer, and candidate ever far less qualified than Brady, but, by being on the ticket, capable to take over the governor’s office in a moment’s notice. Can you explain your rationale on this?”
Ouch.
Losing might be the best for him, maybe awful for the GOP, but we don’t know that yet. The only thing we do know; if you try the coup and you win, what are you really winning?
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 10:24 am
If he is within 100 votes he should ask for the recount. I think there is a majority consisting of Democrats that wish their candidate was anybody else and Republicans who wish they had anyone else but their front runner. If there were a third party candidate out there that was campaigning hard I think he/she would look like a viable option to a lot of people.
Comment by irish Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 10:25 am
The way the GOP has been going, if Dillard goes for a recount - Keyes would win.
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 10:25 am
It is NOT Jim Ryan’s, Andy McKenna’s or even Schillerstrom’s falut.
In a less than 25% turnout statewide, Dillard couldnt’ find 1 voter per precinct more with 75% of the electorate sitting on their hands? All lost, including a Dillard candidacy, because they lacked the skills necessary to get out their voters on election day, doing the math of what they would need to get in “plus” voters in a 5 person race.
Stop blaiming Ryan, McKenna, Andy A., and even Proft … If you worked for Dillard, shame on you for not having a field operation to find 1 more voter per precinct, when 3 of for were at home.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 10:29 am
I found his 100 vote threshold problematic from the beginning. A recount shouldn’t take nearly as much time as it used to and with such an early primary it isn’t going to hurt anything.
The thing no one seems to understand about recounts is that local election authorities make mistakes. A recount can help them correct those mistakes. In theory, those mistakes can happen in any direction so it doesn’t guarantee a Dillard win, but it does guarantee a little more care in determining the winner in such a razor thin case.
I do think the state ought to make recounts automatic when the margin is this thin and have the state pay for it. A little extra care for such close races is reasonable.
Comment by ArchPundit Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 10:41 am
OW, plenty of blame to go around. It was a cute throw away comment on my part. Gallows humor, as it were. Turnout was dismal, field crowded w/folk who had little time to get their message out and “distinguish” themselves. Hard to raise money in such a crowded field so as to pay for the face time.
One question - what does =when 3 of for were at home= mean?
Comment by dupage dan Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 10:46 am
Oswego’s on to something. I can’t imagine Dillard wants to run with Jason Plummer. May be a nice kid but he presents the Dems with some of the same campaign hooks that Cohen would have provided the Republicans—spent his way into the seat, no meaningful experience, etc.
Comment by Indeedy Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 10:51 am
lol… spell check, went “for” instead of “four”… should have read - “3 out of four were at home”
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 10:52 am
Brady by 193.
Comment by N'ville Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 10:53 am
Sometimes you win when you lose (?)….
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 10:53 am
VM - Starbucks and Kentucky bourbon this morning?
Comment by Former Card Carrying Repub Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 10:53 am
No, Dillard shouldn’t ask for a recount. Doing so would cost Republicans too much money and time. If Congresswoman Biggert chooses to retire, in 2012 or ‘14, Dillard should run for her seat.
Comment by Conservative Veteran Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 11:00 am
Vanilla man is on point.
Brady should win.
Comment by Oswego Joe Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 11:31 am
if i’m a Republican, I want a recount, and not just because of the fumbles of the last few weeks. With a position of rape and incest don’t matter, no choice of abortion, it’s gonna get really ugly for him and it will dilute their message on other issues. I would go for a recount. Dillard’s position is to get the count right, a recount is not contrary to that. but as a Democrat, I’d rather run against the Pat Buchanan of Illinois.
Comment by Amalia Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 11:34 am
The key part of the question is whether “he still has a legit shot at winning.” I have no idea of how a recount would be conducted, so I don’t know his prospects. But if Dillard has some heavy election law experts telling him he can still win, he ought to go for it.
On the other hand, and as others have pointed out, what does winning the nomination get him? A chance to be the Governor that presides over the biggest financial mess in state history?
Dillard can beat Quinn, but that might be the high point for him. Then he’d have to govern, and right now, I wouldn’t wish that on anyone.
If I’m Dillard, I bow out graciously. He can come back in four years after Brady/Plummer finally prove the “conservative” wing of the GOP can’t win statewide on their own. If he plays his cards right, he’ll be the frontrunner for the nomination in 2014 and the income tax question will be in the rear view mirror. Who knows, maybe he can run on a message to cut taxes by then?
That’s a long way of saying, no, he should not push a recount. He dodged a bullet and should be grateful.
Comment by 47th Ward Friday, Mar 5, 10 @ 11:56 am
[…] Rick Pearson obsesses about details in Pat Quinn’s early release program, which was also supposed to save the State a bunch of money telling us “Bill Brady finds himself standing in a harsher light”, in this case a light lit by Rick Pearson. Pearson skips the part where Brady proposes some type of notification for early release. Maybe the specific details were incorrect, but does anyone dispute the early release program needs reform? Rich Miller wanted to extend the Republican Primary to combat confusing details of the early release prisoners. Yes, Rich, we could finally fix the budget pit with just a few more months of recounts. […]
Pingback by Our Media Plays “Gotcha” Games while Our State Melts Down | Chicago Daily Observer Monday, Mar 8, 10 @ 2:54 pm