Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Question of the day

Posted in:

Illinois

Let’s use Kass’ latest column as a jumping-off point.

So there is a chance (however small) that in an ever-tightening race, Whitney could pull enough Democratic votes from Blagojevich to elect Topinka.

Let’s assume for the sake of argument that the governor’s race ends up as a close one.

Does Green Party candidate Rich Whitney hurt Gov. Blagojevich by taking away Democratic votes, or Treasurer Topinka by siphoning off votes that would have gone to her in a two-way race? Will it be a wash, or does his candidacy matter at all to the outcome of the race?

[I updated this with the bolded part because I inadvertently gave the Greens an opportunity to pontificate. Answer the question, please.]

posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 8:45 am

Comments

Absolutely his candidacy matters! First of all he got on the ballot in Illinois as a third party candidate and secondly he offers us who are feed up with bother parties and both candidates a vote of protest for change, Iâ€™m a republican (for now) and I’m voting for Rich Whitney.

Comment by moderate Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 9:01 am
Does Whitney’s campaign matter?

Whitney is a voice for progressives and is bringing a whole bunch of ideas into the discussion which are not even being discussed elsewhere.

In many ways, the governor and his other opponent are very similar. Short sighted and tied to the people who pay for them to get elected.

Let’s see… we can solve our budget problems by selling the lotto or by opening a Chicago casino or we can look at the system (house bill 750).

If you look at only that one issue, I think you’ll see that Whitney deserves to be heard.

The current approach of “Starving the Beast” is all well and good, but when the beast dies or can no longer function… then what?

Sound bytes work on TV. When sound bytes are the basis for policy, we’re in trouble.

dan

Comment by TheDan Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 9:01 am
Mostly a wash, but Topinka benefits slightly.

Comment by Phocion Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 9:03 am
A green spoiling an election for democrats? What an interesting concept.

We can all thank the Greens for President Bush!

Comment by Roomie Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 9:13 am
go back to that last poll… I thought it looked like Whitney hurting JBT more then the Gov. A lot of voters mix the Greens and Libertarians up anyways (not sure they’re wrong on that either).

Comment by Bill Baar Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 9:15 am
Bill is correct. Here is the SurveyUSA crosstabs. Whitney was pulling 3% of the Democratic vote, 7% of the GOP vote, and 15% of the Independent vote. We know by comparing election results that atleast 80% of those folks who call themselves independents didn’t vote for Rod in ‘02.

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 9:23 am
Here in Macon County it appears that both sides are not happy with their party’s choice for governor. They will be voting the protest vote=green.

Comment by decatur boy Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 9:32 am
If Bill and YDD are right, why is it that Blago was the one who tried to get Whitney knocked off the ballot?

Comment by Phocion Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 9:33 am
One of the interesting things about this race is, as decatur boy points out, that partisan activists on both sides are unhappy with their party’s picks. Ultimately, though, conservatives have no place to register their protest vote; I can’t imagine that they will end up with the stomach to vote for Whitney. On the other hand, liberals who are fed up with Blagojevich’s incompetence can find an ideological home with Whitney, who is coming off as smart and thoughtful.

Bottom line: it’s likely that the Whitney “effect” is exagerrated in the polls because of Republicans who are protesting Topinka. They won’t come through on election day. However, a lot of liberals will end up voting for Whitney — especially if there’s a perception that Blagojevich will win anyway.

Yes, the Green Party vote can spoil a close election for Blagojevich. I doubt it helps him in any case.

Comment by the Other Anonymous Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 9:44 am
Rich’s question has a built-in assumption that the two-party system is somehow the way things should be and that non-major-party candidates are merely spoilers.

Why is this an appropriate assumption to underpin a discussion about the governor’s race?

Comment by Carl Nyberg Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 9:50 am
No change in the outcome, and Blago wins by 8.

But the Green guy hurts Blago on balance a tad. Although most of the Green voters are probably people who just wouldn’t vote otherwise.

Comment by RealClear Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 9:52 am
Carl, once again you assume things that are not in evidence.

Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 9:53 am
Carl, I don’t think Rich made that assumption at all, moreso that this is the way it is right now, and therefore let’s discuss a third (and much smaller) party’s possible effects on the outcome of the current governor’s race considering the high levels of dislike & negativity surrounding both major party candidates.

Carl, there is no need to inject assumptions or read “to far” into the question here. It’s pretty simple: Do you think Whitney will have that much effect on the 2006 IL Governor’s race?

I think there will be some effect, but it will be seen moreso in metropolitan areas that have heavy liberal bases, so odds are the percentage points he garners won’t decide who wins.

Comment by Tired of all the b.s. Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 9:57 am
Whitney will hurt Topinka downstate. Many Southern Democrats are fed up with Blagojevich, but at the same time do not particularly like Topinka. Whitney gives them another choice. Topinka will lose out on some of thier votes because of this.

Comment by dk Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 10:00 am
It helps democracy. We should have as many options that make sense.

Comment by Wumpus Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 10:06 am
They are ice-skating in the underworld today, and once again I find myself agreeing with Carl Nyberg, albeit on a minor point.

The way Rich framed the question implirs that those voters somehow belonged to either Blagojevich or Topinka to begin with.

The fact is that neither Topinka nor Blagojevich has been able to reach 50% yet because they are both pretty weak candidates. A couple of weeks ago, Rich was projecting Blagojevich to reach 50% on election day…just barely. Now he’s leveled back that projection to 48%…just barely.

With all of the dissatisfaction with Blagojevich, (job approval of just 43%, SurveyUSA), this should’ve been a cakewalk for the GOP. But the Topinka campaign has failed to galvanize their base or find a message that resonates with dissatisfied voters.

Nature abhors a vacuum, and Whitney is the beneficiary.

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 10:07 am
Believe it or not, there are literally millions of voters who vote for a candidate, not a party. It might be hard for narrow minded partisans to accept that, but it is true.

Voters will support Whitney if he gives them a reason to. To see him as a spoiler to either the Republican or Democrat is insulting.

Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 10:08 am
Well for I for one don’t think there is anything to spoil in this election. Neither of the major party candidates are being held accountable to their key constituants, does anyone think they will be accountable to Illinois voters?

This is the campaign season with candidates putting their best foot forward and making all kinds of pie in the sky promises. With that being the case, the main party candidates will not engage in a public debate of the primary issues that concern most Illinois voters; education, healthcare, tax reform, sustainable energy and transportation, etc. The City Desk debate over the summer was laughable if there wasn’t so much at stake here. These blame games have got to stop, and Illinois needs to get out of the habit of electing officials who are engaging in illegal behavior.

My take on how Whitney will affect this election, (and I am voting for him) is this:
1) There will be higher than expected voter turnout and Whitney will motivate people to vote who have become disenchanted with what the other parties have to offer. Whitney will also get young voters, students in particular to the polls.
2) Whitney will get a sizeable chunk of votes from people who identify as Democrats or Republicans as a protest vote for putting up candidates who are not liked within their own parties. Whitney could pull a sizeable amount of votes from the Eisendrath, Oberweis and Brady primary voters.
3) If Whitney’s views were better publicized, we would be seeing a much closer three way race. Whitney’s positions resonate with voters who are concerned about the future and realize that change is needed.

If there are indictments before the election, Whitney will win. It is reprehensible that he is not invited to the IRN or WTTW debates.

Comment by Greener Futures Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 10:11 am
No. Rich Whitney does not have the ability to pull or siphon votes from any other candidate. To suggest this is also to suggest that some candidate already had, or was entitled to these votes; and that’s simply not true–a vote doesn’t belong to anyone except the candidate who receives it. Candidates must earn the votes they receive, otherwise the electorate is taken for granted.

Will Rich Whitney’s candidacy have an impact on the outcome of this election? Yes, assuming that he continues to get media attention, he will win.

Comment by Squideshi Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 10:30 am
Voter Apathy
About the time our original 13 states adopted their new constitution, in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh , had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years prior: “A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse, due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.”

“The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years,
These nations always progressed through the following sequence:
1. From bondage to spiritual faith;
2. From spiritual faith to great courage;
3. From courage to liberty;
4. From liberty to abundance;
5. From abundance to complacency;
6. From complacency to apathy;
7. From apathy to dependence;
8. From dependence back into bondage ”

Professor Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the “complacency and apathy” phase of Professor Tyler’s definition of democracy, with some 40 percent of the nation’s population already having reached the “governmental dependency” phase. If the Senate grants Amnesty and citizenship to 20 million criminal invaders, called “illegals” and they vote, then goodbye USA in less than 5 years. Knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.

How Long Do We Have?

Comment by What Comes Down To Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 10:30 am
does his candidacy matter at all to the outcome of the race?

No, because lefties and goo-goos understand:

A vote for Blago in ‘06 is
a vote for Quinn in ‘07

Comment by So-Called "Austin Mayor" Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 10:42 am
Whitney will peel off Blago votes from dissatisfied Dems. I think he’ll take away more than the current polls are showing. The question is how many would have voted for JBT vs. just staying home. My guess is this will break about 50/50. I doubt he’ll actually get too many dissatisfied GOPs. Just can’t see the far-rightwingers voting for a Green.

The interesting question is where to set Whitney’s over/under at. My guess is 9, although that could rise if a) the Fed shoe drops on Blago, or b) the Greens succeed at bringing the youth vote to the polls.

Comment by Bluefish Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 10:42 am
Sorry if my previous post came across as preachy.

To answer your question, let me ask another question.

Because a politician is a democrat or republican, do we simply owe them a vote if they don’t serve the interests of the voter?

My opinion is, any votes Whitney takes were had and lost by the ‘traditional’ parties.

In the short term (this election) Green votes may hurt one of the other parties, however it may also show a longer term trend as disenchanted voters seek a voice outside of the ‘traditional’ parties who are ignoring them.

I believe the Whitney candidacy will hurt both parties equally.

dan

Comment by TheDan Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 10:43 am
I figure Whitney will break 5%, but not 15%.

Rich’s assumption is that the winner of the election is the only effect of the race.

The pols and pundit class will probably take Whitney’s showing as evidence the voters are in a sour mood and engaging in protest voting.

Whitney and his supporters will argue that it shows that there are a block of voters that feel the neither RB or JBT were reform candidates, that want school funding issues addressed and are generally sympathetic to the Green outlook.

In my mind figuring out why people do vote for Whitney is the more interesting question than, “If the state removed all options except RB or JBT how would Whitney supporters vote?”

I mean, who ever asks the question, “If Blagojevich wasn’t an option on the ballot, how would RB’s supporters break between Whitney and JBT?”

Comment by Carl Nyberg Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 10:51 am
Whitney’s influence on the race is already being seen, but not in the way that one might expect. Whitney is sucking up an increasing amount of oxygen in this race. Despite the polls, I think Whitney is having a greater influence on the race than Topinka. She’s not offering a clear alternative to Blagojevich, and her TV commercials are weak. Instead, Blagojevich seems more focused on containing the threat posed by Whitney — going to Southern IL to hand out checks, cancelling a debate that had been planned for weeks, announcing a renewable energy plan (however half-baked). Now Blagojevich is trying to commandeer Whitney’s ideas for ethics reform. By contrast, I can’t think of one thing the Topinka campaign induced Blagojevich to do. By being a greater factor in the race, Whitney has been enjoying a great deal of press lately. Topinka is old news mixed with nothing new.

So in terms of election outcomes, the more Whitney can emerge as the alternative to Blagojevich, the more Topinka becomes irrelevant. We’ve already seen this bear out in the polls.

Comment by M.V. Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 11:00 am
Carl, the question may not be asked because Blagojevich is an option on the ballot.

Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 11:01 am
If Rich (Miller) is strictly talking about Whitney’s candidacy affecting the winner of the race, then there’s two answers.

1. Blagojevich is supremely unpopular, but Topinka is apparently even more unpopular, an incredible feat to be sure. No poll has put Topinka close to the margin of error, and the latest “bobbing head to George Ryan” ad isn’t going to help things. At this point, Whitney could pull 10% (which I think is likely), and not affect Blagojevich’s unearned victory.

2. Everything written above completely changes if Rich Whitney is allowed into a statewide televised debate. The guy’s polling at 7% now with 85-90% of the Illinois population never having heard about him. Now, I have no predictions on who he would pull more from (SurveyUSA has him pulling more from self-identified liberals, but more from self-identified Republicans), but the race would truly become three way and be much, much closer, including Whitney having a real shot at winning. I still think Blagojevich would ultimately end up winning, but probably Clinton ‘92 style (remember Perot) with a real low percentage of the popular vote.

Finally, to NOT answer Rich’s question…

3. If we’re talking about OUTCOME and not WINNING, then the impact of Whitney establishing the Greens as an official state party can’t be underestimated. That means Greens absolutely being elected to the ILGA in two years, and the party only getting larger. Blagojevich and Topinka will probably be able to dance around debates well enough for the next five weeks to exclude Whitney (and hopefully take a beating in the press for it), but that position will be completely untenable in four years if there’s half a dozen or a dozen Green votes in the General Assembly that a would-be governor is counting on.

Comment by Diversity of Thought Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 11:26 am
does his candidacy matter at all to the outcome of the race?

If history gives any clue: $0=0 matter

Comment by RD Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 11:43 am
That can’t be the reason Rich. The pollsters don’t seem to have a problem asking “if the election were held today, and the candidates were Rod Blagojevich and Judy Baar Topinka, for whom would you likely vote?” They do these one-to-one matchups with Rod and Judy all the time, but they don’t do it for Whitney vs. Blagojevich or Whitney vs. Topinka. They should!

Comment by Squideshi Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 11:48 am
To answer the question, no, Rich Whitney will not matter at all to the outcome of this race.

Aside from those of us on this board - and our friends and poor family members who have to endure us using phrases like “cross-tabs” and “delayed pension contributions” - no one has heard of Rich Whitney and no one will hear from Rich Whitney.

The actual number of votes cast for third party candidates is historically much less than the projected votes from polls, mostly because third party candidates lack the field organization and GOTV power of a more established party to get people to the polls. (Lack of name recognition and lack of money to get name recognition are also major reasons for the disparity, of course.) Do the people polled say they’ll vote for Whitney ? Sure; after hearing and dismissing Blagojevich and Topinka, the person opts for Whitney/none-of-the-above. But getting this person to his or her specfic polling place in that approx 14-hour window on one specific day is another matter.

I don’t have any examples to give, but perhaps folks here could offer up their own personal examples from past elections of when the polls suggested a third party candidate would have a larger vote total than s/he actually did.

Comment by Scott Fawell's Cellmate Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 11:49 am
Right on Diversity! And to add to what you are saying, Whitney has already had an enormous influence on the outcome of the race. Blagojevich has unveiled a Green energy policy with numerous similarities to Whitney’s which was announced last December!

Carterville school district is at the top of the funding list, thanks to Blagojevich desperately flailing for good press in Southern Illinois. Wonder what the schools who were bumped down the list thought of that move!

And on Monday, Blagojevich held a press conference at that Carbondale Amtrak station, site of Whitney’s campaign kick off speech 12/19/2005. Blagojevich’s people saw that Whitney would be in Springfield that day before they would send Rod/Shaft in. Funny how Shaft is unavailable for the scheduled debate the very next day. Hmmm.

Also, Shaft had the SIU marching band at the event just to add nauseum. OBNOXIOUS.

Whitney’s presence in this race forces the Dems to be Greener and keeps them slightly more honest about the issues that matter. Look for a Green speech from both the Rs and Ds at the Environmental Leadership Council Dinner 10/5. Whitney on the ballot forces follow through.

Comment by Greener Futures Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 11:59 am
Bridget over at SoapBlox on Whitney pandering to conservatives.

Comment by Bill Baar Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 12:02 pm
The discussion on whether a political party can make claims to certain voters is interesting, if misguided.

The fact is, that in determining political strategy, every candidate figures out his or her base. True, the candidate or party doesn’t “own” the base; but they are the base.

I, for one, would not generally vote Green. I am pretty close to a yellow-dog Democrat (not, of course, Yellowdogdemocrat!), and I am not offended if a Democratic candidate counts me as part of the base.

This doesn’t mean the Democratic Party “owns” my vote. And, in this election, I am seriously considering voting for Whitney as a way of expressing my dissatisfaction with my choices. In that sense, my (potential) vote for Whitney comes directly at the expense of a vote for Blagojevich.

I think that’s all Rich intended by this question.

Comment by the Other Anonymous Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 12:07 pm
the “Other Anonymous” @ 12:07 hit it on the head.

Also, to “What Comes Down To” at 10:30. Remember those guys in the 1700’s held a lot of their meetings in taverns. I think your progresive sequence list actually morphed into its present stage over the last 200 years from the original list.
“Mankind’s Ten Stages of Drunkenness”
0) Sober
1) Witty and Charming
2) Rich and Powerful
3) Benevolent
4) Clairvoyant
5) F*ck Dinner
6) Patriotic
*7) Crank Up the Enola Gay
8) Witty and Charming, Part II
9) Invisible
10) Bulletproof
* For the non-trivia buffs, the Enola Gay was the name of the B-25 plane
used to drop the “A-bombs” on the Japanese at the end of World War II.

Comment by the other other anon Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 1:20 pm
the other other anon at 1:20:

Great list ! And some needed comedy on this board. (We all can get so heavy…)

I wish Homeland Security would match this list with some sort of color code to create a wearable patch, so I could look at my buddies later in the evening and say, “Dude, I thought we were just chanting ‘USA, USA’ to be patriotic [Stage 6] - now you’re talking crazy talk [Stage 7].”

Comment by Scott Fawell's Cellmate Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 1:58 pm
Not an expert on voting habits at all, but it seems more likely, from a common sense perspective, that some otherwise Dem voters will likely swing for Topinka and then feel good about voting Democrat for Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan (she’s doing a fantastic job holding the feet of the non-profit hospitals to the fire in the whole charity care, billing, and collections affair). And the GOP ticket is really a well-balanced ticket, because Judy is moderate on social issues while Joe Birkett has been a fighter for justice as DuPage County State’s Attorney. What a nice, balanced ticket for the GOP to offer for Illinois voters. And it is backed by former Illinois Governor Jim Edgar, as well as the awesome former mayor of New York City, Rudy Giuliani (who will be elected POTUS if he runs in 2008, by the way).

Comment by Angie Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 2:02 pm
- What Comes Down To - Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 10:30 am:

Sorry, too good to be true: http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/tyler.asp

Comment by Ken in Aurora Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 2:53 pm
Angie -

Joe Birkett, “fighter for justice”? I think some former death row inmates would beg to differ.

More like “Joe Birkett, Fighter for Splashy Headlines.”

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 2:57 pm
If Whitney gets into the debates and voters hear his vision for a People’s Republic of Illinois then he will peal votes from Blagojevich. Whitney’s positions are closer to the Democrats.

Right now he’s hurting Topinka because of the none of the above factor.

Comment by taxmandan Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 3:35 pm
I think Whitney will pull off 6% tops if his media coverage remains the same. If it amps up, that could be higher. If he somehow manages to get on TV, it will be significantly higher. And, yes, despite Whitney’s pandering to the conservative base (which Rich missed here in the Kass article, but I didn’t over at my place), I do believe he could peel off votes from Blago.

Comment by Bridget Dooley Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 3:38 pm
YDD, as one capitol wag said when Birkett was picked as lieutenant governor: if Rolando Cruz was dead today, he’d be turning over in his grave.

To answer the question, Rich Whitney won’t change the outcome of the race. Unless he’s indicted, Blagojevich wins whether Whitney’s in or out. Since the only real purpose of an election is to elect a winner, that means Whitney doesn’t affect the outcome, period.

Diversity of Thought’s post, while good, also operates on the assumption that actually seeing Rich Whitney will cause voters to like him. Likely that many people will pull the lever for him based on lack of knowledge of him personally — they just don’t like the other choices, and the unknown beats the known.

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 3:42 pm
The “Enola Gay” was a B-29, not a B-25. It was flown by Col. Paul Tibbets, who attended schools in Illinois. I believe at one time his family had a business concern in Quincy.

Any votes for a third party reflect disgust with the two major party candidates and this feeling is running high. He might get 10-15% of the vote and harm both equally.

Comment by Eagle I Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 6:11 pm
Bridget, Whitney has been on television several times. In fact, on just one day last week, he was on CBS2, WTTW11, and WGN9. He was on FOX32 the following Sunday. He has also been on the radio.

Comment by Squideshi Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 7:08 pm
Wow, Whitney pandering to a “conservative base” — I’ve been following the campaign for months and I never knew he had a conservative base!!! Almost sounds like laughable, especially in light of the fact that Blagojevich can’t take a limo ride into southern IL anymore without handing out a half a billion dollars in pork and promises.

Comment by M.V. Wednesday, Sep 27, 06 @ 11:54 pm
M.V. I don’t think a green conservative alliance out of the question at all…. there are crunchy con isolationsts who can feel at home there. Whitney’s gun talk is an effort to get at them.

Comment by Bill Baar Thursday, Sep 28, 06 @ 5:24 am
Whitney will wind up pulling more GOP conservative votes from Topinka than he will pull Dem votes from Blagojevich.
If Topinka really wanted to give herself a boost in the polling numbers, she would come out and explain to everyone why she stayed silent during George Ryan’s reign of corruption. Steve Rauschenberger spoke out against Governor George Ryan during that time period and risked his political career by doing so. Jim Ryan, Judy Barr Topinka, and several other GOP chose to protect their political futures and good standing with the Illinois GOP Party leaders by keeping quiet. Their failure to have the courage to speak out later came back to haunt them. It cost Jim Ryan his political career.

Judy needs to simply admit that she lacked the courage at that point in time to challenge George Ryan and the GOP “powers that be” that would have jumped down her throat if she had spoken out. She needs to acknowledge that she handled the George Ryan corruption that was going on around her very badly. She was wrong and now realizes the error of her ways. If she agreed to disassociate herself with Kjellender and other George Ryan cronies, she might still reclaim a substantial number of conservative GOP votes that will be going to someone other than herself.

This will be the true test of a good leader. Can she say, “I should have spoken out against George Ryan. I should wash my hands of those George Ryan cronies that are still in GOP politics. I made a mistake that will not happen again. Let me show you that I am sincere about this by giving me your vote. I won’t disappoint you.”? This will tell the tale.

Comment by Beowulf Thursday, Sep 28, 06 @ 7:22 am
This will be the true test of a good leader. Can she say, â€œI should have spoken out against George Ryan. I should wash my hands of those George Ryan cronies that are still in GOP politics.

Yep, I agree. It would help JBT.

Then Birkett should pose the same question to Quinn.

Only in Illinois can people advocate voting for a candidate on the assumption he’ll get indicted and replaced by a more progressive Lt Gov….

…only in Illinois to people think like this.

Comment by Bill Baar Thursday, Sep 28, 06 @ 7:51 am