Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Lipinski primary strategy: Tell everyone on all sides whatever they want to hear

Posted in:

Illinois

* Facebook ads and direct mail make it very easy for candidates to talk out of every side of their mouths at once. Lynn Sweet with the scoop…

An internal document for Rep. Dan Lipinski’s Democratic primary campaign, obtained by the Chicago Sun-Times, proposed pitching Republicans by highlighting his vote against Obamacare while wooing independents by reminding them he opposed its repeal.

Other highlights from the strategy document suggesting messages to various voter demographics in the 3rd Congressional District:

•Hispanics were to be flagged about Lipinski’s “pro-Dreamer votes” while Republicans would be targeted with “pro border patrol” messaging.

•Lipinski is anti-abortion and that would be the emphasis for Republicans and Catholics, but not for outreach to other women, millennials, teachers, independents, union members and nurses.

•A drive to persuade Republicans to vote in the Democratic primary would include reaching out to GOP officeholders; getting letters from “GOP surrogates”; and through Facebook “ads targeting independents.”

* React…

“The kind of cynicism displayed in the Lipinski campaign memo is why a lot of people are turned off from politics,” said Marie Newman. “Since he has not voted with the Democrats on critical issues, this memo suggests he is turning his attention to Republicans instead. This is why I am running - because I believe this district needs a real Democrat who will fight for everyday issues and represent working people, lower health care costs, and fight for our Democratic values.”

posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 12:38 pm

Comments

So the novel part here is, this particular politician put that strategy to paper. /s

Comment by Ron Burgundy Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 12:48 pm
===So the novel part here===

No. The depth and breadth of this strategy is above and beyond what most normal candidates do.

Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 12:52 pm
But on the up-side, this time the Republican candidate might not be an actual Nazi. [fingers crossed]

– MrJM

Comment by @misterjayem Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 12:53 pm
I’m afraid to the average voter, this strategy does work.

Comment by Bruce (no not him) Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:00 pm
Great strategy by Rep Lipinski. with multiple foes in the primary, they need to divide and conquor to win. Each focusing on a certain consituancy of votes. While Lipinski is looking to unite and conquor.

Comment by Donnie Elgin Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:02 pm
===Great strategy===

Not when it’s used in reverse against him.

Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:06 pm
=So the novel part here is, this particular politician put that strategy to paper.=

I’d say the novel thing here is that a reporter has the piece of paper.

=No. The depth and breadth of this strategy is above and beyond what most normal candidates do.=

Everybody with any kind of digital platform is doing this. With mailers and more traditional formats, you have to be careful how you get a message to just one group, and tailor it to a wider audience. Facebook lets you control who sees it to a much higher degree, and for very little (relative) cost. This stuff is especially important for moderate members that need crossover votes to survive primaries (like Lipinsky) and candidates in swing districts.

Comment by phenom_Anon Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:10 pm
=Not when it’s used in reverse against him. =

Yep, it goes both ways. All you do is reverse who gets which message and you have a roadmap for opponents.

Comment by phenom_Anon Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:11 pm
He’s running in the wrong primary if he’s appealing to Republicans to win.

Comment by Stark Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:11 pm
The only reason I can think you put this on paper is to keep track of what fib you’re telling to what group at any given time.

The matrix to this is fascinating.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:13 pm
The sad thing is that this is going to be viewed negatively in the current climate and with the extreme campaign that Newman will run. The reality is that the 3rd District has long been a conservative Blue district and Lipinski fits the mold perfectly for it. So this strategy, while obviously designed to help him win the primary then be a shoo in for the general, is also about him appealing to all of his constituents. I, as a Republican, appreciate the effort. He is one of the few people in his caucus in Illinos who routinely reaches across the aisle. There is no doubt that the radical wings of his party will try and use this against him, but from the outside looking in, I appreciate it.

Comment by KJCIllinois Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:13 pm
=== not when it’s used in reverse against him===

This is a very conservative district and it’s not like urban dwellers are swooning in. Even the suburban part, which includes Western Springs and is his home base, has nothing but expats of Chicago who don’t want to chance getting shut down by selective enrollment schools and are tired of paying Catholic School tuition. People won’t forget the bitterness displayed by Newman’s camp after the last election either. It will be tight, but it’s his to lose.

Comment by Squeegee Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:14 pm
In one of the few districts left where Conservative Democrats still add up, some Republican help there may be a big plus. I doubt the GOP has a lot of love for Dan if you really examine his votes, but they’d take him 10 times out of 10 over Newman. Dems got to see the character of her the last time around. It wasn’t impressive.

Comment by A guy Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:17 pm
“The sad thing is that this is going to be viewed negatively in the current climate”

Naked dishonesty is often “viewed negatively” regardless of the climate.

– MrJM

Comment by @misterjayem Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:19 pm
===This is a very conservative district===

You’re living in the past.

Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:22 pm
I agree with phenom_Anon . This narrow-casting has been around for a decade. Sure, candidates in safer districts don’t need to do so.

Comment by C Ball Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:23 pm
It seems that a politician proudly owning his votes and viewpoints has mostly gone the way of the dodo bird. I believe those pols used to be known as “statesmen” and we are in short supply of them.

Perhaps the Lipinski camp should be studying John Bel Edwards’ recent gubernatorial victory in Louisiana instead of relying on the “all things to all people” approach. Conservative Democrats can still carry an election.

Comment by Bourbon Street Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:23 pm
I agree with Rich. This district is far from conservative. Dan Lipinski barely won in a gubernatorial year in 2018. The 2020 election is a presidential and there is A good possibility That presidential primary will make it to Illinois where more voters will participate. These voters are usually younger and more liberal.

Comment by Frankie Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:29 pm
Accidentally shared by Jerry Hurckes in a google doc. The same Hurckes who is the Executive Director of the Village of Summit, which recently was visited by the Feds. I hope Mr. Hurckes didn’t use his government computer to draft that document.

Comment by It’s A Small World Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:30 pm
Let’s not forget Dan’s silence on gun control despite being in attendance at the Gilroy Garlic Festival.

Comment by Jocko Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:34 pm
What an inexcusable error by the Lipinski campaign. I understand that mistakes happen, but I am not sure that you could let this one go.

Comment by Powdered Whig Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:41 pm
==I agree with Rich. This district is far from conservative.==

You agree with something he didn’t say? This district isn’t as conservative as it once was, but it’s not “far from Conservative”.

If it were Marie Shrewman would be running for reelection.

Comment by A guy Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:41 pm
Flip flop, flop flip, oh what a campaign it is!
Must be his “alternative facts” campaign. They’ll need a matrix to keep their lies…err,stories straight.

Comment by revvedup Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:43 pm
Not sure if my previous comment was blocked, but Lipinski is clearly the better choice.

Comment by Romeo Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:44 pm
@ A Guy

I am not going to argue with you and what you think you know.
Please safe this post until March 17, 2020 when Marie Newman defeats Dan Lipinski with at least 55% of the vote. Good day sir.

Comment by Frankie Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 1:45 pm
Candidate’s often will pitch themselves to different groups which seem opposed to one another, using messages orientated for both.

But I don’t think I’ve ever heard or seen any Democrat in *2020* bragging about opposing Obamacare while also simultaneously bragging about opposing repeal. That’s extreme.

Comment by Nick Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:01 pm
It seems that people are going off topic. The topic isn’t who you support or whether one candidate is better than the other. Its about the memo. There is nobody in politics that will tell you that the release of the memo was a good thing for Lipinski. If they do, please let me know because I have some oceanfront land in Arizona I would like to sell them.

Comment by Powdered Whig Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:05 pm
Frankie, can I bet you any amount of money no candidate gets 55% of the vote in this race ?

Comment by 'Goose Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:08 pm
This is a pretty diverse district. Both conservative and liberal blocks. Hispanic, non-hispani, labor, White Collar. If you don’t think Newman had a similar plan you’re kidding yourself

Comment by Drake Mallard Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:15 pm
@Goose

Mark my words my guy. This is going to be a thorough beat down.

Comment by Frankie Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:17 pm
@Frankie

let’s each put 500 bucks in escrow with Rich- is that allowed? lol

Comment by 'Goose Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:21 pm
===If you don’t think Newman had a similar plan===

All candidates should have plans to address various factions in diverse districts. But to do so by saying one thing to one faction and the opposite to another often gets candidates in big trouble. It displays a lack of core substance and voters generally hate that.

Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:34 pm
It is normal to emphasize different messages to different groups. It is not normal to emphasize completely contradictory views to different groups . It makes everyone wonder what you actually believe or if you believe anything at all. Trying to get Republicans to vote in the Democratic primary is a strong sign of a candidate’s weakness.

Also, as Rich points out this isn’t a conservative district. Clinton won it by 16 percent in 2016.

Comment by ArchPundit Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:35 pm
==You’re living in the past.===

You’re living downtown.

Take a gander down Archer sometime or out into one of Dan’s burbs. Very Catholic, very anti-crime. People who prefer there space, or their space not being compromised by crime. Even the Hispanic parts of the district have an element of conservatism centered by the Catholic Church.

These aren’t communities filled with activists and most of the people who are so vocally opposed to Lipinski happened to live outside of his district. It’s possible even GOPers will reconcile with the fact that Trump won’t win Illinois, and may even pull a blue ballot.

Place your bets.

Comment by Squeegee Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:41 pm
===most of the people who are so vocally opposed to Lipinski happened to live outside of his district===

lol

OK. Newman won the Cook suburbs last time around 51.7 to 48.3.

Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:44 pm
@ Squeegee

Are are you a strategist? Should we call you Karl Rove.

Most Latinos voted against Dan in 2018 because he voted against the Dream Act. Look at the numbers please.

Comment by Frankie Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:46 pm
I’m just confused who is “pro crime”?

Lots more to unpack there, but the “anti-crime” tripe is… fun.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:49 pm
As opposed to those city folk who are supporting Newman and are just pro-crime, obviously.

In any case, it goes without saying that this just looks incredibly desperate on Lipinski’s part.

Comment by Nick Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:53 pm
Oswego, god love ya, but you can’t armchair quarterback this thing from Oswego. These aren’t Oak Parkers you’re talking about.

Frankie, I don’t even have a horse in the race. I could care less. And I’m a democrat, BTW. I’m just saying that just because you view Dan as a Dinosaur doesn’t mean that a lot of his constituents do.

I stand by my assertion: this is Lipinski’s race to lose.

Comment by Squeegee Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:58 pm
=== but you can’t armchair quarterback this thing from Oswego. These aren’t Oak Parkers you’re talking about.===

Still… who is “pro crime”

Use your words, don’t make it about me.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 3:00 pm
“Still… who is “pro crime”

Use your words, don’t make it about me.”

Then use the words I used. I never said “pro-crime.” I can admit, I stated it poorly. But mark my words, a lot of these are people who will not be voting for Kim Foxx. They’ll break Conway, or dare I say it: Donna More.

Comment by Squeegee Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 3:08 pm
it better be Lipinski’s race to lose! He’s been the incumbent in this district for nearly 10 years. Lipinski’s issue is that he refuses to change with the district on all issues. This my friends will cost him
His seat.

Comment by Frankie Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 3:10 pm
=== But mark my words, a lot of these are people===

These people, “pro crime” people.

You never explained what “these people” are, the opposite of “anti-crime” folks

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 3:11 pm
Willy, I tried to respond, but I don’t know if I got flushed. Rich tends to do that. I spelled out my reasoning for thinking what the results will be.

Let’s talk the day after the election on this one. You’re hanging on a word choice to make your argument and it’s flawed.

Comment by Squeegee Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 3:47 pm
- Squeegee -

I read your comment.

To the post, and this alone;

=== •A drive to persuade Republicans to vote in the Democratic primary would include reaching out to GOP officeholders; getting letters from “GOP surrogates”; and through Facebook “ads targeting independents.”===

The state party last time allowed a national socialist to be the nominee.

Snark intended, the ILGOP backing Lipinski, maybe to help with another possible error would be on brand to help with the Lipinski primary like he’d like, lol

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 4:00 pm
Thanks for the snark, Willy. Well-played. Half of my comments never see the light of day, and I’m not part of the game like the rest of the insiders here. As such, I don’t have time to hit anyone with facts that back up my assertions or other mentions that Rich deems inappropriate (I mentioned the son of someone in one of the earlier posts being a great h.s. football player, not sure how that’s offensive). Anyway, as I said, I love your snark and actually appreciate your comments. I’m done arguing on this one. Day after the election, let’s regroup and see who was wrong. I said the same to Frankie, but that one mysteriously disappeared too. Oh well.

Comment by Squeegee Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 4:11 pm
None of this matters anyway - If Newman wins this district will likely be the one that is eliminated in the new map. Things have a funny way of working out sometimes 😂😂😂

Comment by Powdered Whig Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 4:12 pm
=== If Newman wins this district will likely be the one that is eliminated in the new map. ===
That’s a completely ridiculous assertion. No way the Dems in charge of making the next map eliminate a Dem district. It will definitely be one of the remaining downstate R districts. Anyone who says different doesn’t know what they are talking about.

Comment by Boomerang Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 4:39 pm
=== No way the Dems in charge of making the next map eliminate a Dem district. It will definitely be one of the remaining downstate R districts.===

This is the correct analysis.

The only thing about this district it will be drawn more blue and less recognizable than when William O. Lipinski served.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 4:41 pm
===It will definitely be one of the remaining downstate R districts.

That’s where most of the population loss is the strongest as well.

Comment by ArchPundit Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 4:46 pm
But what if we lose 2 districts? CD 3 will definitely be on the chopping block along w a R district

Comment by ‘Goose Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 5:05 pm
=== But what if we lose 2 districts?===

Then Bost, the Shimkus district, and Davis district would be a lone downstate district.

Why? It make the most political sense.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 5:08 pm
Lots of interesting stuff on the blog today, and I’m just catching up. But the misogyny from A guy at 1:41 isn’t something I expect to see here.

Comment by Change Agent Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 5:08 pm
So that has been part of the lib D playbook for 8 years …does not matter what you say at the door just get their commitment for your person. A moderate D using the same program not a surprise. I was at a local funder two weeks ago and an individual asked me to sign a Foster petition told her I lived in Lips dist. She went off crazy on the guy even after I told her his family has been my families friend for 25 plus years, she still proceeded to tell me how awful a human being he was. Game On.

Comment by NorthsideNoMore Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 5:33 pm
Not much different than the strategy experienced precinct captains have used at the door for ages. Agree with everything said by the voter, whether in line with the candidate’s views or not. Trust the voter will never see through it.

Comment by Oldtimer Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 6:16 pm
== So that has been part of the lib D playbook for 8 years …does not matter what you say at the door just get their commitment for your person.==
Who specifically has used this before? Which “lib D”?

Also your anecdote disputes your assertion. You said Lipinski was a family friend and the petitioner didn’t adjust her opinions of him to conform to your beliefs, she did the opposite.

Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Wednesday, Nov 20, 19 @ 7:13 am
==But the misogyny from A guy at 1:41 isn’t something I expect to see here.==

Then you haven’t been paying close attention to him/her…it’s par for the course

Comment by Joe Bidenopolous Wednesday, Nov 20, 19 @ 10:49 am