Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Madigan: “Throw it in the ash can”
Next Post: Another ISRA blast at gun violence victims: “These people love the limelight”
Posted in:
* The Illinois Republican Party raised no money during the first quarter of the year. If you want to see one reason why that happened, read this Sun-Times report…
A livid Ron Gidwitz called out the conservative faction of the party’s central committee on Thursday, telling the Sun-Times its ousting of Illinois Republican Party Chairman and lack of preparation to deal with the fallout has put a poor face on the party, “destroying” the embattled GOP’s chances in next year’s election.
“The state central committee — a faction of the state central committee — is destroying any chance that the Republican party has in 2014,” an angered Gidwitz told the Chicago Sun-Times on Thursday. “I mean, how stupid is this! The lack of thoughtful, leadership … The state central committee is responsible for the leadership of our party. To push out the party chairman with no plan for a replacement — it is absurd. And with no thought to the consequences of their behavior.”
Gidwitz is typically one of the leading Republican cheerleaders in the state and is a major player in national and statewide politics, hosting a variety of fund-raisers, including for presidential nominees.
“They’re making the central committee irrelevant. The uncalled for attacks on Pat Brady and the lack of preparation once they started attacking Pat Brady, with no expectation, no strategy to replace him with a capable, respected individual,” Gidwitz said. “They are fundamentally creating an irrelevancy for the state party.”
Gidwitz blew up after the Sun-Times contacted him with a working list of possible replacements to Brady.
Gidwitz has been a leading member of what the Republicans euphemistically refer to as “the donor community,” which essentially means wealthy Republicans who traditionally give big bucks.
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, May 10, 13 @ 9:40 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Madigan: “Throw it in the ash can”
Next Post: Another ISRA blast at gun violence victims: “These people love the limelight”
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
You’re doing a heckuva job, Obie.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, May 10, 13 @ 9:44 am
Mr. Gidwitz nailed it here. The GOP has become irrelevent in Illinois, not because of the brillance of the dems, but because it continues to be the channel for angry disallusioned extremists that have hijacked its message. It is no longer the party of Ronald Reagan. Illinois badly needs a credible 2 party system. Look what the state has become with the dems having complete control of everything except local government. For some reason the GOP has decided to be against virtually everything and everybody. It’s chosen to embrace the Tea Party extremists, that cost it several spots in the U.S. Senate. It has driven away voters like me, union members, because we suddenly became the enemy. Ronald Reagan created a colition of Americans that included union members, many of whom are conservatives or moderates. A new voice and message is needed to bring us back to the fold.
What is really humorous about this is that Brady is apparently not conservative enough. He’s just another RINO to them. Until this stops, the GOP will continuously be trounced in elections.
“A livid Ron Gidwitz called out the conservative faction of the party’s central committee on Thursday, telling the Sun-Times its ousting of Illinois Republican Party Chairman and lack of preparation to deal with the fallout has put a poor face on the party, “destroying” the embattled GOP’s chances in next year’s election.”
Comment by AFSCME Steward Friday, May 10, 13 @ 9:52 am
This is bad for anyone who beleives that a viable two party system is necessary in a democratic society…look at CA and NY, two states with a healthy two party system that seem to function pretty well despite political differrences betwen the two parties…we’re not supposed to agree on
every issue,it’s all about dialogue, compromise,
and finding common ground between concerned parties…we’re doomed in IL for sure…
Comment by Loop Lady Friday, May 10, 13 @ 9:57 am
Gidwitz is 100% right. Look at every credible IL GOPer pass up the position now. They’re playing hot potato and it will eventually end up in Alan Keyes’ lap.
Comment by Boone's is Back Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:07 am
This is some of the BEST news I have heard in such a long time.
Congratulations, Senator JIM OBERWEIS.
You have caused My Party to be, in essence, “bankrupt” at the ideolgy level… and the financial level, and all in one 1/2 term in the Illinois Senate, and while serving all of us Republicans on the SSM! Pretty Impressive!
“Make the check out to ‘ILGOP’, Mr. Oberweis, and every time you think its your place to basically ruin the party by having your ‘Litmus Tests’ decide how to grow, we will expect you to cover the expenses for that quarter too.”
I want to be very clear about this next part, and I would hope other Republicans will think about this …
I, for one, am going to hold your feet to the fire with all these “new” quotes and your “new enightenment” Mr. Oberweis.
For someone utterly incompetent in understanding political acumen, if you say all these “new” things, people, like me, are going to hold you to EVERY WORD.
Count on it.
As for “Two-Putt” and Commander Galloway, I suggested the same “financial “response for their handling of their “diverse” caucuses, and even suggested visable changes, since both “Two-Putt” and Ms. Galloway felt the need, after being veto-proofed, to stay, and I am not seeing enough of the Reagan rule of 80%, but much more of the Slytherin House Republicans speaking … for … you.
Why?
Commander Galloway, 1 vote on SSM, from the “Woman, not playing the ‘Gender card, but playing the ‘gender card’, but not really … so we have a moderate leader, Jo Galloway.
A moderate of what? Eighteen of 19 “no” votes is a Moderate Leader? Even “Vote Countula” Heather Steans, with all her missteps, outflanked you, got the votes with Cullerton, and you all look intolerant and petty… and Marginalized.
Thanks.
Leader Cross. This is your “moment”. Make the 5 vote deal with Rep. Harris, make this now a “Bi-Partisan Bill”, getting kudos from the sponsor, inocualte the HGOP next cycle … and MOVE ON!
If it passes, Leader Cross, with 3 HGOP votes, and they really didn’t need them, what a wasted opportunity to look like the Reagan Rule is alive … at least in the House!
My point calling them out?
Those Caucuses are doing the same damage, but with actual VOTES in Chambers, and voters never forget… when they are reminded … time after time …after time of intolerance.
The only reminder, it seems that matters, is the CASH.
If you are telling me that these Caucuses are already so diverse, why do they all vote in lock step on the social issues, the issues that have the largest margins for diversity to be seen?
Is it because “diversity” for the GA GOP is “an old, old wooden ship that was used during the Civil War era”, as Ron Burgundy thinks?
Cut the Cash, cut the games, get My Party back to thinking winning, is more important than being “Right”.
We are not a “religion”, we are a political party… You cut off the Cash, Irrelevent Leaders, your religion can now ask the Slytherin Housers to donate, and then those donations will be “charity” to the new religion, because the GOP “party”, will be long gone.
Good on you, Mr. Gidwitz, and Jim Oberweis, do you see the “harm” …now?
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:09 am
Gidwitz is correct He would have been a very good Governor if his TV presence didn’t kill his campaign..
Comment by Anonymous Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:10 am
I like gidwitz a lot and I’m more moderate than oberweis but this problem is not social conservatives fault and Oberweis is 100% right. The party’s position on marriage is that it’s between a man and a woman. Pat Brady left the reservation and had to step down. That’s it.
This other stuff about the “party needs to modernize and change”-that’s another discussion and one that will be decided in primaries and future party gatherings.
“extremists have hijacked the party”-moderates left the party, they chose not to fight the conservatives, and or they did and lost.
Ronald Reagan was 30 years ago. Move on. thanks.
Comment by Shore Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:12 am
The ISRA and the conservative wing of the ILGOP central commitee continue to compete for the title of “the gang that could’nt shoot straight.” (pun intended)
Since that left winger Brady is out of the way the only thing that can save the ILGOP now is Jason Plummer or the fact that the Democrats have to remove Madigans pension reform bullet from their own foot as they wage war on their base.
Comment by Madison Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:17 am
One quibble with these comments… the state central committee was relevant before the pat brady purge? I thought the committee stopped being relevant when it imported alan keyes. I seem to recall them pushing out jack ryan without a ready replacement back then too.
Comment by hisgirlfriday Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:20 am
=== The party’s position on marriage is that it’s between a man and a woman. Pat Brady left the reservation and had to step down. That’s it.===
I am …literally …screaming in the Wind, and yelling for the health of my lungs alone!
===“extremists have hijacked the party”-moderates left the party, they chose not to fight the conservatives, and or they did and lost.===
They left, because Slytherin House says they are “RINO”s, if you back SSM, we don’t want you …They left because they feel unwelcome? It’s not because of the Guacamole being moldy, they left My Party because My Party made them unwelcome.
===Ronald Reagan was 30 years ago. Move on. thanks.===
Attention.
Attention. Abraham Lincoln was over 150 years ago … Please … stop with the “Lincoln Day” Dinners .. I mean, really. Thanks.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:20 am
I’m not a Republican, but Shore makes sense here.
Comment by Chi Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:23 am
Ron’s frustration is understandable. But he can’t keep defending Brady’s self-destructive management style. Pat picked countless unnecessary personal fights that sealed his fate.
Ron and the more moderate elements of the Party like Mark Kirk are absolutely correct that the GOP has to broaden its base and allow dissent within the Party. The Dems manage sometimes conflicting interests well (i.e. Enviros v. Labor) but in the GOP everyone just starts attacking anyone they disagree with.
There is plenty of blame to go around but the fundamental message is that all sides of the GOP have to be tolerant and collaborate with others.
Comment by Adam Smith Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:27 am
==Oberweis is 100% right==
And people wonder why the Republican Party in Illinois can’t manage to tie their shoes. As long as people believe stuff like that then the party is beyond help.
Comment by Demoralized Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:27 am
The IL GOP is now the Oberweis party. He is now their de facto chief, and they will either rise or continue to fall with him.
Comment by Reo Symes, M.D. Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:29 am
I don’t think Oberweis is right about the issue of gay marriage, but he’s right that the Chairman of a political party should back the party platform 100%. It’s the platform that needs to change.
Comment by Chi Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:30 am
I guess the next ice cream Over we is will be serviing at the next GOP meeting will be banana splits.
Comment by Hedley Lamarr Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:38 am
===He is now their de facto chief…===
Not even with all the “political” Ice Cream in the World is Oberweis the de facto chief.
The SCC marginalized his contless calls to vote out Pat Brady, and who is singing off whose “Hymnal”, We, or He?
Oberweis is a “leader” of a subgroup, of My Party, which is now a subgroup of the entire electorate. Giving Oberweis any credit, accept for the credit Mr. Gidwitz and others are giving for not donating, not assisting, not growing my party, that is what Oberweis is doing.
The defense of Oberweis’ political acumen in all of this, including this search which should be a good thing, but is now drawing out, and making us all look like Dopes, is a “House of Milk Cartons”.
This started with the calling out on the SSM when you had loads of things to call Brady to resing for, heck I gave a laundry list as well, including all that others say too.
But it came down to SSM, the “Meeting calling and Room Reserving”, the “not backing down…backing down”, the marginalizing of Oberweis, finally rhe resignation, and the “new enlightened Oberweis” with a search that is good in so many ways, but has the appearance of a Rauner Chicken running around with its head cut off, with no beginning of the beginning, of an end.
If Oberweis is the de facto leader of this Fias…Co, then you got me …
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:39 am
===The IL GOP is now the Oberweis party. He is now their de facto chief, and they will either rise or continue to fall with him.===
Actually, if you look at what Gidwitz has done in recent years, I might argue that the Republican Party is being slowly privatized. He has a lot of smart guys working for his political operations (he and IMA’s Greg Baise have been doing this for years) and they hold a gold mine of talent, data and wherewithal.
The State GOP — not so much.
Comment by Just Saying Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:40 am
Ronald Reagan may have been 30 years ago, but he created a coilition of voters that was inclusive. It won elections. It resulted in a 2 party system in Illinois. The current GOP keeps moving further and further to the right, alienating everybody but the most hardcore goofballs. People can be labeled RINO all day, but if they stop voting Republican, you lose. And you will lose nearly every time. Geez, you even lost the Senate seat in Indiana, a 100% safe seat, beacause a wacko was the nominee.
“Ronald Reagan was 30 years ago. Move on. thanks”
Comment by AFSCME Steward Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:41 am
What should the IL GOP stand for?
As a progressive Democrat, I believe Michael Madigan fully occupies the center right niche on the political spectrum, at least on fiscal issues, which necessarily forces the GOP even further right towards Ayn Rand territory.
Despite repeated propaganda otherwise, Illinois is one of the lower taxing states when measured as a percentage of GDP.
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/eco_tol_tax_bur_pergdp-total-tax-burden-per-gdp
Comment by Bill White Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:44 am
According to Ron Gidwitz: “The state central committee — a faction of the state central committee — is destroying any chance that the Republican party has in 2014…And with no thought to the consequences of their behavior.”
It is imperative that Illinois Republicans find and support a true moderate to head the party’s central committee. If they do not find a way to do this, it will result in nothing less than the total destruction of the two party political system in Illinois. Even if the Republicans only remain as the loyal opposition party in Illinois, they must work to be a strong loyal opposition party, not an irrelevant one.
Comment by Ruby Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:48 am
“Moderates” like Gidwitz apparently believes his party should not adhere to the principles that large majorities of it’s members believe in.
“Moderate Republican” appears to mean changing principles based on polling numbers, or to whatever “moderates” think they ought to be at the moment.
Gidwitz was a joke as a candidate. He should stick to writing checks, something he is really good at.
Comment by Michael Westen Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:50 am
The State GOP needs to revisit the idea of electing their state central committeemen like the Democrats do. Then they can get past the revolving door at the top and a lot of the infighting. The conservatives who tend to vote in higher percentages during primaries can take control of the state party at the ballot box and send all of their moderates over to the Democratic Party once and for all.
Elect the State Central Committee. Give the Oberwies conservatives exactly what they want, good and hard.
Comment by 47th Ward Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:51 am
@Ruby
What messages or themes would a moderate IL GOP offer in contrast to the current Democratic party?
Pension reform is the #1 issue facing Illinois, and it seems that “Me too, Mr. Speaker” is the best option available for the IL GOP.
Comment by Bill White Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:52 am
Sayre’s law: “In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake.”
Comment by MrJM Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:52 am
==What messages or themes would a moderate IL GOP offer in contrast to the current Democratic party?==
So the assumption is that if you are a moderate you can’t distinguish the party from the Democrats? That’s nonsense.
Comment by Demoralized Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:55 am
The funny thing is, I read Ron’s statement very differently and his complaint transcends the SMS issue entirely.
It was a lack of a plan, that is what were you going to do when you have Brady out, that is who was going to take over. That is the bigger indicator of what the issue was.
Right now the party is a bit like the end the movie the graduate, she has fled the wedding and the two of them are sitting at the back of the bus looking at each other and wondering what’s next.
Comment by OneMan Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:56 am
“Despite repeated propaganda otherwise, Illinois is one of the lower taxing states when measured as a percentage of GDP.”
That link uses the tax burden from 2004 (!!!). Got anything more contemporary?
Comment by Chris Friday, May 10, 13 @ 10:59 am
Remind me… what was Gidwitz’ winning margin again?
Comment by just sayin' Friday, May 10, 13 @ 11:00 am
- Michael Westen -,
With respect.
Don’t miss the point as you are chastizing.
The Reagan Rule of 80% is not about focusing on what we disagree on, but on the 80% we do agree on.
The point of all this is to allow the voters to understand that “we as a Party” are welcoming to someone who can agree with us on 80% of ALL we are. No one is required to be 100%, otherwise we are just a subgroup of a small subgroup, never getting close to being relevent.
It’s not about polling, its not about putting our index finger in the air and testing the wind. It’s not even changing to ask people to accept someone with NO Republican ideals …
It IS about being able to say to as many voters…
“We agree on quite a many thngs, we agree to disagree on a few, but as YOU describe yourself, you are a Republican, and we welcome your diversity to Our Party.”
Not, “Oh, you are against Plank 7, subparagraph iii, then you are either a RINO or a Democrat, and we can’t have that in THIS party.”
So which sounds more like a “diverse” party.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 10, 13 @ 11:01 am
- just sayin’ -,
Well said, very valid point.
Gidwitz is also the leader of the piggy-bank, and guess what happend last quarter? Then, read the post as to why that piggy-bank is empty.
I give you all the props, and well said on the electoral success, or lack thereof, but … those who pay the bills, get to pick some of the tunes too…
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 10, 13 @ 11:04 am
Thank you Ron Gidwitz for saying this. All of Pat Brady’s shortcomings could have been addressed constructively, yet the SCC chose to deal with them in the manner that is most destructive and disaffecting to the very voters Republicans need in order to win elections. It’s been horrifying and I’m glad someone with influence is calling them out on it.
Comment by Community Organizer Friday, May 10, 13 @ 11:11 am
OW -
The extreme right oppose any relaxing of an ideology. Extreme pro-lifers oppose abortion under ANY circumstance. Gun rights advocates oppose any restrictions on ownership.
So when you bring up the 80% rule, are you advocating support of 80% of the position of each plank, or are you talking about the entire GOP platform?
The GOP used to be in lock-step on taxes, regulations and national defense. Today it appears there are so many social issues that I’m not sure there would be concurrence on 80% of the planks.
Comment by Darienite Friday, May 10, 13 @ 11:26 am
AFSCME
Reagan’s revolution never made it to Illinois. Jim Thompson was already well entrenched and was not fond of conservatives. Reagan did bring blue collar “Reagan Republicans” to the GOP and pro lifers. Here in Illinois when some of the young conservatives joined the GOP we found our votes were wanted and our leg power but our ideas were “Just to extreme for Illinois” as we were told again and again. 1998 was the banner year and still the party shunned conservatives Ryan capitulated on every issue and they threw Peter Fitzgerald under the bus. That’s your two party system; and conservatives have been to blame for every bad thing thats happened when will the people in charge admit they have some responsibility mostly by alienating the people who do all of the work. As I already said the GOP relies on people volunteering the democrats have paid helpers. Pro life against the abortion industry , School choice against Teachers unions, smaller government against AFSCME, every time the GOP wins billions of dollars rush there to put the fire out.
Comment by votecounter Friday, May 10, 13 @ 11:26 am
If you always do what you always did, you shouldn’t be surprised that you’ll always get what you always got. Gidwitz is right. Times change, needs change, Apparently, my GPO doesn’t and won’t. Worse yet they demonize and denigrate those who feel the need to change.
@ Michael Westin. Pretty harsh. Because we look at things in a current light, we are bad? see above, times change, needs change, we must too.
The issues at the heart of your criticism can be taught at home, not through political direction. After all, aren’t we the party of less government (i.e interference with personal choices by government or political parties?) Seems hypocritical to me…
Comment by LisleMike Friday, May 10, 13 @ 11:28 am
- Darienite -
===So when you bring up the 80% rule, are you advocating support of 80% of the position of each plank, or are you talking about the entire GOP platform?===
The platform, the ideology, all things that make us Republicans, if we can agree 80% of the time, how does that make one a “Good Republican” and one not a “Good Republican.”
Here is another thought….
House Districts 119 and 120, and Senate District 60.
3 Fictional Seats. One fictional Senate District.
House 119 is in a more urban, suburban actually, area, a bedroom community with many working in an urban area like St. Louis or Chicago. No real manufactoring, but plenty of small businesses. Good schools, growing area.
House 120, low suburban sprawl, leading to the actual rural areas of Illinois. Two major factories in the district, employing a sustantial number of residents. Average schools, Agriculture and transportation of goods are critical in the business climate. Small town “downtowns”, tight communities.
Question.
Do you think that either district will elect a Republican that requires its voters to 100% accept the GOP platform, and …
Is it easier to find common ground on Republican principals in both distrcts, using the GOP strengths to win, say 80% of the time …or should we try to insure purity?
That is also … senate district too.
Two sides, one coin, got to win with a plurality in 2 halfs that are quite different. You think 100% purity is going to be enough in 1 district to carry for both districts? Do you alientate one diversity to remain pure to your coalition, if the numbers “work”.
This is one way, “on a napkin” type example I think about. We need to recognize that our 80% strength will win more than our 100% purity.
My example is a “thumbnail” and when I get the real demographics of SEN60, and H119 & H120, I will be more precise (j/k).
We get 30 Senate districts to agree with us 80% of the time, we get 60 House districts to agree with us 80% of the time …it builds on itself, but only recognizing we all can’t be “Pure” and we ALL are not 100%…
That help?
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 10, 13 @ 11:51 am
Vote
Thanks for proving my argument. The GOP controlled the statehouse for years, but they weren’t Republican enough. They were RINOs. The teachers and unions are the enemy. Guess what, there are a lot of moderate conservatives like myself that are tired of the GOP demonizing people that work in the public sector. This us vs them position has put the Illinois GOP exactly where it belongs, marginalized and irrelevent.
“School choice against Teachers unions”
” smaller government against AFSCME”
Comment by AFSCME Steward Friday, May 10, 13 @ 11:59 am
My fellow resident of the 47th Ward, 47th Ward, is spot on re: direct election of GOP state central committeemen. Alas, SB 600 that would have done this has been buried for years.
The oligarchy that rules & ruins the IL GOP will continue unchecked.
Comment by Ravenswood Right Winger Friday, May 10, 13 @ 12:36 pm
So ridiculous. Doesn’t Gidwitz still hold the record for most money spent per vote in Illinois, from back when he miserably lost the gop primary for governor? Why would anyone listen to him now?
Gidwitz belongs to the same circle of failures who have overseen the decline of the IL GOP for years. These are the same people who had no problem seeing Jack Ryan crucified because he purportedly propositioned his OWN WIFE! But now we’re supposed to treat gay marriage as some kind of sacrament, even though Mark Kirk was opposed to gay marriage the last time he was elected statewide in 2010.
Wish Gidwitz and all the rest of the loser hypocrites would just go away.
Comment by just sayin' Friday, May 10, 13 @ 12:39 pm
==The IL GOP is now the Oberweis party. He is now their de facto chief, and they will either rise or continue to fall with him.==
So because he finally got elected to something and craves attention and has a big mouth Oberweis is now automatically the “de-facto chief” of the whole party?
Naw, I don’t think so.
Comment by Responsa Friday, May 10, 13 @ 12:41 pm
I agree with shore completely. Furthermore, I’ve met both Messrs. Oberweis and Gidwitz, like them both, and believe they both have the best interests of the Party in mind. I also have every confidence in the Committee and their ability to put us back on track.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, May 10, 13 @ 12:43 pm
=They left, because Slytherin House says they are “RINO”s, if you back SSM, we don’t want you …=
I think many who are posting regarding “being welcoming” are doing it from their laptops and based on what they hear on the news. I’ve worked with both factions in the field and Conservatives have always been welcoming to other Republicans.
The surprise the last couple of years, has been the new nutty, incestuous, and insecure “Moderate” flank who don’t even welcome other Moderates.
And all the “DC” attitudes and approaches that descended upon us a few years ago, haven’t helped either.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, May 10, 13 @ 12:52 pm
=== The Illinois Republican Party raised no money during the first quarter of the year. ===
Ya’ll can thank Pat Brady for giving the proceeds of the March fundraiser away to the RNC rather than the IL GOP. He made that choice strictly by himself.
If we’re so concerned about pointing fingers and all. Sheesh.
Comment by Keep Calm and Carry On Friday, May 10, 13 @ 12:52 pm
Nothing will change in Illinois until Cook Co. elects precinct committeemen and can take the party back from the Democrats.
Comment by votecounter Friday, May 10, 13 @ 12:56 pm
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Jack Ryan’s Campaign (who as you might recall is a Conservative) had the best outreach anyone had seen in quite some time.
Compare that to Kirk’s, which was the exact opposite and probably did alot more damage than anyone wants to admit because his focus was ALWAYS making nice nice with the Media–NOT the public.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, May 10, 13 @ 12:56 pm
===And all the “DC” attitudes and approaches that descended upon us a few years ago, haven’t helped either.===
Well said. DC thinks it needs to babysit Illinois because we can’t handle handle our own business, and then DC learns Illinois “ain’t like ‘X’ …” trying Dopey things that work in states that don’t mirror IL and exaserbate the ILGOP and the Voters at the same time.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 10, 13 @ 12:58 pm
Gidwitz used the wrong word. The far right wing extremists haven’t taken over the party. They have however paralyzed the party from taking action.
It is the paralysis that is destroying the party. The stances on issues the party takes is something else. The public is free to adopt or reject those stances.
No intelligent GOP’er wants to walk into the current irrational buzzsaw set up by the extremists in the party. Anyone nominated for the next chairman will be immediately accused of being (1) an insider, (2) not elected by the masses of Republicans out there, (3) beholden to special interests, (4) a mere puppet of the “establishment,” and on and on and on and on and on and on. I’ve been listening to this crap for well over a decade now. The rest of the world is now just being exposed to it. It’s the “blow the whole thing up” mentality with no procedure or idea of what will take its place.
And with each bloody carcass of a GOP chairman thrown to these wolves, they just get more ravenous and more bold. Ask McKenna. Ask Topinka. Ask Brady.
Democrats! Rejoice!
And I have to figure out how to push the GOP message as a Township Chair in my region while these knuckleheads continue this nonsense?
Sheesh!
Comment by Louis G. Atsaves Friday, May 10, 13 @ 1:04 pm
Sorry, that obvious should have read “…because his focus was ALWAYS *been* making nice nice with the Media–NOT the public.”
And I’ll add this, too: I don’t understand how the HECK anyone who was watching can believe that Kirk’s strategy of shunning the public and constantly flip-flopping and lying in the press was a good one and even SO good that others should adopt it.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, May 10, 13 @ 1:05 pm
=DC learns Illinois “ain’t like ‘X’ …” trying Dopey things that work in states that don’t mirror IL and exaserbate the ILGOP and the Voters at the same time. =
Friday, May 10, 2013: Oswego Willy and Anonymous collide and actually agree on the definition of “dopey” and its application.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, May 10, 13 @ 1:08 pm
=== The State GOP needs to revisit the idea of electing their state central committeemen like the Democrats do. ===
Ummm… have you looked at who is on the Dem Central Committee?
LOL.
That’s a great way to centralize power and eliminate anyone who isn’t wealthy or powerful from the position.
Perhaps some folks would like their Committee to consist of Mike Madigan, Jimmy Deleo, Danny Davis, Jerry Costello, Jesse Jackson Jr. (prior to being replaced by Al Riley), etc.
Yeah. ‘Cause that just screams GRASSROOTS.
Comment by Keep Calm and Carry On Friday, May 10, 13 @ 1:09 pm
“That’s a great way to centralize power and eliminate anyone who isn’t wealthy or powerful from the position.”
Obviously you know nothing about the way the IL GOP functions now.
Comment by too obvious Friday, May 10, 13 @ 1:13 pm
OW -
I get the general concept. But some issues more resolute than others.
Is being pro-life except for cases of rape and incest as ‘wrong’ as being completely pro-choice?
The litmus-testers would say so.
And if we grant variances to everyone who “kind of but not exactly” believes in our principles, what do we have other than 50%+1?
Comment by Darienite Friday, May 10, 13 @ 1:15 pm
=Naw, I don’t think so. =
Here’s a perfect example in “exercise of Power.” Watch your back, Jim. You have no idea.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, May 10, 13 @ 1:21 pm
- Darienite -,
Here is MINE …My bottom line.
If you and I can agree 80% of the time on the issues of the day, and our agreement is working towards Republican agandas, and working for majorities, then we’re good.
Litmus Testers and Blood Oathers are the ones saying 50%, or 61% …because tests are based on specifics of “right” and wrong and weighing them for their purity because they are “musts” in a political spectrum.
If you want to get weighted down on the what “weight” each has, then those are the hangups you may have.
If you are a “1 issue” voter, than that’s on you, not me.
Common ground at a 80% clip is “what it is”, and Pro-Life is not 21% or 2nd Amendment 26%…
I can’t help you if you see a Dem Running against a Republican and you are figuring out if you agree, at that stage 80% of the time. That is up to you. If you are worried the Republican is a RINO at that point too, then I really don’t know how I can reconcile what you have hangups on, or the “weight” of those.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 10, 13 @ 1:26 pm
- Anonymous -
We ONLY need to agree 80% of the time …
But the “Potomic Brain Trusts” that come here and know “score”, …we can agree 100%… - Dopes.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 10, 13 @ 1:56 pm
OK, here is a crazy version of OW explanation (whic I get)
Suppose the ILGOP is a bride. she lays out a list of demands, say 1000, that any suitor for her hand must fulfill if she is to marry them.
of the 1000, 800 are perfectly in line with most suitors ideas of being a husband. However, there are 200 that have varying degrees of unease or outright unacceptability to the prospective grooms. The bride says “a pox on all of you who can’t meet my requirements. I will stay unwed for as long as it takes to find “Mr. Right” who espouses all 1000 of my requirements!”
Well the bride is getting along in years and not getting any more attractive because there are few if any suitors willing to accept her terms and marry. If she had settled for 800 of her 1000 she would have been married long ago….
Same thing applies here. 80% of something that makes you competitive is better than 100% of nothing but sitting around and waiting and hoping.
Comment by LisleMike Friday, May 10, 13 @ 1:57 pm
Chris:
According to an Ernst & Young analysis in 2011, IL ranks 5th lowest in tax burden including state and local taxes. Cited by the president of the IMA.
The Tax Foundation’s 2012 State Business Tax Climate Index ranks Wisconsin 43rd, while Illinois is in the middle at #28.
Comment by reformer Friday, May 10, 13 @ 2:05 pm
Keep Calm
You’re absolutely right! Republicans should not be able to elect their SCC. The status quo has worked so well, let’s not tinker with success.
Comment by reformer Friday, May 10, 13 @ 2:08 pm
reformer
As someone who supports “reform”, I should think you would support your party’s committee implementing term limits and no longer allowing county chairmen to vote vacant precincts.
I am unaware of any other body that has recently self-imposed term limits.
Are you?
Comment by Keep Calm and Carry On Friday, May 10, 13 @ 2:16 pm
votecounter and just sayin’, ditto
Gidwitz’s comments are more self serving than reflective of the “disintegration” of the ILGOP. It’s Gidwitz’s way of making a preemptive moderate strike against the ILGOP conservatives as a faction seeking a new state chairman. Gidwitz well knows the mainstream media would jump on his rant as “evidence” of ILGOP “dysfunction” based on “slavish fealty to right wing ideology.” Nonsense. If Gidwitz wanted to play a constructive role in transitioning to a new chairman, than he should have kept his mouth shut and participated in the selection process behind the scenes.
Comment by Conservative Republican Friday, May 10, 13 @ 2:21 pm
===Nonsense. If Gidwitz wanted to play a constructive role in transitioning to a new chairman, than he should have kept his mouth shut and participated in the selection process behind the scenes.===
Or, he could backrupt the Party, stopping the funding and make everyone pause as to why Donors are giving …
Wait, Gidwitz DID do that …
Having a Party, with no funds, and Gidwitz can control if the Party can get funds from Donors by rallying them to make a point.
Sounds as thou Gidwitz is being constructive, “We pay some of the Bills, we can call some of the tunes.”
Funny how money, and Public Shame, by answering, not going to, but answering, press questions … makes people listen when its levereged … “just”….”Right”.
Oberweis gets out-manuvered…again.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 10, 13 @ 2:32 pm
Conservative GOP; You mean he’s playing politics? Of course he is. Gidwitz has every right to make his opinion known just as Oberweis does. I went back and read what Mr. Gidwitz was mad about; the first reports were that the SCC was not prepared right away to fill the position. All side will be fighting for their point of view or public opinion. BTW I just saw a gallop number that kind of makes the moderates here wrong, it was 58% of all Americans oppose all or most abortions! who are the fringe people now?
Comment by votecounter Friday, May 10, 13 @ 2:50 pm
As documented in multiple media reports, a significant amount of money was raised at a March 19, 2013 fundraiser in Chicago.
Mr. Brady unilaterally decided to give the entirety of proceeds to the RNC instead of any to the party as was agreed.
He previously asserted, in writing, that this event was going to raise $250,000 for the state party.
When a party chairman decides to make a $250,000 donation to the RNC instead of the state party two weeks before the end of the quarter, yeah, it seems reasonable that party might suddenly be a little short on cash. “Surprise”!
Comment by Keep Calm and Carry On Friday, May 10, 13 @ 3:02 pm
===As documented in multiple media reports, a significant amount of money was raised at a March 19, 2013 fundraiser in Chicago. Mr. Brady unilaterally decided to give the entirety of proceeds to the RNC instead of any to the party as was agreed. ===
Actually, he canceled the state party event and it became an RNC event because the “donor community” didn’t want to give the state party any money.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, May 10, 13 @ 3:25 pm
Vote Counter
I am in the 58% you mention and I have raised my daughters in the same mode. I guess that would make me one of the “purity test” case successes, except I have other issues with the planks of our party. OOPs LisleMike is now OUT of the party, even though I agree on the other planks. I would ge a RINO, regardless of how much I am in agreement on other issues…
Obie had made it clear that removing Brady was not about SSM but bad management. Yet, as the seemingly self appointed interim successor, he has shown poor management by removing without a successor. also, the party has not raised any $$ in the first quarter. (who WOULD contirbute to the GOP until you see who is going to lead, continue to lead,or continue until a successor is named?)
It is about assembling a strong leader to build a strong team of candidates, among whom will be those with whom you (and occassionallyI) may disagree philosophically. Naming “fringe” is not a good tactic to encourage inclusion, either.
Comment by LisleMike Friday, May 10, 13 @ 3:32 pm
=It’s Gidwitz’s way of making a preemptive moderate strike against the ILGOP conservatives as a faction seeking a new state chairman.=
If there’s any truth to that, I’d hope that Mr. Gidwitz is kind enough to consider that lately, “Moderates” may in fact be a huge contributing factor to what ails ILGOP, specifically from a grassroots perspective. It’s tough enough for some Moderates who are not aware of and/or cannot understand our diversity to see a “good fit” there, but to ALSO be shunned by what is often described as our “de facto” Moderate leadership group–the group that SHOULD be welcoming to them, has to play into this somehow as well.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, May 10, 13 @ 3:33 pm
And just another thought: Perhaps we should look at “identity politics” as well. My impression was that Jack Ryan’s campaign did NOT pander to various groups; it’s success in recruiting others seemed more grounded in reaching out to ALL Americans.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, May 10, 13 @ 3:38 pm
Hi Rich.
I had not seen that in published reports, but appreciate the clarification. It was previously my understanding that the Chairman was using the promise of “re-scheduling” that event as leverage in attempting to retain his seat.
While it does not fit very well with some of the things I have recently observed and read, I assume you have more insight on this than any of us readers do and appreciate the response.
Comment by Keep Calm and Carry On Friday, May 10, 13 @ 3:40 pm
===Obie had made it clear that removing Brady was not about SSM but bad management.===
Please, it’s Friday.
You really want to go down the “Oberweis didn’t make it about SSM road”. It is not what Oberweis wants us all to think, it’s what Oberweis DID, it was about the SSM, until it backfired so bad his own SCC Marginalized Oberweis.
Oberweis made it about SSM, no matter much he wants, or others want to “wish it” away, that was the lever Oberweis used.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 10, 13 @ 3:40 pm
===Jack Ryan’s campaign===
If that is the standard of a “good campaign”, good “campagin strategy” and a “good candidate” by the way jack handled himself, the campaign handled crisis, or how the party handled failure, and then we point to it…as good.
Yikes!
“Jack!” Ryan lost it for Jack, Jack’s campaign lost the credibility for Jack to survive, and the the fallout….led to …well, the rest is history.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 10, 13 @ 3:44 pm
Were you there, Willy?
Comment by Anonymous Friday, May 10, 13 @ 3:47 pm
For the most important, critical Party things, I am usually with Tom Cross golfing…
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 10, 13 @ 3:49 pm
===Jack Ryan’s Campaign (who as you might recall is a Conservative) had the best outreach anyone had seen in quite some time.===
He also spectacularly flamed out. His outreach (some of which was contrived window dressing) couldn’t save him.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, May 10, 13 @ 3:50 pm
For someone who “likes to win,” you certainly have no clue that winning and losing can simply be grounded in dumb luck. That’s why “post-mortems” are conducted in business, Willy. It’s to determine what worked well because it was planned (v. an outcome of dumb luck), and the same for what went wrong.
Also, context is important. I’M discussing outreach. If you’d like to exceed that scope, that’s obviously your option, but I’m not going to bite.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, May 10, 13 @ 3:51 pm
Again, Rich. I’m looking specifically at outreach.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, May 10, 13 @ 3:53 pm
OW
my bad…miscommunicated. Obie wanted us to think it was not about SSM…I knew this but misspoke.
Comment by LisleMike Friday, May 10, 13 @ 3:55 pm
===have no clue that winning and losing can simply be grounded in dumb luck.===
I am going to just …isolate that … just for a moment…
Just. Wow.
As for the outreach, you find out during a crisis how “Deep” and for “far” your outreach is … things peeled off pretty quickly once the ball rolled.
It was what it was, you can’t capture lighning in a bottle and HOLD it based on poor choices you make in a campaign and then still say you have good “outreach” as it erodes quickly.
I hear ya, but …it WAS what it was.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 10, 13 @ 3:56 pm
- LisleMike -,
All good, heck my typos are legenday everywhere!
Plus, knowing your posts, my response was more like, “You? Really?”
Much respect.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 10, 13 @ 3:59 pm
Says the one who’s always griping that we don’t have a good ground game.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, May 10, 13 @ 3:59 pm
We will never know about “Jack!” ’s Ground Game, but I do know, there was a great deal of flash, to a nugget of sustance because when it came to knowing where that outreach was when it god “bad”, that is where it was.
I do like to win. I also like to not have to worry about “wild card” issues that the candidate throw in front of themselves.
It was, what it was.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 10, 13 @ 4:03 pm
=We will never know about “Jack!” ’s Ground Game,…=
YOU will never know about Jack’s Ground Game, Willy? And yet, you’re the expert on same. Right?
Comment by Anonymous Friday, May 10, 13 @ 4:05 pm
The eventual “winner” of that seat…
is in the Middle of the 2nd term in the White House.
The country… is moving on from that Senate race, we ALL should too.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 10, 13 @ 4:07 pm
Talk about a great deal of “flash and no ’sustence’” when it comes to operations and the willingness and ability to truly assess same.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, May 10, 13 @ 4:07 pm
- Anonymous -
One thing I am not going to quibble over…is the “expertise” of the “Jack!” Ryan Campaign…especially on a Friday.
Here are some thoughts about what I said and how it fits;
You can’t assess because it was not tested in a General Election, especially when it tried to base its outreach as designed to make a difference in non-GOP areas, when it had no chance to do what it was designed for!
Can’t judge it. But can judge how quickly it flamed out, and the support eroded.
It was, what it was.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 10, 13 @ 4:13 pm