Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: Morning shorts
Posted in:
An interesting turn of events.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has launched a $400,000 TV ad campaign to promote the re-election prospects of U.S. Rep. Melissa Bean, D-Barrington. The normally pro-GOP chamber has not yet endorsed her, but the group is slated to make an announcement with her Tuesday and says she has a 74% pro-business record. GOP challengerBrianDavid McSweeney termed the spending “payback” for her vote for a Central America free-trade bill.
As you already know, organized labor is upset with Bean for the same CAFTA vote.
Use this as an 8th District open thread.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 9:36 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: Morning shorts
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Some people refer to the Republican candidate as Dave McSweeney.
Comment by Anon Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 9:41 am
Tell it to Crain’s. It’s their story, not mine.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 9:42 am
That’s David McSweeney.
A number of supposedly “pro-GOP” groups have thrown heavy money at incumbent Democrats in recent years, especially on state levels. Bean is but one beneficiary of this behavior.
Time for the GOP to sit down and evaluate who their true friends are in politics. No one political party can rule the roost forever, right?
Louis G. Atsaves
Comment by Louis G. Atsaves Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 9:52 am
Snore… Crickets chirping…
…Whatever analogy you want to use.
Comment by NW burbs Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 10:02 am
Ummm, NW Burbs, I’m not sure what you consider big news, but when GOP Loyalists are supporting a Democratic incumbent in what’s supposed to be one of the most hotly contested Congressional races in the country — while Dems are poised to take back the House — that is huge.
It’s really a two-fer, because that’s $400,000 they won’t be spending on a Republican somewhere else.
Right in Hassert’s backyard, too. That makes me wonder just how serious the GOP is about going after Bean. I think they’re more worried about hanging on to incumbents and defending open seats than they are going after Democrats.
Anybody heard how Topinka is polling up there?
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 10:28 am
No NW, this is good an example of how a Dem victory in 2006 is just going to make things more complicated for the party in 2008.
If they take over the house this year it will be because Democrats have elected a slew of candidates like McSweeny… people in marginal districts like this who win because they get broad support. They’ll provide the margin to the party at a time when it’s trying to digest a take over at a National level by the Peace candidates. (Read Perez in WSJ.
This is a toxic combination and it’s going to cause sever indigestion.
Especially if the Republicans put forward a Giuliani or McCain united with Lieberman.
Until Democrats can make room for Bean in the party, it’s just going to be hard hard times for them; win or lose this year.
Comment by Bill Baar Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 10:28 am
sorry, …slew of candicates like Bean
…but you all got the drift.
Comment by Bill Baar Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 10:30 am
Is it surprising that the Chamber, seeing a national trend of support for Dems this year, would place their bets on what looks to be the winning party come November?
Inidcative really of the sorry state the republican party is in nationally after 8 years of Bush. The base is disaffected, and the democrats smell blood.
Comment by Veritas Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 10:35 am
I meant to type “indicative”.
Comment by Veritas Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 10:36 am
“Brian McSweeney termed the spending “payback†for her vote for a Central America free-trade bill”.
Funny how them supporting Bean is payback, but if they would have endorsed McSweeney he would have termed it them supporting him because he is good on business issues.
Comment by Just Oberving Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 10:45 am
400K does not buy much Chi TV, but I agree with the blogger who notes it is 400K they won’t be spending on hate messages elsewhere. Would have loved to been in the room when the GOP brain trust
got this news….wow
Nice start to the week.
Comment by Bean Bag Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 10:56 am
Baar’s comment was interesting.
He blames Democrats for running both moderates and liberals. According to him, by winning elections the Democrats are going to destroy the party.
Fascinating analysis.
Comment by Skeeter Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 10:59 am
YDD and Bill Baar,
Bean came into Congress on her business credentials. She’s voted to the right on a host of issues from CAFTA to Schiavo.
Hence the Chamber $s are not a huge surprise (though I’m sure they could care less about Schiavo). And the crickets chirp on.
College Republican chapters are doing GOTV for Lieberman. Norquist’s gang endorsed a certain “Democrat” in Texas. And look up Linc Chafee’s endorsements and you’ll find a slew of “left” organizations. This sort of thing happens all the time.
Bean’s only saving grace from a progressive point of view is the D after her name. If she and other conservatives like her can form part of a big-tent Dem majority in the House, our nation will be the better for it as some sort of balance would return to our democracy.
And Bill, your fantasy about impending Democratic Party implosion is fascinating. The closest to reality your vision may come is if the grassroots (ie, voters) can actually prove to candidates the beltway establishment consultants don’t know squat.
The Republicans went through that bloodletting decades ago and their extreme base is what passes for mainstream movement conservatism nowadays. The results of that are playing themselves out in the low approvals Bush and his failed conservative philosophy are earning nationally.
Comment by NW burbs Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 11:01 am
PS: Bill, why would any progressive get advice from the conservative Wall Street Journal? (And if you’re implying Scheurer is a candidate worth mentioning… I still have that bridge available in Brooklyn. Real nice provenence to it too.)
And wanting to rationally redeploying troops is a good shot different than “peace” candidates and you know it. Afghanistan and the war against al Quaeda/Taliban is a moral war — the invasion of Iraq, for all the good intents (capturing Hussein, etc), was not.
Comment by NW burbs Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 11:05 am
I wonder if the Chamber really believes that Speaker Pelosi will be good for business, not to mention Chairmen Rangel, Frank, and Dellums?
Comment by respectful Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 11:07 am
Maybe the Chamber believes that massive government spending, staggering deficits, and an entirely new welfare plan for prescription drugs is bad for business.
Maybe the Chamber recalls the low interest rates, balanced budgets and reduction in the growth of discretionary spending during the Clinton years.
Maybe as others noted they see a sure winner and want to be on her side.
Or maybe they simply realize that Cong. Bean is an oustanding member of Congress with views in line with her district.
That could be it.
Comment by Skeeter Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 11:18 am
Good night McSweeney the party is over turn out the lights.
Comment by Lee Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 11:18 am
Respectful,
Interesting that you would make a list of bad Democrats singling out two African Americans, a woman, and a homosexual.
You didn’t include Cong. Murtha or any of the white male southerners in your list.
It is an interesting commentary on your own views.
Comment by Skeeter Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 11:20 am
The Republicans went through that bloodletting decades ago and their extreme base is what passes for mainstream movement conservatism nowadays.
Yes indeed. Reminds me of D’Amato’s defeat of Javits in 1980. Except I don’t think the netroots left is going to follow up Lieberman’s defeat with their version of RR.
Bill, why would any progressive get advice from the conservative Wall Street Journal?
It’s free. Sometimes the best advice comes from the other side….
He blames Democrats for running both moderates and liberals. According to him, by winning elections the Democrats are going to destroy the party.
No I blame them for driving out the moderates. For folks who refrained Bush was the most divisive Prez in history they’re lunching at Lieberman with vengence.
Comment by Bill Baar Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 11:42 am
lunging… thinking lunch I guess
Comment by Bill Baar Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 11:44 am
Baar said:
“No I blame them for driving out the moderates. For folks who refrained Bush was the most divisive Prez in history they’re lunching at Lieberman with vengence.”
Interesting. For a post on Cong. Bean you launched into an attack on a Democrat in Conn. who is running a winning campaign against a Democrat who sides with the Democratic Party about as often as Zell Miller. Democrats tend to vote for people who vote like Democrats we are funny that way.
Moreover, it is fascinating because it makes no reference to the fact that the Democrats this cycle have run a bunch of moderates, including people like Casey, Heath Schuler, Tammy Duckworth and others. Meanwhile, the ILGOP has been overrun by right wingers like Keyes and Salvi and Syverson who have made the party the weakest Republican Party in the country.
Facts, of course, don’t mean much to Baar. He sure keeps talking though.
Comment by Skeeter Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 11:52 am
Pretty boring ad if you have seen it. Looks like it was done by amatuers. Maybe uninspired support is all the Chamber could mount for a Dem.
Comment by Niles Township Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 12:22 pm
Skeeter,
Yes for sure Dems have run a bunch of moderates; many of whom the netrooters bitterly opposed earlier. Witness the hits on Duckworth.
The point is just that: if they take the house in 2006 it will because the Dems ran moderates.
Problem is come the 2008 convention, they’ll turn on the moderates with the same anger they’re turning on Joe in Conn…. because those moderates wouldn’t get relected in 2008 if they shift to the netroot-left.
It’s a heck of a spot for a party to work itself into… that a fossil like Gore seems to be the contender now for 2008 just deepens the morass.
Comment by Bill Baar Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 12:24 pm
Problem is come the 2008 convention, they’ll turn on the moderates with the same anger they’re turning on Joe in Conn…. because those moderates wouldn’t get relected in 2008 if they shift to the netroot-left. -Bill Baar
Those pesky primary and general elections just keep popping up and letting people decided who they want to represent them. Annoying, aren’t they?
Endorsements or no, Bean will have a hard time motivating progressives in her district. Maybe she’ll benefit from a close Governor’s race. I may give her my vote, but I won’t be putting her sign back in my yard this year.
Comment by doubtful Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 12:35 pm
Baar,
You’re mistaken. When the democrats win in November, it will be because the GOP, from Bush to Congress, has spent the past six years alienating its own base.
Comment by Veritas Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 12:38 pm
Doubtful,
If a choice between McSweeney and Bean doesn’t motivate you, then you deserve to be represented by McSweeney and his right wing pals.
Comment by Skeeter Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 12:39 pm
…has spent the past six years alienating its own base.
That’s the point too. But I’m betting Republicans do better repairing that damage for 2008, then Democrats; who won’t be in a repairing frame of mind.
Comment by Bill Baar Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 12:45 pm
Those pesky primary and general elections just keep popping up and letting people decided who they want to represent them. Annoying, aren’t they?
I thought Bean and Duckworth excellant candidates. I wish them both well.
Comment by Bill Baar Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 12:46 pm
If a choice between McSweeney and Bean doesn’t motivate you, then you deserve to be represented by McSweeney and his right wing pals.-Skeeter
My problem is it shouldn’t be the choice that motivates, but the candidate. I shouldn’t go to the polls to vote for “not McSweeny,” I should go to vote for someone I truly feel represents me and that is what I doubt I will be able to do.
Comment by doubtful Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 1:12 pm
If you dems think that the American people will put people like Dingle and Rangel as Chairman of major committees I got a bridge to sell you! Being anti american military and on the side of Hammas and Cuban dictators does not seem the way to reach middle america, at least to me.
But then you look at these stories
“In USA Today,”Economy, more than war, setting tone for elections,’: A battle for control of the most closely divided Congress in 70 years enters its final and decisive phase… But for many voters, the economy appears to have eclipsed terrorism as a top concern… A recent Gallup Poll showed 50% of registered voters were more likely to vote for Democrats, 42% for Republicans.”
“President Bush’s vigorous campaigning to elect Republicans in November could make the elections a referendum on his presidency… ‘If Republicans lose ground in the House and Senate, it’ll be a major embarrassment to him,’ said Gilbert St. Clair, political science professor at the University of New Mexico. Still, he also said a president ‘doesn’t have much control’ over such elections.” They go on to cite polling data that shows the American people vastly prefer Democrats to Republicans.”
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, ‘Bush’s political capital may buy him nothing but trouble.’ Consumer confidence is shaky and a majority of voters are pessimistic about the economy’s near-term prospects. On national security, polls show that voters are not inclined to cast their ballots based on the issue; worse, according to National Journal’s Charlie Cook, the recent debate over attacking Iraq may have hurt Bush’s approval rating.” “They cite polls showing that the country much prefers Democrats to Republicans.”
Chicago Sun-Times, “From all indications, this fall’s midterm elections should confirm the Judis-Teixeira thesis… They could win back the House on Nov. 5 and are favored to win key governorships. For the Democrats, happy days may be here again,’”
Christian Science Monitor, ‘Deciding the fall elections… Polling numbers and historical patterns may provide the best clues.”
they cites polling data that “suggests the majority of the country wishes to elect Democrats than Republicans.”
BTW All these stories are from August of 2002, so don’t believe everything you read in the media!
Comment by RAI Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 1:13 pm
Whatever. Voters in this district are perfectly capable of sorting through the rubbish that passes for news and political spin today. If they like McSweeney, they’ll elect him. If they liked what Bean has done, she’ll be re-elected. Endorsements and the backroom deals and rumors that float around about who got what and when is nothing but background noise.
As to when the Democrats take over Congress, well we have been reading those stories every two years since 1994. Historically, Republicans are supposed to take it in the shorts this year, so what’s the big deal? There is still no one handing out a list of races that will make this happen. These stories are just speculation by desperate liberals.
I guess that is what really stinks. We are constantly barraged by garbage editorials trying to pass themselves off as news. Every pro-Democrat news bit is trumpeted as the second coming, and every anti-Bush news bit is trumpeted the same way. After ten years it is no wonder why so many voters have stopped reading yesterday’s opinions in the newspapers and stopped watching CNN, CBS, NBC/MSNBC, and ABC.
At some base level voters sense BS but know the dance. When pollsters ask the fashion questions of the day, voters follow suit. But when they walk into the voting booth, their instinct decides. Will voters chicken out in Iraq or fight? Will voters embrace gay marriage or not? We know the public fashion statements to keep us looking pompous and hip, but in private, voters are going instinctual. Polls lie because respondents do.
Comment by VanillaMan Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 1:59 pm
NW Burbs -
The key to electing “progressive” candidates is to educate the electorate, not browbeat Democrats. Show me a poll that shows that even a sizeable minority of Bean’s district opposes CAFTA, and I’ll have some sympathy for you.
I agree, she was probably way out-of-touch with her district on Schiavo, but I’m sure she learned her lesson. Is McSweeney better? I don’t think so.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 2:18 pm
Everybody seems to be fighting about the numbers in the house. Nobody really cares about Bean or McSweeney… they really are basically the same. The Politics1 bloggers really criticize Bean because she is a “sell-out.” In my opinion, both parties need a few more “sell-outs.”
Comment by Lovie's Leather Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 2:30 pm
Doubtful whines, “I should go to vote for someone I truly feel represents me and that is what I doubt I will be able to do.”
You missed your opportunity to circulate petitions in order to put yourself on the ballot. From the sounds of it, you’re the only person in the district you’d be “motivated” to vote for because you are the only person who would agree with you 100% of the time….
Barring that, you go to the polls and vote for the candidate who best represents you, not the one who least represents you.
—
And if Lovie’s Leather really believes Bean and McSweeney “really are basically the same” then I’m running out of bridges in Brooklyn to sell to conservatives. McSweeney is far and away an extreme conservative. Bean is at least something of a moderate (not extreme one way or the other). She votes with her caucus when it fits her principles. She votes against her caucus for the same reason. She’s been representing the mood of the 8th fairly well in doing so. McSweeney is outside the mainstream for the 8th.
(As evidenced by the tied polls in the 6th the same can be said for Roskam and Duckworth. Though it is counterintuitive in this “red” district, Duckworth represents the mainstream and Roskam represents a movement conservatism pretty extreme for the suburban 6th as shown by his willingness to use NRA operatives to go door to door. C’mon Roskam — common sense says you try to hide your gun-totin’ allies from the already “scared” suburban housewives.)
Comment by NW burbs Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 2:54 pm
Can’t blame him for the name screw-up…Shawn…errrr, I mean David has changed his name a few times!!!
Comment by Anon Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 4:42 pm
Was McSweeney the guy whose campaign ads were “elect me because I love my family?” Who also had his wife endorse him by saying ‘he’s always there for me?” If it is the same guy, that was the craziest campaign I ever saw. Vote for him because his wife endorses him?
Comment by NoGiftsPlease Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 5:58 pm
I live in the 8th CD. And I think his name is Brian McSweeney.
Larry McSweeney, possibly.
Comment by IllinoisEddie Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 8:09 pm
Since Bean doesn’t have a ground operation is in an overwhelmingly Republican district, she will have to rely on a big budget media campaign and as much IE money as possible.
This is similar to the Flanagan-Blagojevich race in ‘96, with the partisan roles reversed. Bean will not have the advantage of Obama and Kerry at the top of the ticket, or a beleaguered incumbent to attack.
She will have to convince the electorate that she will continue to vote the way she has been, while trying to paint McSweeney as a right-wing nut. In the 8th District, that’s actually to his advantage, not hers.
Comment by 8th CD Anonymous Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 9:49 pm
Here are the links to Bean and McSweeney’s platform pages. The only difference between them is that Bean is pro-enviornment and McSweeney is pro-life. Other than that, can you tell me a difference, NWBurbs?
http://www.melissabean.com/index.php?Path=Public/[05]%20Issues
http://www.davidmcsweeney.com/news/platform.htm
Comment by Lovie's Leather Monday, Aug 7, 06 @ 10:52 pm
Lovie,
The real question is what they would do on impeachment….there is probably a big difference there.
Comment by Bill Baar Tuesday, Aug 8, 06 @ 7:14 am
The Chamber’s policy is to endorse any incumbent who has a 70% or better voting record with them, to guard against accusations of being merely politically partisan. Looks like Bean just made it under the wire. I’ll bet the Chamber knows who would be the better candidate for business. And I’ll bet that if their efforts succeed in electing Nancy Pelosi Speaker, that will be bad enough for business they’ll change their policy.
Comment by The Watcher Tuesday, Aug 8, 06 @ 7:47 am
Watcher, what is it exactly that you fear from Speaker Pelosi? Massive deficit spending? A massive new welfare giveway?
Looks like they’ve seen what Speaker Hastert has done and have taken the proper step of backing the pro-business Cong. Bean and at the same time, assisting in elevating Speaker Pelosi.
Comment by Skeeter Tuesday, Aug 8, 06 @ 8:33 am
NW burbs, first of all, just because you use the word “whines” to color what I wrote doesn’t automatically invadlidate it. All it really does is expose you as an ass.
Secondly, I don’t have to run for office personally to have a candidate I agree with and I never suggested I needed to agree with someone 100% of the time, as you erroneously imply. As Lovie’s Leather pointed out, Bean and McSweeney are very similar in their platforms.
Frankly, I don’t see why you don’t resist the easy and irrelevant jabs at a commentor who is just expressing concern over this race.
Barring that, you go to the polls and vote for the candidate who best represents you, not the one who least represents you.
That’s a false assumption. Sometimes people vote against the person who least represents them, not for the person who most represents them. The results may be the same or similar, but the motivation comes from two very different places.
Comment by doubtful Tuesday, Aug 8, 06 @ 9:53 am
Lovie actually has to ask, The only difference between them is that Bean is pro-enviornment and McSweeney is pro-life. Other than that, can you tell me a difference, NWBurbs?
McSweeney is movement conservative, and we’ve all seen how well conservative policies have been for work-a-day Americans over the past 6 years.
That, and Bean had to work to get where she is.
Since Bean and McSweeney are so close, it’s pretty clear the incumbent will win — why change horses midstream, especially if the other horse is the same?
– NW “Proud to Be an Ass, Mr. Doubtful” Burbs
Comment by NW burbs Tuesday, Aug 8, 06 @ 4:54 pm