MyDD :: How the DCCC and Illinois Dem Establishment Can Make Nice In IL-06

How the DCCC and Illinois Dem Establishment Can Make Nice In IL-06

by Chris Bowers, Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 02:12:42 AM EST

I want to emphasize before I suggest this that I don't know if it is actually possible. I spent the last thirty minutes on Google trying to find some info about it, but I couldn't.

Anyway, I heard earlier today that according to Illinois election law, any candidate, no matter how much s/he was behind on the first ballot count, can trigger a recount for a fee of $75,000. Even if a candidate lost 99%-1% on the first count, they can trigger a recount if they pony up $75,000. If this is true, and I don't know if it is, I think the way that the DCCC, the Illinois Democratic Party, and other members of the Democratic establishment can make nice in IL-06 is to pony up the $75,000 for a recount.

I'm not writing this to suggest that there was anything wrong in the vote counting. I don't think that there was. However, paying for the recount would be a pretty darn good show of good faith to Cegalis activists on behalf of our Democratic Party leaders. Paying for a recount would show that they respect democracy within their own party. Paying for a recount would show that they are aware of, and appreciate, the efforts of all the people who worked so hard for Cegalis and made this thing close. Paying for a recount would show that they would like all Democrats in the district to be confident in the final results, so that we can move forward with less acrimony.

Doing this would be a helluva lot better than just demanding that everyone fall in line and return to work in the activist salt mines for whatever candidate the party leaders decide upon. Doing this would be a lot better than just continuing to pretend that grassroots Democrats don't exist and acting as though the grassroots don't deserve to have a voice in the party. If what I heard about Illinois election law is true, the party should show that they care about democracy within their own ranks, and they should show that they are aware of, and appreciate, all of the work Cegalis supporters put in for this election. This would be an excellent way to do that.

As long as it is possible, the same Democratic leaders who got involved in this primary on behalf of Duckworth should show that they care about the grassroots activists who supported a different candidate. Those same people and organizations should now pay for a recount. This can't go on like this forever. At some point, they have to at least try to lessen the ongoing tensions in the activist class war, or we will all spit apart at the seams. If possible, show us that you care.

Tags: Democrats, activism (all tags)

Permalink :: 142 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: How the DCCC and Illinois Dem Establishment Ca (3.00 / 0)

Damn straight.

by blogswarm on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 02:23:29 AM EST

Re: How the DCCC and Illinois Dem Establishment Ca (3.00 / 3)

I can think of MUCH better uses for $75000 in Democratic campaign funds than to pay for a recount of a race in which the result is not questioned. I agree that the DCCC needs to do something, but to direct funds for an unnecessary Dem primary recount when it could be going to defeat Republicans just doesn't seem wise.

by Ian in DC on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:46:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How the DCCC and Illinois Dem Establishment Ca (none / 0)

"I can think of MUCH better uses for $75000 in Democratic campaign funds than to pay for a recount of a race in which the result is not questioned."

Exactly.

by Politicalhack06 on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 10:55:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How the DCCC and Illinois Dem Establishment Ca (none / 0)

I question it. Notice Axelrod's complaints about Cook County votes on national television last night? I want a machine recount, a hand recount, another machine recount, and then, perhaps, I will be willing to discuss the results.

by illinois062006 on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:06:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How the DCCC and Illinois Dem Establishment Ca (none / 0)

They've already WASTED $600K+, what's another $75K to clean up their mess?

"It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly American criminal class except Congress." ~Mark Twain

by dabuddy on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 10:35:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How the DCCC and Illinois Dem Establishment Ca (none / 0)

搬家搬家公司打折机票特价机票飞机票机票机票成都机票成都机票成都飞机票成都打折机票北京机票北京机票北京飞机票北京特价机票北京打折机票上海机票上海机票上海机票上海飞机票上海打折机票广州机票广州特价机票广州机票广州飞机票深圳机票深圳特价机票深圳机票深圳飞机票深圳打折机票重庆机票重庆特价机票重庆机票重庆飞机票重庆打折机票西安机票西安特价机票西安机票西安打折机票快递北京快递北京快递公司上海快递上海快递公司成都快递成都快递公司广州快递广州快递公司深圳快递深圳快递公司重庆快递重庆快递公司工程设计中国語网络电话身份证阅读器澳洲房地产澳大利亚房地产上海翻译公司录音电话电话录音电话录音卡录音系统电话录音系统语音卡电话语音卡呼叫中心一卡通一卡通企业一卡通方案收费机售饭机门禁机考勤机餐桌重庆人才网重庆招聘网重庆火锅重庆餐饮餐饮加盟北京到上海机票北京到深圳机票北京到成都机票北京到重庆机票北京到海口机票北京到三亚机票北京到福州机票北京到厦门机票北京到南宁机票北京到珠海机票北京到西宁机票北京到银川机票北京到郑州机票北京到兰州机票北京到悉尼机票北京到大阪机票北京到曼谷机票北京到旧金山机票北京到纽约机票北京到汉城机票

by liaozhi123 on Wed Apr 26, 2006 at 03:29:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

It'll never happen (3.00 / 3)

Not in a million years.

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 02:25:24 AM EST

Re: It'll never happen (3.00 / 1)

Emanuel bought district 6, and now he must transform it into a landslide, especially as Kerry, Clinton, Obama, Durbin, Schakowsky and everyone else who had to stick their dirty fingers into the race invested their time and their reputations into little Tammy's victory. And then Tammy has the audacity to go on CBS and call for party unity. You broke it, bitch, now you and all your supporters from outside the district can fix it.

Votes are to be counted tomorrow, and I know Tammy will lose. And even if she wins, I know she did not deserve it. Her whole campaign is a fraud, and I hope she feels the pain she has inflicted on district 6 for the rest of her life.

by illinois062006 on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 02:59:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It'll never happen (2.62 / 8)

The amount of hatred in this comment and others about out there concerning this primary really damages my faith in these blogs and the community that surrounds them.

by Ryan Anderson on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 03:40:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It'll never happen (3.00 / 1)

I'm glad someone else is starting to feel this way as well.

The blogs really are starting to become as locked in their own ideaology as those inside the beltway. Sometimes those inside the beltway are right, sometimes we are. No one is right 100% of the time.

Rahm obviously had a reason and just to screw us over is obviously not his reason. He wants to win, he may be wrong but a Pelosi speakership is his #1 goal. Let's let him finish his run before we crucify him (unless he does something obviously dumb like an enodrsement for a Cuellar-type in NYC).

We're here to win first. And so is the DCCC, DSCC, and DNC. Different ideas, yes. Different strategies, yes. Same goal, yes.

by Trowaman on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 02:49:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It'll never happen (3.00 / 4)

"You broke it, bitch, now you and all your supporters from outside the district can fix it. Votes are to be counted tomorrow, and I know Tammy will lose. And even if she wins, I know she did not deserve it. Her whole campaign is a fraud, and I hope she feels the pain she has inflicted on district 6 for the rest of her life."

Ummm... just wanted to make sure you were aware that she beat your candidate in an election. She didn't shoot your dog.

by Politicalhack06 on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 04:00:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

She didn't beat Cegelis (3.00 / 3)

The DCCC bought it for her.

by lisadawn82 on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 06:59:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It'll never happen (none / 0)

smile. laugh. smile some more.

by aiko on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 08:37:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It'll never happen (2.50 / 4)

I'm not from Illinois, but I totally agree with you. Dont feel compelled to vote for Tammy in the general if you dont want to.

The problem with our side is that the Dem party shits on us and we vote for 'em anyway because the alternative is worse. Well, maybe if we stopped they wont take us for granted anymore.

by dayspring on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 08:31:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes sit it out. (3.00 / 3)

We don't need every seat we can get. Who cares whether or not George Bush's regime is stopped or investigated.

"Once in a while you get shown the light In the strangest of places if you look at it right"

by molly bloom on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 08:51:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes sit it out. (2.20 / 5)

If we desire a majority , then we should allow the voters to choose their representatives and not allow representatives to choose their voters. duckworth obviously did the latter. and whether she is a democrat or a republican, i find her behavior unacceptable. it is unethical, and it once again illustrates why we need public funding of elections in this country similar to the canadian system. the amount of money spent and the amount of coordinated free media coverage for duckworth was frankly outrageous. and anyone who refuses to discuss those issues is complicit with an inherently corrupt system of government.

by illinois062006 on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 08:59:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes sit it out. (3.00 / 4)

It still was a fair election. There was nothing illegal... or even unethical... about it. You might not like the tactics, but it still involved people in their own district voting for who they want to represent them. They were not paid to vote. They were not threatened. You may not like the result, you may not like the hardball politics, but it was an election.

I do not know who would have a better chance to win this seat. I didn't care which person won this district as both seem like good candidates. I am just glad this happened in March and not like in so many states that have September primaries where a divisive party battle would be too fresh in November.

by Ian in DC on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:43:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Elections in this country (3.00 / 2)

The seat was sold to the high bidder.

Voters decide based on what they know and are told. In this race, Duckworth, thanks to the backing of the entire party, spent probably over $500K to carpet bomb the district with at least 11 large mailers, many robo calls, and TV ads. The MSM gave her lots of nice free media, like the Nightline piece Monday night that basically ran her campaign photos and rebroadcast her ad with Obama giving her more free media.

The election was fair and nothing illegal happened. But I could cheat on my wife and not break the law too. Unethical? You bet.

This is what bothers me greatly in what I see. We are willing to just sit by and see this type of thing happen, and the say "well, that was an election."

If this is what elections are becoming, then my friend, we are in deep trouble in America. Elections will now become more like autions, shutting out the common rable, and focusing on only those with wealth or friends who will supply the wealth for them.

I am deeply troubled by the lack of concern for this.

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:16:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elections in this country (3.00 / 3)

Elections have been about money for decades. If you are worried about what elections will become, well it is too late.

Again, you can disagree with the tactics, but they were hardball, not unethical. Nothing that was done was the equivalent of someone cheating on their wife. The powers that be admitted they wanted Duckworth to win and they would fund her. It was very transparent, nothing underhanded about it. But it was hardball.

by Ian in DC on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:21:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Elections in this country (none / 0)

Apathy is always a strategy. You are out of touch.

by illinois062006 on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 09:19:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Sit it out. Are you NUTS? (3.00 / 4)

Absolutely and thanks for saying it.

There isn't much argument that the Dem establishment has a poor record of success. But it's still foolish in response to choose a strategy for change which happens to also allow Republicans to maintain their stranglehold on the national government.

It only takes 5 minutes on the front page of a newspaper to see why Democrats must win in 2006. That hasn't changed.

Of course the ham-handed manipulations that occurred in IL-06 and OH-SEN give a clear example of incompetence in the leadership of the national party. But the lesson I draw from that is not that we should teach them a lesson by helping "their" Democrats to lose. It's that we need to throw the bums out upstairs who are costing the party votes through their mismanagement.

by Curt Matlock on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:52:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It'll never happen (none / 0)

Now you know how we feel in Ohio. I don't think anyone is going so far as to say "Don't vote for Sherrod Brown" (there's actually a t-shirt you can buy that says "F*** Sherrod Brown, but I'll vote for him anyway.") but the complete fizzling of energy in the race is palpable. I see all the people I know in Ohio who want to be involved in a campaign going some place they think they can win or make a difference, such as Strickland's gubernatorial campaign or Chandra's non-party-approved but winnable attorney general campaign.

We're just so sick of party leaders telling us "Here is your candidate. Like it or lump it." Most might vote for them with gritted teeth but you just aren't going to get the grassroots out there stumping for them and when you've got a leaner like this, you need that.

by anastasiap on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:29:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How the DCCC and Illinois Dem Establishment Ca (none / 0)

Seems like a lot of money to me. I'll count them for $10,000! I'd really wish the establishment would just stay out of primaries to be honest. Let the people who live there decide who they want, regardless of 'electability'. It's their choice. That said, I don't think Duckworth is a bad candidate. From what little I know, both seemed to be good people.

Philly Liberal

by Airb330 on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 02:43:31 AM EST

Re: How the DCCC and Illinois Dem Establishment Ca (3.00 / 1)

It's late, but offhand the only time that I can think of it being acceptable for the party to step in with contested primaries--especially where there is no incumbent--is when some extremist that does not at all represent what the party stands for runs for the nomination.

At that point it's a good thing for the party apparatus to grind into action and denounce the extremist candidate so it's clear to everyone that they don't represent our party.

by Quinton on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 03:16:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How the DCCC and Illinois Dem Establishment Ca (none / 0)

Like Pennsylvania, only the opposite.

by blogswarm on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 03:22:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Why bother? (none / 0)

There's a guy named Merrill Keiser running for the Democratic Senate nomination against Sherrod Brown. He has no money, no website, no formal campaign and he believes gays should repent or be put to death. Everyone in Ohio who believes that is going to be requesting a Republican ballot so they can vote for Kenneth "Katherine Harris" Blackwell in the highly contested Republican gubernatorial primary. Keiser isn't going to take anything out of Brown's hide. He'll leave that for Mike Dewine in November, unfortunately.

by anastasiap on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:37:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

William Rivers Pitt of PDA and truthout here. Spent the last two days in Cegelis headquarters and at the election night shindig. Came up with a really goofy idea:

http://blog.pdamerica.org/?p=581

by kspidel on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 03:24:43 AM EST

Re: (2.50 / 4)

This another example of how there are still too many ordinary Dems who let the corrupt wing of the party machine do their thinking for them.

But it seems to be getting incrementally better. Just got to keep plugging away at exposing the ugly truth to those who don't yet get it.

With Democrats Lieberman goes for the jugular. With Republicans he goes for the lips.

by Sitkah on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 03:43:30 AM EST

Re: (3.00 / 2)

Is it possible to agree with the DNC sometimes without being "corrupted"?

As for the person before who said that now, Emmanuel needs to deliver a landslide, yes it's bad press right now for a recount, but all that matters is getting one more vote than the other guy in November.

http://cosstandard.blogspot.com

by flyingplates on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 03:54:14 AM EST

Re: (2.33 / 3)

No, what matters is the ability of voters in a district who were involved in the political process for two and a half years to be proud of their party. And I must say that I am not proud of my party. Tonight I am ashamed of the DCCC, the DLC, John Kerry, Jan Schakowsky, Dick Durbin, Barack Obama and Rahm Emanuel. Their manipulation of this election, when it was clear that Cegelis was the candidate district voters wanted, is shameless. What is most important is our party's ability to demonstrate to us that voters choose them, not the other way around.

Obviously I and many others will not visit the site you advertise.

by illinois062006 on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 04:05:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

With all due respect (3.00 / 2)

How can you say Cegelis is the candidate the district voters wanted when Duckworth has more votes?

The picture of the district being painted here is not an objective one. A lot of liberal primary voters chose Duckworth.

by OfficeOfLife on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 04:09:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: With all due respect (1.66 / 3)

I love seeing a troll show up to begin posts against Cegelis on election night, go DCCC!

by blogswarm on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 04:16:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Why am I a troll? (3.00 / 1)

I disagree with the arguments made by the Cegelis supporters in this thread. Can't we just debate this civilly?

by OfficeOfLife on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 04:19:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Heart (none / 0)

I love Bob Brigham. Not only are his ripostes biting and accurate; he is tall and handsome. And I love his politics.

by illinois062006 on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 04:25:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: With all due respect (none / 0)

I love seeing a troll show up to begin posts against Cegelis on election night, go DCCC!

Just because someone doesn't agree with you, doesn't mean they're a troll. You should be more careful with your language.

Independent Illinois Grassroots: IllinoisDemNet.com

by patachon on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 03:15:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: With all due respect (none / 0)

Now why exactly am I a DCCC troll? Is it because I don't agree with you? Last time I checked, the progressive movement was supposedly about maintaining our freedom and creating a government based on the American ideals (in addition to a focus on social problems within our nation)... but the second someone disagrees with you about anything, they're suddenly not part of the movement, they're just "trolls" and "drones"?

Quite frankly, there's a lot of debate within the Democratic party and the progressive movement itself... no good is served by demeaning those who disagree with you just because you're unwilling to consider a different point of view.

And for the record, this wasn't me "trolling," this was me starting to be active on an account I just started, on a forum where debate or disagreement apparently isn't welcome.

http://cosstandard.blogspot.com

by flyingplates on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 04:48:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: With all due respect (2.00 / 2)

No, they were manipulated to vote for her. You obviously do not understand the structure of intention.

by illinois062006 on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 04:16:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Manipulated? (3.00 / 4)

Come on now, that's a pretty unreasonable slander against thousands of loyal Democratic voters. It's also an easy cop-out, calling the other side stupid.
Some people liked her military background, others probably preferred her more centrist politics over the more liberal Cegelis. People all have their own important issues and ideologies.

This is a classic primary battle that has been going on since the dawn of American politics. There's the more conservative-leaning candidate against the more-progressive leaning candidate. If you're unhappy over Duckworth's politics, that is perfectly fine and reasonable. But slamming voters because you didn't get the result you wanted is a tired old tactic that doesn't help the process any.

by OfficeOfLife on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 04:24:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Manipulated? (2.33 / 3)

No, I am right.

Why? When one pours $600,000 into a district, coordinates endorsements, asks an entire party to endorse a candidate, and manipulates the public with the wounds of a soilder, I believe one has to ask questions about ethics and responsibility.

And discussing the structure of intention is not tantamount to insulting others. That you would interpret it in such a way reveals how naive you actually are. Money buys opinion. Any philosopher and any marketer can tell you that.

by illinois062006 on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 04:28:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Manipulated? (none / 0)

Money buys opinion. Any philosopher and any marketer can tell you that.

True, and this race was a good example of that. Tammy Duckworth has a resume and personal history that makes it easy to market her. You can buy a TV ad for some candidates and it's not going to budge a typical person an inch. But with Duckworth you have all those attention getters that make it easy to sell her. That's what the bosses saw in her I'm sure.

The rest of us are stuck worrying about positions and ideology. That's why I supported Cegelis. I respect what Cegelis has done in building an organization and I'd much prefer her in Congress than Duckworth.

by Curt Matlock on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 10:07:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

An old union organizing saying (3.00 / 1)

There's an old union organizing saying: "You don't blame the workers when you lose an organizing vote, you blame yourself because you didn't explain it well enough."

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 07:58:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: An old union organizing saying (none / 0)

did you know that OfficeofLife has never commented on myydd before this thread?

s/he may be expressing you opinion but sure looks like an invasive busybody troll to me

by aiko on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 08:43:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Or a newbie (3.00 / 2)

I think you should wait and see some more comments before you pronouce them a troll.

"Once in a while you get shown the light In the strangest of places if you look at it right"

by molly bloom on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 08:57:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Or a newbie (none / 0)

Or perhaps just vacuous. The spectacle I witnessed last night should prompt questions on election reform, ethics, the necessity for multiple parties, public funding, banning television advertisements, and laws stipulating funding and endorsement rules for primaries, not grandstanding about the artificially manufactured victory of a candidate who is unashamed of the fact that she is an interloper and a carpetbagger. but i guess some democrats are not interested in ethics. dlc? dccc? too much alphabet soup?

by illinois062006 on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:02:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Or a newbie (none / 0)

Whining is so much easier, eh?

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:05:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Or a newbie (3.00 / 1)

Election reform? Define please
Ethics- who isn't for ethics?
Multiple parties? Go out and form one (Somehow I am reminded of this [scene from the Life of Brian)
Public Funding- I am for it.
Banning TV advertisements? Ever hear of Amendment? It is settled law that the 1st amendment applies to the states.
Laws stipulating funding and endorsement rules for primaries?
See the 1st Amendment again.

Your basic complaint is the same one leveled against JFK after his victory in his 1st (1946) congressional campaign. You are in the good company of every candidate and their supporter whoever lost. Some have real complaints (Al Gore -2000).

"Once in a while you get shown the light In the strangest of places if you look at it right"

by molly bloom on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:21:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Or a newbie (1.00 / 1)

Defend it all you wish. I find the whole situation unsavory, and this perspicacious observer will cast an incredulous gaze onto the election process knowing that a carpetbagger bought the Democratic nomination.

$600,000 for 1,000 votes. Welcome of democracy. Welcome to America.

by illinois062006 on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:50:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Acutely insightful and wise observer (3.00 / 1)

Will the new party be named The Peoples Front of Judea or the Judean Peoples Front or the Popular Front of Judea?

"Once in a while you get shown the light In the strangest of places if you look at it right"

by molly bloom on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 10:32:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Probably (none / 0)

The "Not arrogant and crooked Democrats". FYI

by ElitistJohn on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 10:52:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Probably (none / 0)

Splitters!

"Once in a while you get shown the light In the strangest of places if you look at it right"

by molly bloom on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:35:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

And your point is? (3.00 / 2)

If it's a troll, it'll get taken care of soon enough.

This particular primary reminds me that we never get out of junior high school. Elections are about throwing the opposition (and boy, are they bad) out of power. Primary elections get you to the general election. You fight the good fight, but just because you fought before doesn't mean "it's your turn" at the next election by default. Somebody else may run, or not. Someone else may encourage another to run, or not. Each election is a distinct excercise, not a birthright.

You don't like how the party operates? Find out what it takes to take it over. Then do it.

Gee, people poured money into someone else's campaign. I've got news for you, it happens all the time.

Do you think the republicans will be all sweetness and light in the general election?

Leran to throw an elbow and take a head butt. If you lose a primary one day, take it out on some poor unsuspecting republican son of a bitch the next day. Pick yourself up and take it out on the opposition - viciously. Do that and you'll get some respect - and maybe even win one every once in a while.

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:04:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: And your point is? (2.00 / 2)

And that is what Christine Cegelis did, only to be derailed BY HER OWN PARTY. Your argument went stale last night. Try again.

by illinois062006 on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:17:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Unh (none / 0)

I love that. Get screwed over...so take it out on the people who those who screwed you over don't like!

That'll learn 'em.

by ElitistJohn on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:35:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Unh (3.00 / 1)

As opposed to your view - let the people in control of the current administration who are really screwing everyone of us over benefit from this petulance.

How quaint. I bet you liked st. ralph's little "no difference" meme in 2000.

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:53:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Nope (none / 0)

But the "STFU and do what we tell you, peon" routine grows tired.

If people like you wrote the script "Path of Glory", Kirk Douglas would have been the hero for being a good STFU, grabbing the promotion, and letting the crooked General Staff falsely execute soldiers to cover their mistakes. The classic "And to hell with you!" would have been replaced by a 5 minute soliloquy on how "we need to put this execution on false charges behind us, or the Germans will win!".

by ElitistJohn on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 10:55:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Huh? (none / 0)

What does that have to do with the price of beer in Denmark?

Are you saying that Duckworth's campaign terminated her opponent's GOTV team with extreme prejudice? Say it ain't so!

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:34:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

There's no point (none / 0)

In discussing ethics and conscience with someone who doesn't have much of either.

by ElitistJohn on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:52:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Your mistake (3.00 / 1)

You mistake me for someone who gives a shit about what you think of me. Heh.

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 12:08:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yep (1.00 / 0)

People without a sense of ethics often don't care what anyone thinks of them.

by ElitistJohn on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 01:01:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Heh (3.00 / 1)

Oh, I'll just mimic the mind set of the incompetent amateur you are: "Why are you being mean to me? Please don't hurt me with your mean words!"

You're just the kind of "activist" the republicans want for the Democratic Party - you'll crap all over the carpet in a fit of anguished revulsion, hoping to take the entire cruel world with you.

No wonder you lose elections.

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 02:03:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Heh (none / 0)

While I didn't exactly like the hissyfit between you and elitistjohn, I gotta agree with you. What exactly is accomplished by turning on the party when a result comes out that you don't like? One candidate overspent in a district? Republicans do it all the time! If you can't overcome a primary opponent with more money than you, how will you overcome your opponent in the general?

If you don't like the way money was tossed around, the correct response shouldn't be to bitch and moan about the election (since it was legal), it's to consider and advocate means to fix the problem of overspending all together.

Also, a question to consider... when Bowers called for a "good faith" recount when Duckworth was leading by a tiny margin for the sake of "making nice in the district," would he have made the same appeal to fairness had Cegelis won?

by flyingplates on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 04:59:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Heh (none / 0)

...would he have made the same appeal to fairness had Cegelis won?

Only Chris can answer that question.

I'm fascinated by the post election scorched earth attitude of some. Hell, don't hold back on your candidate's primary opponent during the campaign. I never have. But, after expressing initial disappointment in the immediate aftermath, the continued public garment rending can be a bit much. We all know our lazy media is watching - to continue to give them and the general election opposition any ammunition for their memes and talking points speaks volumes, eh?

A long while back - the day before a primary - I handed a committee check to the campaign of a statewide candidate involved in a three way primary. This candidate had textbook qualifications and the endorsement of every major paper in the state. The conventional wisdom had him as the front runner. After the votes were counted he came in a very poor third - everywhere. I vividly remember beating myself up (and swearing profusely) over that miscalculation on my part.

The primary victor, who ran an extremely low budget campaign, called up the first candidate late on primary election night and said, "The press has been calling me. What do I say?" The first candidate replied, "Tell them: 'My campaign strategy worked.'" The first candidate then rolled up his sleeves and offered to help the victor in the general election.

The primary victor lost badly in the general. Primary campaigns are not the same as general election campaigns. For both, you win some and you lose some.

In general, activists who have been in the trenches for a while (more than a few election cycles) know that you win some and you lose some. That's the way of the world. The activists and candidates I respect most are the ones who dust themselves off and get back to it, remembering the primary goal. That is especially important in times like these.

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 08:56:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: An old union organizing saying (none / 0)

Maybe true, but that assumes that when you are explaining your point on top of your soapbox your opponent isn't explaining hers with a 100 watt megaphone management bought for her.

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:21:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: An old union organizing saying (none / 0)

And the republicans won't be doing so in the general election?

Oh, the injustice of it all.

Gee, life is unfair. What else is new?

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:36:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: With all due respect (3.00 / 2)

"No, they were manipulated to vote for her. You obviously do not understand the structure of intention."

Well I am a Democrat and a democrat. I have never been manipulated to vote for anyone, and my guess is you have not either. Why do you have such contempt for voters that you assume that they were manipulated and are so stupid that they just vote for who The Party tells them to vote for? I didn't care who won this primary because I liked both candidates, but this assumption of mindless, programmed primary voters is arrogant.

by Ian in DC on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:54:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: With all due respect (3.00 / 2)

You don't have a very high opinion of the voters in the district if you think that they're so stupid that money can manipulate them into voting against their self interest.

by Lucas O'Connor on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 10:15:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: With all due respect (none / 0)

Did you pay any attention to the last presidential election or the Republican southern strategy?

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:23:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Aaaargh! (none / 0)

Not...the...DNC. The DNC had nothing to do with this. You want to target the DCCC.

Totally different animals.

by ElitistJohn on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:32:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Good point (none / 0)

Everyone please remember this. NOT DNC.

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:28:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How the DCCC and Illinois Dem Establishment Ca (none / 0)

I think its too big a gap now, at over 1k votes, to justify a recount. Damm, I lost a beer by hoping for Cegelis. I think Duckworth should be supported though, though I realize its going to be tough for her to rely upon suppport from those activists. Anyway, best wishes for Cegelis and her team, they ran a terrific race, and should feel good, but to come up just short sucks.

by Jerome Armstrong on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 05:01:13 AM EST

Chris must be very tired (none / 0)

What Jerome said. She lost by over 1,000 votes. If you have any actual evidence of vote rigging, that might be something, but otherwise, it's just a huge waste of money for nothing.

In Canada, our electoral districts (known as ridings) get vote totals roughly the same as this, and when recounts are held, the numbers will change by at most 20 votes one way or the other. To be sure, we use paper ballots and hand counting, but as I said, if you have no evidence of vote rigging, I doubt the number would be much different.

by Adam T on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 05:38:57 AM EST

Re: Chris must be very tired (none / 0)

The electronic ballot checker/counter in my precinct (strong Cegelis and Claypool) was still broken at 11:00AM. Ballots were taken "to be counted later". And although my wife and I requested (and got) paper ballots, we were issued touch screen activation numbers on our voting receipts WHICH WERE NOT ISSUED TO US. How much do you want to bet that the paper ballots were destroyed and someone used those activation numbers after hours? I'm finally beginning to think my Chicago-born wife is correct when she says "Why waste your time voting? It's all fixed anyway?".

by antiHyde on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:49:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Chris must be very tired (none / 0)

I don't know why you would believe your paper ballot would have been destroyed.

I was listening to Chicago Public Radio for a while and the problem you experienced occured throughout Cook County, if not the state as a whole, because of problems with the new election machines.

by Adam T on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 05:18:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How the DCCC and Illinois Dem Establishment Ca (2.33 / 3)

Gotta hand it to Emanuel, Durbin, Obama, et al. They know how to buy an election. If the final count does show Duckworth won, she really didn't. It just means that Emanuel sold IL-06 to Roskam.

Roskam really won.

Now Emanuel will pour millions into ONE CD sacrificing every other candidate in the country just for his pet project.

How can this country pretend to fight for democracy when it doesn't even know the definition of the word?

by Philosophe Forum on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 05:41:22 AM EST

Re: How the DCCC and Illinois Dem Establishment Ca (3.00 / 7)

Millions? The DCCC doesn't spend millions on a candidate.

Right now they only have $16.3 million cash on hand.

And how is this not democracy in action? Just because you didn't have the resources to beat Duckworth doesn't mean that she didn't get more votes than Cegalis. Organize better, raise the money, work on your GOTV efforts more and then you can win.

Hyperbole gets us nowhere. Let's try sticking to the facts of the matter and stop trying to make everything look like the end of the world.

This happens too often. After the grassroots lose one of these battles they complain and winge in the blogs and the media, and that just hurts them with the DCCC-types out there. It makes you look weak to them, and they will just ignore you. They respect strength, and part of being strong is taking your lumps and getting back in the ring, on the horse, in the game or however you want to say it.

We have to realize that each of these primaries/elections is a battle and not the war. The proper attitude is to start planning for the next battle, and not to complain that the other side had too much money and power for us to overcome.

I've lost these battles, many times. In my legislative district here in NJ we backed a progressive, independent Assemblywoman to move up to the State Senate when our State Senator had to drop out of the race. We got trounced by more powerful Democratic forces in the district and she did not get the nod.

This year Assemblywoman Linda Stender is running for Congress in NJ7 with the full backing of the grassroots and the Democratic Party.

So stop exagerating, stop complaining and keep fighting. Eventually you can win.

by nathan on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 07:55:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How the DCCC and Illinois Dem Establishment Ca (1.00 / 1)

You say: "how is this not democracy in action"

This is the best primary race the DCCC can buy, and they'll have to spend a ton all over again to beat Roskham. She may get some of the Cegelis votes, I doubt she'll get any of their grassroots support and Volunteers. They should have run her in another district that did not already have a great progressive candidate that locals loved and were willing to work their asses off for.

Duckworth had a made up campaign paid for by rich elite democrats who came in basically and told the grassroots locals to F off, we don't care who YOU want, this is who WE want, and when we win, COMPROMISE again (always one sided), suck it up and vote for her. Then proceeded to pump just about every cent Duckworth "raised" into her campaign. And paid Duckworth's "people" to do all her work. All Duckworth had to do is show up once in a while, hope she shows up in congress more often is does, by luck beat Roskham.

They could have backed Cegelis to begin with and directed at least half of the Duckworth fortune to other candidates, like here in IL-11 for John Pavich, who really needs it. He can beat Weller to pick up another seat if he has money.

If Cegelis supporters were smart, every single one of them would NOT cast a vote for Duckworth, or would write in Cegelis.

Short term it would be a loss, but it would be a loss that could be made up two years later or more importantly a lesson would be learned and the mistake not repeated: respect the base of your party and compromise WITH them, not always take them for granted. Actions like these hurt the Democratic party, they are alienating their base, they are acting just like Republicans with throwing lots of cash around and doing that needlessly, and flashing the fact they are corporately owned.

by Philosophe Forum on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:58:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How the DCCC and Illinois Dem Establishment Ca (3.00 / 1)

If Cegelis had won, her supporters would be bitching about Rahm not spending ENOUGH on a top tier race because Cegelis wasn't his candidate no matter how much money he put into the district. Now that Cegelis lost, no matter how much he spends will be overspending to protect his ego. The hypocrisy, I'm sure, will continue to disgust me in this race.

by Lucas O'Connor on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 10:17:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

High Horses (3.00 / 2)

You felt that condemning hypothetical future behavior was a comment that might help Democrats win elections?

Feeling self-righteous today or just felt like insulting Cegelis supporters one more time?

by Curt Matlock on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 10:38:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: High Horses (none / 0)

feeling exceptionally frustrated by bitter sour grapes, because no matter how justified they may be, they aren't constructive? That's me every day of this campaign so far.

by Lucas O'Connor on Fri Mar 24, 2006 at 12:52:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: High Horses (none / 0)

You're early to expect completely productive behavior. Gotta let people feel the loss and bitch for a little while don't you think? Not speaking for myself, but many Cegelis supporters have been behind her for a long time and the loss hurts.

by Curt Matlock on Fri Mar 24, 2006 at 07:56:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the DCCC (3.00 / 1)

I think these results are terrible for Hillary in 2008. Because it shows that, regardless of what the Washington Democrats say or spend, the people of the district will vote for someone they believe in.

Even though our side lost. It was still a very impressive showing (we lost by 2%) given how badly we were outspent and how much free air time and Washington support our opponent had.

by JackBourassa on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 05:56:08 AM EST

Re: the DCCC (none / 0)

I'll fight he just because she backed Duckworth. It was none of her business.

by antiHyde on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:50:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Watch me laugh (2.00 / 2)

when Emanuel or Duckworth discuss inside interests or a culture of corruption. If I ever meet them, I will be sure to stamp their heads with a dollar sign in blue ink. To be a Democrat means to either be wealthy or easily manipulated.

by illinois062006 on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 06:08:18 AM EST

Re: Watch me laugh (3.00 / 1)

aren't you a Democrat?

by Lucas O'Connor on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 10:18:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Watch me laugh (1.00 / 1)

What's the difference between a MSD corporately owned politician and an republican corporately owned politician?

by Philosophe Forum on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 12:01:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The difference? (none / 0)

People who actually believe that and st. ralph's 2000 campaign meme "that there is no difference."

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Thu Mar 23, 2006 at 06:27:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Handling the disappointment (3.00 / 4)

Your candidate lost in the primary and you're too bitter to actively support the other candidate? Do something productive.

Find out how to run for party ward or precinct committee. File for it and run. You'd be surprised by the number of open spots. Take over the party from within.

Find another local, statewide or national candidate you can support and put the volunteer skills you learned in this campaign to work. Make a difference for them (and for you). Do that and you can truly call yourself an activist. Lose one election and walk away - then you're nothing but a a consumerist dilettante - and I don't want to know you.

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 06:51:30 AM EST

Re: Handling the disappointment (none / 0)

No one said they are abandoning politics. We will just find other candidates we deem worthy of our support.

by illinois062006 on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 07:33:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Handling the disappointment (none / 0)

Time's a wastin'. Instead of spending your time here whining about the injustice of it all, get to it.

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 08:00:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Handling the disappointment (none / 0)

I need time to recover. And I prefer to have a discussion on election reform and the public funding of elections. My candidate and her supporters have been battered for months. Perhaps you can show us a bit of respect. WE PAID OUR DUES. What have you done?

by illinois062006 on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:04:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Handling the disappointment (3.00 / 1)

Perhaps you can show us a bit of respect. WE PAID OUR DUES. What have you done?

How conveniently self-righteous of you. And in the royal third person to boot.

You obviously need to work on your research skills. If you had done so earlier you might have been able to put those skills to good use for your candidate. I understand that Google is a convenient tool for many people.

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:13:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Handling the disappointment (2.00 / 2)

Because your comments are so impertinent, I cannot respond to them. Instead of doing a Google search, why not visit the district?

by illinois062006 on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:20:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Handling the disappointment (1.50 / 2)

Because your comments are so impertinent, I cannot respond to them.

How convenient for you. Heh, what, you wrote a check with insufficient funds at the Bank of Snark?

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:34:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

This wasn't worthy of a 1 (3.00 / 2)

Once again I'm glad I'm not one of the sides in this race. They both seem to enjoy acting like children.

by Teaser on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 07:43:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Handling the disappointment (none / 0)

Michael-

This attitude backfired badly in Ohio and it's going to backfire badly in Illinois.

Word to the wise....back off.

by anastasiap on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 11:44:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Handling the disappointment (none / 0)

...Word to the wise....back off...

What? If you want a piece of me your going to have to take a number and stand in line.

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 03:58:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

the DCCC and Illinois Dem Establishment (1.50 / 2)

Let me say upfront that I'm not a big fan of the DCCC - my wife and I contributed to them on a regular basis for a number of years and watched them snatch defeat from the jaws of victory year after year.

However, why should they support a proven loser? At least with Duckworth Dems have a fresh face, who is a injured vet, to throw against a well-financed Republican in a heavily GOP district. Winning this district is going to be a longshot anyway.

It's the day after now - everyone should wipe the tears from their eyes/wipe the smiles off their faces, kiss and make-up, and get started working to win in November. Regardless of what happened yesterday, you have a common enemy.

And, save the $75,000 for something useful, like yard signs and pizza.

by GeorgiaDem on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 07:34:11 AM EST

Re: the DCCC and Illinois Dem Establishment (1.00 / 0)

A proven loser? Please retract that statement. Some people are just so gauche and misinformed.

by illinois062006 on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 09:05:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the DCCC and Illinois Dem Establishment (3.00 / 1)

what did she win?

by Lucas O'Connor on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 10:19:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Axelrod's Tantrum (none / 0)

His public diatribe against Cook County's vote tabulation system on behalf of Claypool, but then he is orchestrating Duckworth's ethically compromised campaign. A nice media distraction, but a complete cover up of the ethical flaws of the Duckworth campaign. And what about those Cook County votes that were not counted until the very early hours of the morning? All were from Cook County, and those votes increased Duckworth's margin. I smell a bit of fraud. And notice those votes are from Cook County.

Very interesting.

by illinois062006 on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 07:36:20 AM EST

Re: How the DCCC and Illinois Dem Establishment Ca (none / 0)

A campaign in NJ costs $1.5M, so a campaign in IL is probably at most a $1M campaign.

You are asking the DCCC to pony up 7.5 percent of an entire campaign on a recount with no evidence of wrongdoing just to make nice?

The DCCC doesn't have the money for that. It'd be better if they pledged $100K to the Duckworth campaign and earmark it for grassroots organizing.

Giving it to the state to count votes is just tossing it down the drain.

by nathan on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 07:45:07 AM EST