Tag: democratic primaries

like il-03, there are new endorsements that have been announced since the first post.  john laesch has gotten the afl-cio endorsement [PDF], the endorsement of pdachicago, and the endorsement of the western regional council of the united electrical, radio & machine workers of america.

bill foster has increased his growing list of endorsements with endorsements by senator durbin, afscme state council 31, planned parenthood, seiu as well as 22 nobel prize winners and a growing list of voters.

jotham stein got the endorsement of harry katz, dean of cornell university’s school of industrial and labor relations, which i failed to mentioned before.

the local papers have been covering the fact that there is a special election in the district.  the daily herald covered both the opening of candidate’s petition drives and the first day of filing:

Laesch, a Newark carpenter who challenged Hastert a year ago, turned in more than 1,700 signatures and Foster, a former Fermilab scientist from Geneva, had 1,832.

The top Republican and Democratic vote-getters in the special primary will compete in the special general election March 8 to fulfill the remainder of Hastert’s term, which ends in January 2009.

a candidate’s forum was held in st charles for candidates of both parties.  the three major democrats attended, and the daily herald, the st charles republican and kane county chronicle covered the fireworks.  so did aurora’s openline blog.  openline also gave more general coverage of the race.

kendall county democrats have set up their own board for following this race.

several outlets picked up the dueling endorsements of durbin for foster and afl-cio for laesch.  rich miller’s capitol fax blog noted that, “Both of these endorsements are important in a Democratic primary, and neither will come with a whole lot of cash.”  the beacon news and courier news covered it, as did the kane county chronicle.  aurora’s openline blog hit at this angle.  both the daily herald and the chicago tribune’s clout street blog covered the dueling unions (afl-cio and afscme) angle.

laesch was interviewed for the progressive news daily podcast.  he also live blogged at firedoglake.  the campaign congratulated their “all-volunteer army of John’s friends and neighbors in the 14th district” for getting on the special election ballot.  wurfwhile covered laesch’s endorsement by the alf-cio and was late in his coverage of laesch’s november press conference (but not for the video of it.  otoh, archpundit points out that laesch’s energy statement supports banning corn-based ethanol, and takes contradictory positions on spending money on scientific research.  he also points out the irony of anger at planned parenthood’s endorsement of foster, when he refused “to accept donations from pro-abortion rights political action committees” in 2006.

jotham stein got coverage for his education proposal in the daily herald and for filing his paperwork for the special election.  stein was also busy on the airwaves, getting interviewed on the mike koolidge show and wls’ connected to chicago

foster has been the big winner of news coverage, both local and national, this time. us news and world report reported on the foster as scientist angle.  george bush’s assault on science is getting attention everywhere.  the beacon news covered foster’s energy plan.  the kane county chronicle covered durbin’s endorsement of foster.  several of the sun-times local papers covered planned parenthood’s endorsement of foster: here and here.  

foster is also getting lots of local blog support.  hiram wurf talked about his endorsement of foster, other key endorsements, the durbin endorsement, the afscme endorsement, the planned parenthood endorsement, the trouble seeing foster’s grassroots support, and the seiu endorsement.  archpundit had stories about foster’s endorsements and foster’s new commercial.

aaron krager, of faithfully liberal, blogged about his volunteer stint for the foster campaign as well as foster hitting the air waves.  clout street also covered foster’s new cable ad.  nosugrefneb talks about a letter making the rounds of scientists and grad students at the university of chicago, university of illinois at chicago and northwestern.  prairie state blue covered foster’s live blogging for dailykos, including video of the session.  that blog also covered foster’s nerdiness.  aurora’s openline blog wonders why foster accepted the planned parenthood endorsement.

john laesch has a spiffy new website up (link above) that is more high res and feature rich.  the text for the site seems to be the same, but it now includes a photo suitable for print media and a flickr photostream.  i hadn’t noticed before (so it may be new), but the site encourages you to “Nominate John Laesch at Democracy for America” but it has (so far) failed to apply for the dfa endorsement.  (campaigns can apply at this link).  one new feature, it’s spanish translation, hasn’t been completed yet.  nonetheless, this is a great improvement.  simple, easy to navigate, eye candy.  laesch also has a new youtube video.

stein also has a new video up on his website (link above) that focuses on family.  stein’s spanish page IS in spanish!  (not new, just the contrast.)

foster has a new cable ad running.  they also have a new brand across the web reminding everyone of the special election on march 8th.  looking past the february 5th elections, are we?

given the proximity of christmas, you might think that the campaigns would be slowing down.  not happening.  the laesch campaign begins its gotv training on saturday at 10:30.  the stein campaign will continue to release his ideas and positions on the issues and volunteers are working out of the campaign headquarters to communicate with supporters and people who signed their petitions.  the foster has begun an email campaign asking their low dollar donors to recommit for the special election or to bring in a new donor to our campaign.  

outlook

if the first posts in this series was designed to lay a foundation, this next group will be focused on looking at the fundamentals in this race.  like blocking and tackling decide football games, the fundamentals decide elections.  there are five fundamentals that are thought to be decisive in the outcome of elections:

1. the candidates

2. money

3. the environment (deciding factors that campaigns can’t change)

4. the climate (deciding factors that campaigns can influence)

5. their organizations

probably the biggest factor right now in this race is the political environment.  and the most important environmental factor is the upcoming special election.  the fact that the special election is a month away from the special primary focuses all attention on this question: who scales up fastest?  the campaigns have six weeks to identify supporters and then educate them on voting twice for them on the same ballot (once for the general election and again for the special election).  the campaigns already lost a week or so because they had to circulate petitions (again) for the special election.  christmas and new year’s will cost them some more time.  this is even more true for the laesch campaign (and possibly stein’s), since they are so dependent on volunteer expertise.  the foster campaign staff will undoubtedly work the same amount during that week.  (i worked on christmas day last year, so i sympathize.)

one of the questions asked of the campaigns dealt with their candidates.  the laesch campaign was unable to participate, since they are currently flooded with questionaires that they are working on.  still no word whatsoever from the serra campaign.

the stein campaign argues:

we have the best candidate because our candidate represents the district best.  Jotham may be a lawyer but at one point he was a cabby and struggling to make it through college.  On the other hand he has done fairly well in life and represents that portion of the population of this district too.  So he has seen both ends of the spectrum.  Also Jotham at least knows what the issues are, one of the candidates goes way to far to the left for this district, and the other well he doesn’t like to talk issues he just throws money at the problem of winning a primary.  The other thing is, I’m willing to bet that jotham has knocked on more doors and spoken one on one with more voters then the other two.

Jotham speaks so well to voters on the issues.  Jotham has been the first to stand on a lot of issues that the other two guys have been trying to make hay out of.  Jotham was the first to say he was against an ID card, Laesch had a press release about how he was against them.  Foster came out against global warming and for renewable fuels, I hate to say it but Jotham has been talking about that since the beginning and with a better plan then Foster’s that everyone can benefit from.  I believe if folks could have a sit down chat with Jotham on the issues they would support him.

foster’s campaign chimes in:

Bill Foster is the only candidate with deep roots in the community, a background of solving problems that appeals to voters and the only candidate with the resources to compete against entrenched Washington Republicans who will fight like hell to save this seat.

He has spent a lifetime changing institutions for the better and when he puts his mind to it, he has always met with remarkable success.  When Bill worked on integrated circuits, he first learned how to make and design integrated circuits so he could lead a team of designers.  When Bill entered politics, he did it as an activist in a campaign that had little chance of succeeding.  He is the only candidate who knows how to put together a winning team.

they further argue:

That as a scientist and a businessman Bill is a refreshing change of pace from the usual politician.  He makes decisions based on facts, not the fictional reality that partisanship demands.  He also is uniquely able to make a huge impact on technical areas like energy policy because he can tell you if something can work in the lab and in the business plan.

all in all, the three main candidates in this race all come with flaws.  some argue that foster is charisma-challenged and too impressed by his intelligence, others believe that laesch has a messianic complex, and stein is too policy-focused and that hasn’t yet caught on (it’s late, there’s only a little time left to do so).  i’d call any comparison of these three candidates a draw — a gambler might say, pick ’em — but the contrast with il-10, where you have two high-energy, dynamic candidates couldn’t be more stark.

does this matter?  well, yeah.  in part, because voters are starting to feel the pain.  the foster campaign notes that:

Voters are still talking about all the problems we need to solve, especially ending the war.  Their newest concern is the nervousness about the economic situation in the US because of the mortgage crisis.

the stein campaign observes some differentiation in the concerns of the district:

In a place like Aurora, their worried about Jobs and the current housing mess.  In a place like Geneva, their worried about more taxes.  Out west in a place like Geneseo, its jobs.  A lot of the people out west work in places like Davenport and Moline, that’s outside the district, and are worried about places like John Deere and the Arsenal and Alcoa.  Currently there are no problems, but there are rumors that John Deere will be moving their HQ out of the Quad Cities.  Which makes people fear that maybe the second most recognized american symbol in the world after coke will start moving jobs overseas slso.

the political climate is changing, and only those campaigns who maintain comprehensive contact with the electorate will be able to respond to those changes.  there is no question that the laesch campaign has maintained contact with the netroots.  but it doesn’t appear that they have the same close relationship with the electorate.  the momentum from being the 2006 candidate was squandered (partially, perhaps even majorly, because laesch took time to get married).  the fact that they didn’t have the most signatures, or raised the most, even in the small dollar category, is evidence of this.

the point on money has already been made.  foster has not only committed his own resources, he’s raising money, significantly from new sources.  stein has made the effort, and we will see how that’s going on his next report.  laesch has an extraordinary burn rate; it’s a good thing that he’s got signs left over and volunteers committed to helping his campaign.

which leaves their organizations.  in a sense, this isn’t just about their organizations, but their potential to scale up.  the laesch campaign seems to recognize that they are it, with “little or no help expected from the national or state Democratic Party.”  given their organizational structure, they may not be able to handle a massive influx of assistance, even if they received it.

the stein campaign still suffers from the lack of a campaign manager, someone who conducts the chorus, as it were.  stein has a capable staff, but not enough of it (especially for the special election).  no one doubts that jotham has worked hard as a candidate — he’s raised the money to demonstrate that — but he’ll need more people working hard if he’s going to win a special election.

in a way, the stein campaign recognizes that they have to scale up.  they say that their keys for winning are:

Talking to the voters, putting a good field plan for the final

stretch into place.  Focusing our message so that our supporters know they

can vote twice for our candidate.

good field plan requires lots of leadership and experienced captains.

foster’s campaign is clearly the most scaleable.  in fact, scaleability seems to have been part of the plan from the very beginning.  they have been taking on staff and apparently training volunteers.  the campaign has plans to integrate local and state democrats into their gotv efforts after the primary is decided.  it is this inherent scaleability that gives foster not only the best chance to win the special primary, but a decent shot at taking the seat blue.

how can this be?  laesch’s supporters continue to trumpet his stands on the issues and believe that this will deliver him to victory.  the problem with that is that voters don’t even know laesch’s name, let alone his stands on the issues — and that assumes that voters in the 14th would prefer laesch’s stands to the other candidates.  laesch has neither the money nor the organization to effectively deliver his message to the electorate.  activists and ideologues may focus on issues and where candidates stand, but voters rarely do.  voters may become vaguely aware of a congressional candidate’s message, but they have neither the time nor inclination to go much beyond that.  in the end, the perceived advantage that laesch had — that he had run before — is minimized by the fact that his name recognition was in the high thirties among the general electorate, and mid-40s for democratic voters.  he has better name recognition now, before foster’s and stein’s mail starts to drop.  but those numbers don’t make him secure from the challenge.  by contrast, seals’ name recognition is almost double laesch’s.

the message that voters will see this election follows the money and the organization.  in both these areas, foster’s campaign has been out front.

there’s been a slew of news in this race, for everybody running.  rep. lipinski got the afl-cio endorsement [PDF] and the afscme endorsement.  this isn’t a surprise given the association of speaker madigan with lipinski, and madigan’s closeness with the unions.  lipinski also got the endorsement of pipefitters local 597.  

mark pera got the endorsement of NARAL/Pro-Choice America as well as the endorsement of forrest claypool, who won almost 70 percent of the vote in four il-03 townships during the 2006 primary.  pera was also endorsed by reformers ald. manny flores, ald. brendan reilly, ald. scott waguespack, st. sen. dan kotowski, st. rep. john fritchey, and mwrd commissioner debra shore.

jerry bennett has announced the endorsements of 66 local mayors; the southwest sider blogger lists them all.  the one that is missing is the one undoubtedly supporting lipinski.

jim capparelli has no new endorsements since the last post.  capparelli’s website has an audio component to it’s front page, which may have been there before (i often mute sound on my computer).

the politico called lipinski one of the five most vulnerable in 2008 primary challenges:

Lipinski has never been able to win over a large majority of Democrats in his Chicago-based district since he was appointed as the nominee after his father’s abrupt resignation in 2004. His relatively conservative voting record within the Democratic caucus has prompted attorney Mark Pera to mount a well-funded and well-organized challenge.

meanwhile, the national journal has taken notice of kos’ efforts to lick lil lip.

the local newspapers are giving the race attention.  clout street, the chicago tribune blog covered the endorsements that pera and bennett picked up.  archpundit also covered pera’s endorsement by local reformers.  ray hanania, of the southwest news-herald wrote this column on the race:

In the end, the Democratic Primary election comes down to an organization effort. And there, Lipinski has the edge.

In the primary battle two years ago against John Kelly and John Sullivan, Lipinski won by a landslide, with 56 percent of the city’s 46,000 votes and 53 percent of the suburb’s 36,000 votes.

Work the numbers. Lipinski was solid in several heavy voting wards in Chicago, trailing Kelly by 400 votes in the 19th Ward, where Irish voters vote for the Irish above all else.

Lipinski’s vote margin in the suburbs were strong across the suburban areas of the district. He did better, though, in the city, mainly because he won huge voter support in the district’s other key wards, the 23rd, 13th and 11th.

Can Lipinski lose? Maybe, if the powers that be who represent voters in the 3rd District turn their backs on him and on his father, who spent years helping all those communities and leaders.

read the whole thing, which reflects the current conventional wisdom about the race.

jerry bennett has been getting increasing coverage.  the daily southtown covered bennett’s presentation before a gage park high school class:

While not a household name, Bennett is the best-known of Lipinski’s opponents. More than 20 area mayors recently endorsed his candidacy. As Palos Hills’ part-time, $28,000-a-year mayor – a post he has held for 27 years – and as a regional leader on several planning boards, Bennett touts his governmental experience as the characteristic that sets him apart from his opponents.

ray hanania (as well as archpundit) covered bennett’s s-chip announcement.  the reporter online covered a rally, where bennett says lipinski “has not done the job” and is a “Republican in Democratic cloth.”  a radio interview with bennett can he heard here.

mark pera probably scores the best in the last couple of weeks, since his netroots following has been active in keeping his story alive.  one of them posted this story from chicago’s fox news on youtube.  local tribune papers covered pera’s endorsements by citizen action/illinois, claypool and naral.  the blogosphere has been on fire for pera this month, starting with an in these times article, to archpundit’s coverage of pera youtube offerings, openleft’s coverage of candidate statements to dailykos writeups here and here. pera is also getting coverage in the capitol hill outlets, the hill and roll call.  it’s no surprise, then, that aaron krager argues that pera is winning the media war.

the capitol fax blog had a lively discussion about the turmoil of the lipinski campaign, with rich miller, as usual, providing some common sense.

not so new, but at least new to his website, dan lipinski offers up an old brochure [PDF].  interestingly, i think lipinski’s new slogan (“representation you have come to expect!”) is probably more accurate than his old one (“leadership.  commitment.  experience.”).

capparelli has a new, printable issues page.  he has a welcome video up, as well.  

the bennett campaign got back to me shortly after posting the first post, and i gave them the opportunity to answer those questions.  their campaign headquarters is located at 7229 W. 103rd St, Palos Hills, IL, 60465. (Phone: 708-907-5063), which is open everyday.  they feel like their grassroots support is strong:

we have more than 70 Mayors from all over the region backing Jerry’s campaign. Mayors are at the absolute grassroots level, ensuring the quality of life in their towns and communities is addressed and providing those essential services from water to libraries to parks and rec. Mayor Bennett is also a life-long South Sider and his extensive network of family (he’s one of 13 brothers and sisters), relatives, friends, colleagues and civic contacts are doing everything from making phone calls to hosting coffees to telling their own friends and neighbors to collecting small-dollar donations for the campaign. Our Southside Swarm is also gearing up for a strong field effort in these weeks leading up to the Feb 5th Election Day.

they report they have “lots of “at home” projects – calling, netroots networking, etc – for at web-savvy folks!”  email alex [alex@jerrybennettforcongress.com] or call 708-907-5063, if you are interested.  

pera put up a new cable ad, the youtube version is here.  the campaign also sent out two direct mail pieces, available on the website.  the “end this war” mailer is justified by a “fact sheet for this mailing.” [PDF].  the campaign also released a third video message from the campaign to voters.  that’s using your web.

since the last post, the pera campaign has been joined by two new employees, deputy fund-raiser trevor montgomery, who is an iraq war veteran, and community outreach and field organizer, maura kelly.  a video of montgomery is up on youtube here.

if the first posts in this series was designed to lay a foundation, this next group will be focused on looking at the fundamentals in this race.  like blocking and tackling decide football games, the fundamentals decide elections.  there are five fundamentals that are thought to be decisive in the outcome of elections:

1. the candidates

2. money

3. the environment (deciding factors that campaigns can’t change)

4. the climate (deciding factors that campaigns can influence)

5. their organizations

probably the biggest deciding factor right now in this race is the political environment.  while the incumbent has about a third of those polled who support his re-election, this is still a machine district.  and it’s not just any machine district, but the core of the chicago political machine.  it will take more than half a million dollars to be competitive with the machine candidate in this district.  there is such a strong undercurrent in the last two weeks that any campaign that hopes to be competitive will need to buttress itself and its voter base from the effect.

add to this the fact that the primary is february 5th.  the machine is hoping that the weather is nasty — typically, this is called precinct captain’s weather, because some believe that only those who benefit directly from the chicago system will come out in such weather.

the bennett campaign seems to expect to import some of their own lil machines into the district for his benefit.  many of the towns and villages who’s mayors have endorsed bennett have non-partisan elections.  that doesn’t mean they don’t have parties — or machines — just that they are not known by the democratic or republican label.  we cannot know how committed these mayors are to bennett’s election, but if they are, then machine or precinct captain’s weather may not tilt the campaign one particular way.  however, bennett can only benefit from importing lil machines if he’s got his support id’ed by the time they come in (for the most part).

the final environmental factor that will strongly influence this race is the obama effect.  barack obama drives turnout in illinois.  his presence on the ballot in the primary of 2008 will have the same effect as his presence on the ballot in the primary of 2004 — it will boost turnout significantly.  and it will boost turnout beyond the normal surge turnout expected in a presidential year.  turnout will be super-surged, and all those extra voters are not likely to go to the machine.  of course, the good precinct captains know this, and they may have a plan to respond.

in many ways, as candidates the jury is still out for the non-incumbents.  lipinski is, at best, a D candidate.  that’s a D for below average, not democrat.  mark pera has shown promise, but i don’t think he’s shined (yet) like dan kotowski or deb shore did in 2006.  his campaign says:

By any objective measure, Mark Pera is the viable challenger to Congressman Dan Lipinski. With less than 50 days to the election, Mark, myself and our campaign staff have been up and running full-time and over-time for nearly five months out of our offices here in Countryside. We have been up on cable TV since the end of October with two TV ads (“It’s Time” and “Pain at the Pump”). We have four top-notch direct mail pieces out the door and in the hands of Democratic voters. The video messages that we have posted online at our Web site and on YouTube are watched by thousands of viewers. We’ve set the framework for this campaign and, perhaps most importantly, we are directing the new people and resources that have joined us to increase the pace of the campaign. For example, we recently opened a second field office in the city.

Mark has the talent and vision to provide real leadership for residents of the 3rd district. Since 2001, he has served as President of the Lyons Township High School Board of Education, which has an attendance area of 80,000 residents. The district is one of the top school districts in the state. As director of the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office’s Environment and Energy Division, he and his team was responsible for prosecuting major industrial polluters and well-known utility companies that were working against the public interest. It’s these civic and law and order credentials that have helped him earn the trust and support of some of the leading reformers in Cook County and the state.

jerry bennett is still too new to the race.  he’s played an insider’s game, to the extent he can, and hasn’t really had the level of public appearances one expects from an a-level candidate.  the bennett campaign tells us that the local mayoral network is significant in the southside and southwest side.  they will leverage that as much as they can.  bennett has been, by all accounts, an effective mayor who has organized his fellow mayors to gain influence in the state.  but bennett’s late entry is problematic.  bennett’s name recognition outside his town is limited.  in pera’s poll, capparelli had better name recognition than bennett.  pera’s name recognition was higher than either of them — due to his earlier start.

jim capparelli has been almost invisible outside his base.  so who knows?

the political climate favors the reformers.  that’s why there’s so many looking to claim that label in the race.  lil lip is vulnerable, and pera’s campaign has specifically been designed to take advantage of that:

We’re hearing from voters that they have decided to vote for Mark Pera on Feb. 5. The reason they most often cite is that our campaign is on the right side of the issues that the voters care about deeply, whether it’s the Iraq war, energy and the environment, choice, personal privacy, stem cell research or health care. They think our current Congressman’s leadership on these issues is inadequate, the don’t like how Lipinski was put in office and voters want change. They know Mark can bring about that change.

the campaign that can seize the reformer label in this race seizes the advantage.  that’s why the pera campaign (and its allies) have worked so hard to grab the reformer label and present this race as one between pera and lipinski.  this rankles the campaigns of the other two candidates, each of which brings their own advantages to the race.

actblue offers one way to tract money.  at this date, actblue shows:

Jerry Bennett

Contributors: 22

Amount: $8,140

Jim Capparelli

Contributors: 5

Amount: $300

Daniel Lipinski

Mark Pera

Contributors: 1,859

Amount: $118,066

the bennett campaign tells me that they have raised $100,000 in the first 30 days of his campaign.  yet even if they continue this pace, they still don’t get to $500,000 (which rich miller reminds us is the “price” of competitive state legislator races in illinois — there are three state senate districts in il-03).  there’s a reason why we advise campaigns to start early.  pera may have outraised lipinski in the last quarter, but lipinski ended it with more cash on hand.  i’d call that a tie.

it’s a little harder to compare organizations.  the word seems to be that lipinski’s organization is crumbling.  demoralized, even.  there are rumblings that lipinski senior has seized control of his son’s “organization” in order to right the ship.  i wonder if it matters.  the lipinski name isn’t what it used to be.  madigan will be the machinehead who decides where the resources go.  if the speaker wants to keep this seat, and he’s willing to sacrifice some other races he’s interested in, he will.  but we won’t know until the last two weeks.  the afl-cio and afscme endorsements could be vital to mobilizing behind lipinski — if they get into the middle of it.

there’s very little question that the pera campaign has the best organization at this moment.  they’ve been aggressive about raising money, and this has allowed them to go on the air and in the mail.  they’ve been outrageously successful at gaining earned media.  they have opened a second field office, and plan “an amazing Get Out The Vote (GOTV) strategy and we’re fortunate to have the support of the volunteers and constituent groups we need to move from planning to action in the upcoming weeks.”

i wouldn’t underestimate the bennett organization.  they have put together a “kick-ass chicago team to run bennett’s campaign.”  he needs it.  palos hills is a small town in the district, and the 3,000 votes he’s gotten there in the past isn’t close to what is needed to be competitive.  in 2006, there were more than 81,000 votes cast in this primary.  no one would be surprised if it went over a hundred thousand in february.  the real question is, where will the extra votes come from?  if they come out of the city, and the 19th ward holds its voters for lipinski, the incumbent wins.  

numerous calls and emails to the capparelli campaign were not returned for this report…

perhaps the most frequent question about the race for the democratic nomination for congress in the 10th congressional district — what some consider to be “the biggest congressional race next year in Illinois” — is why is there a primary?  lynn sweet predicts:

The contest will be one of the most expensive in the nation. Third quarter fund-raising reports gives Seals $498,872 cash on hand; Footlik, making his first run for office, has a $414,018 warchest. The winner faces Kirk, who has stockpiled $1.5 million and has no primary opponent.

“The issue here,” carol marin says, “is whether the battle between Seals and Footlik will splinter Jewish voters, sap each campaign of cash and strength in the primary, and give Kirk the advantage he needs to capture a fifth term.”

while these sentiments may continue to be frequently voiced about this race, it isn’t an interesting lens through which to view the race because there is a primary.  instead, i find it more interesting to note that this election really is a classic battle between two schools of thought: the “perfect candidate” model — behind which illinois machine democrats are a prime driving force — and the grassroots model.

jay footlik presents himself to the voters in the mold of the “perfect candidate” for the 10th: he’s jewish, he’s connected to democratic royalty, he has a strong connection to israel, and he promises to peal off jewish supporters of mark kirk.  according to this analysis, a jewish democrat is the only candidate who can defeat mark kirk because they are the only opponent who can neutralize the advantage kirk has (or is perceived to have) with regard to the issue of israel.  some estimate that up to 20% of the 10th is jewish.

the problem with this proposition is that every candidate who ran against mark kirk before dan seals was a jewish democrat — and they all lost.  and it ignores the fact that, regardless of who runs, kirk will make an issue out of his strong support of israel and use it as a wedge issue.  regardless of who runs.

the footlik campaign has also tried to draw the contrast that jay has more experience in government than his democratic opponent.  this might be a strong contrast if mark kirk didn’t have more experience in government than jay footlik.  if experience is the frame under which this campaign is fought, kirk wins.  it is kirk’s experience as (former congressman) john porter’s chief of staff, kirk’s predecessor, that has kept him in office.  porter was, and continues to be, popular among the voters of the 10th, and kirk has won by brandishing his close connection to porter.

the other thing that footlik seems to be hanging his hat on is, “dan seals is likeable, but he didn’t get it done last time.”  since footlik lived in d.c. in 2006, he is aware of the national trend (well, sorta) of the blue wave in 2006 (at least in new york, pennsylvania, ohio, florida, indiana, arizona, new hampshire, connecticutt, iowa and minnesota).  and because he had no ties to the il-10th in 2006, he’s clearly unaware that topinka (republican gubernatorial candidate) and peraica (republican cook county president candidate) won in the district.  not exactly a good year — let alone great year — for democrats in the 10th.  but that’s what happens when you parachute into the state, even if you are perceived (by some) as the perfect candidate for the district.

given the fact that footlik is new to the district, he’s had to start his media campaign early.  he’s already mailed twice into the district (local republican blog team america has the mailers: first and second).  footlik has also made two cable buys in at least some areas of the 10th, value and square.  footlik has been meeting with influentials in the 10th privately, but has skipped significant local political events.

footlik’s almost invisible campaign contrasts significantly with the grassroots-driven, netroots favored campaign of dan seals.  named a future leader for yearlykos, supported nationally by the major blogs through their blue majority project, as well as by local bloggers.  seals benefits significantly from the commitment made by the grassroots, significantly through the tenth dems — the group that helped recruit him to run for congress in the tenth — to turn the tenth blue.  an innovative grassroots organization, lead by former congressional candidate lauren beth gash, the tenth dems has taken the lead in identifying and training local democratic activists, many (if not most) who participate in seals’ campaign.  add to that the support of the local democratic infrastructure, whether jan schakowsky to the south or melissa bean to the north and west and senators obama and durbin, as well as the township democratic organizations, and you can see why the seals campaign is building a strong organization capable of winning in this highly competitive swing district.

often compared to barack obama by voters and contributors, seals has offered a comprehensive vision for change in the tenth.  his campaign has systematically gone about and identified its weaknesses from 2006 and set about to correct them.  they are creating a rather extensive precinct organization and providing advanced training for their precinct captains.  one result of this approach can be found in the 4,416 signatures they collected on seals’ nominating petitions.  the seals campaign promises an even more aggressive voter outreach effort than implemented in 2006.

the seals campaign combines this grassroots approach with traditional campaigning.  they’ve conducted a benchmark poll for the primary, giving seals “a commanding lead:”

Seals leads Footlik 58 percent to 6 percent in the poll, which surveyed 404 likely primary voters. It also shows Seals with a 69-24 advantage in name recognition.

rather extensive voter contact and media programs are planned, incorporating the results of that poll.  

while jay footlik sports one endorsement so far, dan seals has garnered every democratic official in the tenth, as well as former 10th congressman abner mikva, congresswoman schakowsky and  congressman jim clyburn.  add to that the union powerhouses, seiu and afscme, illinois progressive leader citizen action-illinois and the two democratic township organizations which have endorsed so far, and you get an idea of seals’ strength in the primary.

this strength has been borne out by the results of the two candidates’ fundraising in the district.  footlik has motivated 16 locals to contribute to his campaign, getting about 6% of his money from the 10th.  seals, otoh, got more than 80% locally.  seals’ fundraising is so impressive, he’s on the top ten list of non-incumbents running this time.  seals’ support is so strong locally that we’ve seen reports of petition collectors pretending to be passing for seals in order to get signatures for footlik.  

you can really see the difference on the ground.  in contrast to reports of paid circulators for footlik, seals had 76 volunteer petition circulators who collected his 4,416 signatures.  seals is conducting numerous grassroots events out of their lake cook plaza office (2nd fl professional offices, 405 lake cook road; within walking distance to lake cook metra Station), including field trainings (two thus far), phone banking, canvassing and several different types of outreach events (house parties, coffees, meet & greets).  over 100 people attended a seals event last wednesday night at pinstripes in northbrook.  they are continuing to phone bank nightly, and have canvassing scheduled every saturday (meet at office at 12:00 p.m.), as well as outreach events throughout the district.  ongoing events are listed on the seals calendar.

i made repeated efforts to reach the footlik campaign to ask these same questions (in fact, i’ll pose the questions i asked of all the congressional campaigns in the comments), but they never got back to me.  that is why this diary, planned for friday, wasn’t posted until now.  even the first question (do you have a campaign headquarters and where) couldn’t be answered by the person who answered the phone.  you may have observed that footlik’s campaign office address isn’t listed on their website, but this is in keeping with the secretive nature of their whole campaign.  (i had told jay that i would be doing this series at yearlykos and he said they were eager to participate.)

there is an obvious answer to the most frequent question, which was posed in the opening paragraph.  the reason that there’s a primary is that this seat is ready to turn blue.  it’s got a pvi of 3.5, and the biggest difference between 2008 and 2006 is that there will be a popular democrat running for president — perhaps even barack obama, who endorsed seals in 2006.  illinoisians know how unpopular governor blagojevich was (and is), and the circumstances surrounding the elevation of todd stroger as the democratic candidate for cook county board president won’t be repeated.

but it’s more than that.  in 2006, seals expected to win the parts of the 10th in cook county — but didn’t.  the expected edge in new trier never appeared, minority voting in waukegan and north chicago was suppressed, and the western half of the 10th congressional district went decidedly for kirk.  dan seals and his campaign is not only battle hardened, but understands the complexities of the tenth gained by experience in an entire election cycle.  only seals has seen kirk’s 72-hour project (really, final week push) that mobilized more volunteers than had been seen on kirk’s behalf before.  but the biggest difference between 2006 and 2008 is that there was still doubt that dan could win in 2006, but there’s real confidence that if they can minimize their weaknesses, dan seals can beat mark kirk in 2008.

the movement of the middle east towards peace can only help.  if israel does not feel threatened, dan seals is the biggest beneficiary.  kirk’s voicing of a mortal threat to israel to peel away jewish democrats from the democratic candidate (regardless of who it is) will be senseless if their no perception of mortal threat exists.  the dynamics of the 10th in 2008 is dramatically different than in 2006, and these favor dan seals…

if media was all that mattered, the race against rep. dan lipinski would be lopsided.  lipinski has generated a lot of negative publicity in his run-up to re-election, and you’d expect someone to take advantage of it.  the incumbent faces a mini-scandal, one that doesn’t particularly help his image as he tries to seperate himself from his father (who handed him the seat in 2004).  kristen mcqueary lays out the reasons for the lipinski scandal, and rich miller, of the capitol fax blog, summarizes:

Bill Lipinski games the system to get his kid elected to Congress. The son keeps his dad’s cronies on the payroll, and two of them (includng one who remains on the payroll) are getting payments from his father’s childrens’ charity fund, which doesn’t appear to be doing a lot of charitable work except for Dan Lipinski’s benefit. Dan shares an office with his daddy’s lobbying firm and even pays that firm for advice, but he insists he never talked with daddy about a project that the elder Lipinski is working on.

mark pera has emerged as the early netroots favorite.  he’s demonstrated that he’s serious about this race, lining up pat botterman as his campaign manager and julie sweet as his deputy.  pera has gotten the dfa endorsement and convinced the local dfa groups (all outside the 3rd) to send in the troops.  pera just announced the endorsement of citizen action, which has been a bellweather endorsement in the past.

pera has two videos up on his youtube page, “Mark Pera on the issues” and his first television ad, “It’s Time”.  it’s no surprise that pera is generating support from the netroots, given his efforts to appeal to them in the language we understand.

but pera is also following the traditional campaign plan, having commissioned a benchmark poll by penn, schoen and berland [PDF].  archpundit breaks it down:

401 Likely Democratic Primary voters +/- 5%

Lipinski Re-elect 35 percent

Wrong Track: 81 percent

Generic Congressional Approval: 37 percent

prairie state blue’s maven notes that mark pera won the ballot lottery.  

also jumping into the race has been former prosecutor and army reserves lt. colonel jim capparelli.  capparelli’s main justification for entering this race appears to be that pera and the baby lipinski both live in western springs (does lipinski really live in illinois???).  but unlike the pera campaign (to this point), the capparelli presence has just been catching up.  he talks on his website talks about campaigning at the metra stations, and there seems to be a sparse nature (so far) to the website.  as yet, no one seems to have seen him (although you’d expect that to change).  

capparelli also generated some publicity,  has a youtube page, where you can find this introductory video.  his website now hosts a blog, although it appears to be only for the purpose of answering questions (or taking testimonials) rather than actively engaging the netroots or incorporating them into his campaign.

one capparelli supporter says, in the capital fax blog, that “the unions are playing a huge role in city elections and Capparelli has been lining up their support.”  that certainly remains to be seen, although the citizen action endorsement for pera (who’s board and members who vote on endorsements is full of union representatives) may forebode otherwise.  it’s been reported that capparelli has the endorsements of local 399 of the operating engineers and teamsters local 786.  that comment may be indicative of the strategy and expectations around the capparelli campaign and it will be interesting to see whether union support favors one candidate or is dispersed across the field.  

one of the big disputes in this campaign is the presence of machine plants, or shills, expected to divide the anti-incumbent vote (for the incumbent’s benefit).  jim capparelli has taken great exception to being called a shill for the machine [PDF] even though it is said that “Many of his positions – on the war and abortion, for example – appear to mirror Lipinski’s.”  palos hills mayor jerry bennett also faces the accusation that he is the machine plant.  kos has examined bennett’s past and identified this continuing connection between bennett and lipinski:

Palos Hills mayor Jerry Bennet — a Lipinski ally — is supposedly running a legit race. Yet he endorsed Lipinski two years ago — an endorsement that has been reposted on Lipinski’s new and updated campaign site:

   Gerald Bennett, the Mayor of Palos Hills and a health care executive, said Congressman Lipinski’s proposals were an “excellent approach to helping American families become better health care consumers.”

   “The Congressman should be lauded for working with colleagues in both parties to craft initiatives that will not only improve health care availability and delivery, but also have a great chance of being enacted,” Mayor Bennett said.

and yet, appearances can be deceiving.  unlike john kelly, who was regarded as the shill in lipinski’s first democratic primary in 2006, bennett has come to play.  he’s put together a well-regarded campaign team, with alex behrend, mia phifer, vasyl markus and lake research partners (celinda lake’s polling firm).  bennett garnered the endorsement of the other challenger in 2006, john sullivan.

bennett’s reason for running can be found here:

A life-long Democrat and South Sider, Jerry Bennett is the only person running in Illinois 3rd Congressional District with the background and broad-based appeal in both the City of Chicago and the Cook County suburbs to win the February 5th Democratic Primary. Voters previously supportive of Dan Lipinski are fed up with the Congressman’s support of George W. Bush and Jerry Bennett offers both realistic Democratic change voters seek and experience required.

the real problem is that lipinski seems to have alienated every single democratic constituency there is.  given that democrats don’t always agree on their priorities, it should be no surprise that there are different people running against a vulnerable democrat for seemingly different reasons.  if only he wasn’t mired in scandal and the machine wasn’t under serious strain, he might have a better chance of weathering the storm.  the presence of three serious challengers (at this point, i’m taking their word for it) certainly increases lipinski’s chances at re-election.

what will be interesting to see is whether voters coalesce around one single candidate.  if this is going to happen, it will begin before the television commercials get aired or perhaps even the billboards and lawn signs go up.  voter contact is the only reliable means for generating such a consensus.  as such, it’s interesting to look at the ground activity of these campaigns.

the capparelli campaign reports that they’ve been making a big push going door-to-door for at least the last three weeks “with a big mailing.”  they’ve been hitting different wards in the city and get started at 8am every saturday morning.  while they have a campaign headquarters (5602 1/2 w 63rd st), they appear to meet at different locations each saturday (so call the office if you want to help out).  jim capparelli has also been making the veteran’s circuit, speaking at a veteran’s day rally as well as at local vfw halls in the district.  their campaign calendar shows a couple of fundraisers scheduled over the next few weeks.

the pera campaign has been out in the field a little while longer.  the campaign reports that mark pera has been going to train stations every (weekday) morning and walking with volunteers in the afternoons.  they have also been conducting weekend canvassing with both the northside and oak park dfa groups.  they report that they have a major outreach push on for december 1st and 2nd, as well as an id canvass on the 8th.  the campaign reports fund-raisers planned for the 10th and 13th.  most of their volunteer activities start out of their campaign office, at 7061 s. willow springs rd in countryside, although northside dfa car pools in from the city.  i can’t seem to find a calendar on the website, but i might have missed something.

the bennett campaign also has a campaign headquarters set up at 7229 w 103rd st in palos hills.  the volunteer who answered the phone (they were in the midst of “a big conference call”) didn’t feel capable of answering any other questions about the campaign.

the lipinski campaign clearly relies on the machine for his re-election.  the problem with this strategy this february is that the on-going battle between the governor and the speaker may divert forces from helping lipinski.  there isn’t a lot of crossover wards where the speaker will be defending incumbent state house members and il-03.  and one just doesn’t get the impression that lipinski’s seat is that important — at least, not more important than the speaker’s forces in the general assembly.  it matters how these four campaigns divide the map, where they concentrate on — and where they have pre-existing support.  

all four democrats can be contributed to online through actblue.