« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Do Conservatives Need to Look in on Illinois’s Senate Race?

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  December 15th, 2009 at 11:57 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Mark Kirk, the front runner in the race for the GOP nomination for Illinois’s Senate seat, appears to be cruising to a sure primary victory in February. His challenger, Patrick Hughes, has not made ad buys yet, has no name recognition, and for all intents and purposes has barely put on a political campaign. Hughes also only has $340,048.00 on hand compared to $2.3 million on Mark Kirk’s side.

If conservatives united behind Hughes, Kirk could be in serious trouble in the primary. Republicans, however, have got it in their heads that Mark Kirk is the only Republican who can win the general election.

Talking to more and more Republicans in Illinois, I have a few concerns. I have said for a while that I would be fine with Kirk in Illinois, and I would. I think taking about Bob Bennett in Utah must be a much higher priority for conservatives. But conservatives who are happy to “grin and bear it” with Kirk may at least want to consider the following:

Kirk voted against the Defense of Marriage Act.

Kirk voted against the partial birth abortion ban.

Kirk opposed the Iraq War surge strategy.

Kirk has an “F” grade from the National Rifle Association.

And let’s not forget TARP, Cap and Trade, etc.

I hear from seriously credible people in Illinois, not just my twitter followers, that conservatives inside Illinois are very unhappy with Kirk and do not think he can beat the Democrat, despite his repeated wins in his Chicago area district.

This is the conundrum and why I am writing about this one — Kirk is not a conservative. The question is: is Mark Kirk the most electable guy the Illinois GOP can put up in 2010?

Perhaps he is, especially given his money advantage, but competent, serious Republicans in Illinois tell me that Kirk can’t win the general despite the view from Washington because Kirk cannot distinguish himself in any meaningful way from the Democrat and not only does not excite the GOP base, but viscerally makes the GOP base want to punch him.

Given those dynamics, Washington, D.C. conservatives may want to take one more look at Patrick Hughes before getting into bed with a man they all admit will knife them in the chest with a smile once he gets to D.C.

Tags: , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • proudgop

    Illinois is just too blue now. The last Republican Senator to win barely won over Carol Mosley Braun and she had more ethical problems

    Now if Roskam had run he might of had shot but Kirk is the best in race

    I suspect he would be far more Conservative his first few years and then swing back to left in order to run for re-election

    Winning Obama’s seat would be very good press for us

  • Swamp_Yankee

    But the psychological impact of winning both Joe Biden’s seat in True Blue Delaware and Obama’s seat in True Blue Illinois is tantalizing.

    It would be kind of like Al gore losing Tenn in 2000. Just one of those things that puts the “L” for Loser on their foreheads. And really tarnishes their reputations.

  • E Pluribus Unum

    I am not going to oppose him in the primary, contrary to things I’ve said on record before. But that is ONLY because no viable primary challenge seems possible at this point.

    I’ll not give a flying rat’s a** whether he wins or loses. We’re going to take back 6-7 seats if it’s an extremely good year. If I thought it was 10-11, I’d have a little more interest in his success.

    He’s a leftist pig (not a moderate), but if his one crucial vote, cast once a session, to caucus with Republicans makes the difference between 50 and 51, I’ll be glad we had him.

    But I still hate his guts.

  • E Pluribus Unum

    The fact that he shares a last name with Russell Kirk.

  • Swamp_Yankee

    That B*stard.

  • Bobcat51

    from the NRA; well I suppose he will fit well in the seat as Obama gets an F on everything he has ever done!

    Would love to see the the smirk wiped from Obama’s face if the seat goes our way.

  • Third Street

    is to be able to say we took Obama’s Senate seat. Other than that, he’s worthless.

    Conservatives can win in Illinois. Patrick Fitzgerald did in ’98, toppling a Democrat incumbent in a dismal Republican year. The stench of Democrat corruption in Illinois is at record levels. The Democrat governor was just impeached and removed, ferchrissake. Kirk’s the best we can do?

    At this point it’s probably academic. The nomination seems to be Kirk’s to lose.

  • E Pluribus Unum
  • http://www.eyeconshirts.com anastas

    I’m not in his district and everyone at the tea party rallies wanted him out before he announced he was running for the Senate. His name is not good in my neighborhood so i can only assume that other districts across the state are similar.

    I really think that Hughes would be the better votes. I will vote for Hughes and if Kirk makes it, I will not vote for him. If I learned anything in this last election, I learned that we get the government we vote for and I’m voting for the one I like whether he has a chance or not. If McCain won this last election, we may not be going through this conservative revolution.

    In the mean time, I will be trying to convince my friends to vote for Hughes.

  • E Pluribus Unum

    Another reason is that even the crappiest left-wing Repub is better than the Democrat opponent who will be 0 on the 0-100 conservative scale.

  • hoyasaxa

    Has voted Democratic in the past 5 presidential elections by 25%, 10%, 12%, 18% and 6%

    Mark Kirk’s ACU rating is 55.7. Dick Durbin’s is 6.35.

    Is Mark Kirk Tom Coburn? No.

    Is Mark Kirk the only Republican who has a chance of winning an incredibly difficult state for us? Yes.

    He can raise money, has a proven ability to win in a tough district, and there are a number of other races nationally in better states/districts for Republicans (like Florida for example) to make a stand.

    Insisting on conservative purity in strongly Democratic states is a great way to make sure Democrats continue to win elections there.

    People love to focus on the areas where moderate Republicans disagree with the base, but Kirk voted against the House health care bill, which is kind of a big deal, and it would be nice to have him there in 2011 rather than an Obama stooge.

  • mriggio

    BUT:

    Do we really want to support Arlen Specter Junior?

    Can we win given ‘da Mare’s son’, the current Mayor Daley, running Chicago (and Illinois) with ACORN’s help?

    Can we win running someone none of us has any use for?

    I will (and do) oppose Kirk vehemently during the primary, but if he wins, I’ll hold my nose and vote for him in the general; kind of reminds me of November 2008….exactly like November 2008. Makes me gag….

  • Third Street

    Sorry Peter, didn’t mean to confuse you with THAT guy…

  • DavidSage

    Kirk’s lifetime ACU (American Conservative Union) score is 55.69

    as a comparison
    Lieberman’s is 15.96
    Ben Nelson is 47.26

    Both Lieberman and Nelson have been receiving lavish praise in these quarters, yet Kirk technically has a more conservative voting record.

    I think it’s worthwhile to have Kirk, especially since any Democrat representing Illinois is going to be a flaming liberal. And I firmly believe Kirk is the only credible Republican that has an even remote shot at winning Illinois.

  • erod

    This is one independent conservative Chicagoan that is sick and tired of the IL GOP!!!

  • erod

    that I forgot to add comas :-/

  • IJB

    I know others around here have different opinions, but if people like Kirk arethe best we can do… I’ll pass on my end.

    (And Kirk voted for Cap ‘n’ Tax, so voting against ObamaCare really doesn’t do all that much to make up for it…)

  • IJB

    You’re comparing ACU ratings for two Senators against someone in the House.

    A better comparison:

    Kirk (R-IL 10) 55.69
    Taylor (D-MS 04) 66.61
    Herseth (D-SD AL) 41.11

  • hoyasaxa

    If you replaced those weak Republicans with generic Democrats from the Democratic state of Maine, Obamacare would be well on its way to passing with a public option.

  • nickm

    He’s not mob associate (and Obama protege) Alexi Giannoulias.

    If you think D.C. corruption is bad now, imagine if “Jaws” Gioranagio’s banker has the ability to insert earmarks in bills.

  • SirGladiator

    A race that is extremely winnable, and the party nominates an ultra-liberal instead of a Conservative. Sounds like NY-23 to me, if this guy wins the Primary like Scozefava did I say we find ourselves a Hoffman to run against him in the general! I’m not interested in feeling good on election night because ‘one of ours’ won Obama’s seat, then feeling bad for the next six years (or twelve, or eighteen, or however many years this guy is in there) while we watch him vote like the liberal he is. Lets send the Establishment another powerful message, no more ultra liberals in Republican clothing!

  • merryj1

    I won’t vote for Kirk. It’s the Illinois Republican Party as much as da mare’s machine that has kept Illinois a blue state. Mosley-Braun won in the “Year of the Woman” because the Illinois Committeemen had slated a non-candidate, a lawyer who didn’t seriously want to win and “campaigned” accordingly, in a pre-Primary assumption that Dixon couldn’t be beat… Too clever by half!

    Peter Fitzgerald declined to run for reelection because the state Party hotshots were still in a grudge-match with him because he won in ’98 in spite of their obstacles. George Ryan was pushing Lolita Didrickson because reportedly he was worried she would challenge him for the Gov’s race — which also caused a very viable candidate, Mike Flanagan (who had previously won the Rosty House seat after the House Post Office scandal), to rip up his nominating petitions and drop his campaign plans.

    “Go along to get along” hasn’t worked, won’t work, and I’m just not going to play.

  • zbigreddogz

    If you hadn’t just endorsed a isolationist quasi-truther for Senate in Kentucky.

  • Oz

    that NY-23 had been represented by a Republican for many, many years and this is an Illinois seat.

    I would gladly let Kirk win it.

    The symbolism of the Obama seat going Red will be huge and when Jindal becomes President in 2012, this will give us another vote for conservative judges and someone to nominate fairly conservative judges out of Illinois.

  • Stan(ley) Pruss

    I won’t vote for Kirk in the primary, but I will in the general. I won’t give Kirk money. But a better Illinois primary race to consider is Illinois 14th. Three tea party candidates have dropped out of the primary leaving only Hastert and Hultgren. As a friend and fellow former colleague of Bill Foster wrote, ” http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=343002
    There is another republican left besides Bill Foster’s prefered candidate, Ethan Hastert. I did talk with Danklefsen for about 45 mintues about six weeks ago. I also attended the Republican forum about two weeks ago. There, I met Hastert, Hultgren and Vargas and we chatted for about two minutes each. At that forum, they all said they’d unite behind whichever one won the Republican primary. Between Hastert and Hultgren … I have not been able to get over the fact that Hastert would become my Congressman and he is younger than my youngest child. Yikes! Hultgren has experience as a politician. And Chris Lauzen said Hultgren votes in the Illinois Senate pretty much the same way as he would. That tells me Hultgren is OK. Either one is preferable to how Bill has been voting … from my point of view.

    Cheers. Dave.”

    Send Hultgren some money http://hultgrenforcongress.com/ This is really Illinois’ version of NY-23.

  • http://www.rockfordteaparty.blogspot.com rockfordteaparty

    If Kirk wins the Primary he won’t win the General. He is unelectable. Scandals will pursue him in the General. He is a RINO and the time to stop RINO’s is now. Even if it means 6 years of leftists. Perhaps Americans will get the picture when they have lived under the thumb of Socialist/Marxism for a while and elect Americans who believe in Free Enterprise, Fiscal Responsibility, Limited Government, Limited Taxation. The RockfordTeaPArty has given Kirk an F grade and that will be his grade in the General Elections also. For all you people who plan to hold their nose and vote this RINO into office shame on you. You perpetuate their abuse of us. Until we take a stand and say no the Republican Establishment will continue to abuse our good nature. Goodbye Mark Kirk. Goodbye RINO’s. Goodbye Republican Party if necessary. Kirk will betray everyone of you.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    You may just want to leave now, because you see, we oppose Democrats. You seem to be cheering them on.

    Now I’m not taking sides in the Illinois Senate primary because I don’t know who’s who, but people who talk of favoring Democrat victory and Repubican destruction generally do not get along here. Usually they get along better at Daily Kos.

  • mriggio

    and vote for Kirk if he prevails in the primary. As I said before, won’t be the first time.

    You were doing OK with ‘Goodbye Mark Kirk. Goodbye RINOS’ You lost me at Goodbye Republican Party. Where you gonna go? Just stay home and fuss? That’s real helpful.

    I don’t like Kirk and will oppose him every step of the way, but if he wins the primary, he’s got my vote. Just as McCain did. Did I enjoy it? No. Is it better than not voting for our side, or simply not voting at all? I really don’t think so.

  • mriggio

    the state GOP committee, not by a primary election. THAT’S the real difference here. If Kirk wins the primary, going against him with some ill-defined 3rd party candidacy is absolutely the wrong way to go. That’s what primaries are for!

  • mriggio

    I meant ‘Is it better than not voting for our side, or simply not voting at all?’ Yes, it is. Sorry for my own confusion, need more coffee…..

  • IJB

    That said, I think their value is marginal to the cause (often, at best…), and I’d personally rather have two GOP Senators from ND than ME.

  • martellus

    between two dimocrats the electorate will always choose the dimocrat. I don’t see Kirk carrying IL. Downstate where the GOP has its strength and in Cook County outside of Chicago he won’t be able to turn out the vote.

  • http://www.voteforteri2010.com teridavisnewman

    My opponent in the upcoming primary is a go-along/get along RINO who is convinced that she can sit down and bring everyone together. This will be followed by a marshmallow roast and a rousing rendition of Kumbaya. She is receiving no support because her message of “cant we all get along?” is the same joke now that it was a decade ago. The Democrats want to hand over control of the country to the leftists and have government decide everything for the people in a nanny-state style of hugely taxed “democracy”. I am fighting for the freedom of America’s children and grandchildren! The 2010 election is going to be the most important election in this generation. It is going to be the election that decides whether we keep our Constitutional freedoms or if we hand them over to the Obamunists who are intent upon running our lives and sending us the bill for doing it. I vote for freedom and I will fight for it to my dying breath!! Visit my website and find out about me: www.voteforteri2010.com and let’s take back our America from those who would destroy it!!
    Teri Davis Newman
    Republican Candidate for Congress
    12th Illinois Congressional District
    www.voteforteri2010.com

  • Mayhem

    There is no excuse for ND… or SD, or MT, or AR, or WV for that matter. These States need GOP Senators.

  • Mayhem

    I’m not sure if there is a more conservative candidate running there, but Castle has just about the same record in a state that is just as blue as Illinois. Are we going to nix Castle too?

    As much as I hate them, the Maine Twins are a good match for that state. Sometimes you have to take baby steps in the blue states. My biggest frustrations come not with the Kirks, or the Specters, or the Snowes, but when we have leftwing radicals elected in deep red states. Why are there two liberal Democrats in North Dakota? Why are there two liberal Democrats in Montana? Why are there two Democrats period in Arkansas??

    The bottom line is that if the GOP were winning the seats that they should be winning, we wouldn’t have to be fretting over these blue state Republicans, because we would not be dependent upon them for our majority. They would just be peripheral senators. If we won in all the states we “should” win, we would always have 55-60 senators.

  • Swamp_Yankee

    The worse part about all the hype over Collins and Snowe is that they are not even up for re-election in 2010. What a waste of breath. We have two Republicans in our caucus from a state voted for Obama by +18. It is what it is.

    Meanwhile Portman is in the fight of his life. Kasich has a huge fight on his hands. Roy Blunt is no shoe-in. We have no one running against Bayh. Hoevan has yet to declare and there is no credible candidate running against a vulnerable Dorgan, …

    But sometimes I think just piling on yankees is more fun for some of the strategically challenged.

  • Darin_H

    I could give a rat’s behind about IL and Kirk, likely that we won’t win the seat anyhow. Let’s focus on some winnable races for conservatives and leave the Kirks and Castles to run in the Blue states.

  • red_oakster

    Conservatives should go for 100% in places like Utah and North Dakota and South Carolina. Failing to have solid conservatives is a gigantic unforced error.

    I’m all for Rubio and Toomey, recognizing that when you elect a Santorum or a Toomey in a light blue state like PA, they always will be endangered.

    That said, I am not going to get up in arms about a Collins or a Snowe or a Kirk or a Fiorina. If conservatives do a good job getting conservatives elected in solid red states; if they cut down on the unforced errors, moderate Republicans become a bonus.

    Moderates become a basket where you can find perhaps two or three extra votes out of six or seven to get you to 60 on something like estate tax repeal or drilling or expanding educational choice.

    So let’s focus on Rubio and Toomey, but also on retiring a porker like Bob Bennett or a Lindsay Graham as well as the Dorgans, Conrads, and Testers of the Senate.

  • principleoverparty

    The seat is winnable by a conservative. John Arrington (http://arringtonfosenate.com) has been fighting Obama and his ilk for decades now. He is the one person in the race who knew what Obama was decades before we even heard Obama’s name. Arrington winning would propel this race into a national debate of the policies. Neither Kirk nor Hughes can do that.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    “Mark Kirk the most electable guy the Illinois GOP can put up in 2010?”
    NO!
    You just gave the same kind of laundry list that made Mccain a feeble nominee in 2008. Conservatives will NOT get excited for him. A generic R will do well in 2010, and a RINO will do less well than a ‘Tea Party’ type that can excite the disgruntled base.

    You only reason NOT to oppose Kirk vigorously in the primary is ‘choose your battles’ priorities. But if Kirk is the nominee, it means the NRSC (which will surely give him money) remains a compromised organization. So there are good reasons to not want Kirk to be the nominee…

    But the best reason is this: Illinois is a deep-blue state in part because the IL GOP is a dysfunctional organization run by RINOs. I have seen the rot happen in other places, including where I live, and I have seen how conservatives can turn things around with a vibrant conservative-based party grassroots … that can happen again in Illinois but only if the establishment RINOs are stopped and real representatives of the conservative GOP base are put forward as nominees.

    We need to OPPOSE Kirk in the primary and SUPPORT whoever is the GOP nominee in the general. Simple as that.

  • principleoverparty

    http://ArringtonForSenate.com

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    “Meanwhile Portman is in the fight of his life. Kasich has a huge fight on his hands. Roy Blunt is no shoe-in. We have no one running against Bayh. Hoevan has yet to declare and there is no credible candidate running against a vulnerable Dorgan, ?”

    Travesties and tragedies … nobody against BAYH?!? C’mon, this guy would be in trouble if a viable GOPer stepped forward (What’s Hostettler doing?)

  • Swamp_Yankee

    He “has been fighting Obama and his ilk for decades now.” I hope he could fight better in the general than he has fighting liberals for decades.

  • Joshua Persons

    I think the culture of corruption here has gone far enough that a conservative candidate could harness the backlash and get elected. Problem is, the state Republican party is nothing more than an extension of the Democratic party, and incompetent to boot. There’s simply no party structure in place to promote or support a moderate, let alone a conservative.

    I haven’t looked into it, but I’ve always had the feeling that Kirk’s campaigns are rather independent from the IRP’s, by practical necessity more than anything. Anyone else can correct me if I’m wrong.

    I know, I know: I should look into taking a more active position at the local level. I looked into running for a Republican committee position in Chicago two years ago, but ended up moving out of the city. Now I’m back in the city, but have a wedding coming up in two weeks … Maybe down the line. My (about to be) wife is completely on board with it.

  • Mayhem

    There are several GOPs running against Bayh here Indiana, most of them local and legislative politicos. Last week, former Congressman John Hostettler announced he will run against Bayh next year.

    My guess right now is that the GOP primary comes down to Hostettler and State Sen. Marlin Stutzman. Neither are entirely huge names, but they are good conservatives and will work hard.

    The Indiana GOP would make headlines nationwide if they got Mike Pence to run, or even Lt. Gov. Becky Skillman. Unfortunately, I think both might have their eyes set on the governor’s mansion in 2012, or maybe the White House in Mike’s case.

  • http://AndyforUSSenator.com andymartin

    Kirk will not win the primary. We will take him down on February 2nd. D-Day is December 28th.

    Andy Martin
    Republican for U S Senator
    www.AndyforUSSenator.com

  • http://AndyforUSSenator.com andymartin

    Kirk will not win the primary. We will take him down on February 2nd. D-Day is December 28th.

    Andy Martin
    Republican for U S Senator
    www.AndyforUSSenator.com

  • principleoverparty

    None of us can fight alone. We need to help John. He has had many successes fighting the Chicago machine Obama was a part of. Take a look at his record. Look at how we empowered people instead of the organizational heads like Obama did. He helped keep the mob out of Harvey. He is what who we need representing us in Washington.

  • http://www.rockfordteaparty.blogspot.com rockfordteaparty

    I get along everywhere I go. Mark Kirk will betray your confidence and you vote and when he does you will wonder why the heck you voted for him. I will not regret my vote again. When it comes to checking a box next to his name I will leave it blank. He has proven he cannot be counted on when it comes time to vote for the important issues of our generation. He proved that with Cap and Trade and when you give him 6 years in office he will do what the heck he wants to do and your vote won’t mean a dang thing. He is no better than a democrat. In fact he is worse because you cannot predict what the heck he will do when the time comes to stand with Conservatives. Kirk proved that he will veer left when it comes to the critical questions and votes of our generation and thus in the toughest of times he cannot be trusted. If Kirk wants to vote with democrats then let him run as a democrat otherwise there needs to be a new face for the Republican senate seat. His name is Patrick Hughes.

  • http://www.downstateiladvocate.com anacreon

    because there is much discontent with the politics as usual here in Illinois. As a GOP Precinct Committeeman in downstate Illinois and a Tea Party leader, I can tell you that the people I have talked to will not vote for Kirk in either the primary or the general. With Dr. Eric Wallace threatening a 3rd party run, the conservative vote will be split away from Kirk should he win in February.

    Granted, Hughes needs to get ads on the air so people can see him and what he stands for. However, his support on the grassroots level is increasing everyday. Hughes has beat Kirk in his own backyard with township endorsements – 5 wins, 2 loses, 1 tie. Hughes has the support of the Joliet Tea Party, the Effingham Tea Party, and many others. He’s been endorsed by the Illinois Federartion of Right to Life which Kirk would never be able to do.

    You’re right, Hughes’ money situation could be better but he is doing fundraisers all over the state and slowly but surely he is gaining traction.

    What saddens me is that the national conservative leaders are all too focused on other races in Florida and elsewhere who go to the ballot box much later than we do here in Illinois. We have to decide on Feb. 2nd, and I would love to see Jim DeMint and others come out in support of Hughes and it needs to happen like yesterday.

    Instead, Kirk keeps picking up endorsements by Reps. John Shimkus and Aaron Schock. These two Reps. can very little in common with a Republican like Kirk, yet in Shimkus’ own words “we have to get to 41 in the Senate”. Again, since I am on the front lines here in Illinois, I can tell you that because of Shimkus’ endorsement (very early in August before anyone officially declared or turned any petitions in) that his popularity in his district is at an all time low. I’ve never heard people use the words they use to describe Shimkus before and let me tell you, it ain’t good.

    We Tea Partiers are beginning to coalesce around Hughes because out of the other candidates besides Kirk, he has the money, organization, and the conservative principles to get the job done.

    I don’t buy into the argument that Illinois is too blue to elect a Republican, let alone a conservative Republican. We have stood by while the Democrats in Illinois have run this state into the ground. Our unemployment rate sits at around 10.7% and there is a huge backlash coming against anything Obama, Pelosi, or Reid here in Illinois.

    The time is right, if you live in Illinois, you need to tell as many people about Hughes as possible and vote Hughes in February.

    www.downstateiladvocate.com

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Again, I’m not taking sides in that primary. I don’t know Illinois, nor am I familiar with the choices. I have my own Senate primary to worry about.

    But will you vote for Kirk in the general, should he win? If not, you’re a RiNO. It’s that simple.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    This is an article about the Senate race. Please stay on topic.

  • AceInTX
  • AceInTX

    it becomes self fulfilling…..we back the most liberal as a result of the assumption….therefore he IS the only one who has a chance because we ignored everyone else.

    There is another problem we always overlook as well…even in victory sometimes we lose because of the damage done to the brand when we elect Dem Light candidates because the voters don’t think there is any difference between the parties. The converse is also true…sometimes we win even in defeat because we left the impression in the voter’s minds that there really is a difference between the Republican and the Party by standing our ground and fighting to the end!

  • keli21

    Erick, have you thoroughly researched the Illinois U.S. Senate race? If you had, you would have seen that Hughes has NO political experience and there is a candidate with a much stronger resume of public service to our state and our country. That man is Judge Don Lowery. He is a decorated Vietnam veteran, a retired Judge of 26 years and a strong conservative. He also taught Constitution classes at the local college and has the spine to stand up for conservative values. He is the only one that is even a member of the NRA and a the ISRA – in a state that has the MOST restrictive gun legislation in the nation – that is important!

    I have been to 4 events in the last couple of weeks that all of the candidates attended. Hughes consistently left early without speaking to any of the attendees. If he can’t give me the time of day when he is asking for my vote, how do you think he will treat Illinoisans after he has it? The last even we attended, the response showed 90+% said they would vote for Lowery. They stated Hughes was impersonal and arrogant. Haven’t we had enough of that already?

  • http://www.downstateiladvocate.com anacreon

    …isn’t he the same candidate that had an opportunity to deny a false charge about Hughes’ voting record – on camera and radio – but did not. Voter Vault records – provided by the Joliet Tea Party – show that the rumors spread by Lowery supporters and others are unfounded. I was assured by a regional campaign coordinator for Lowery that if he was wrong on this issue, he would sing to the heavens that the rumor was false. I have yet to hear one word toward such end. You speak of character. Real character is being strong enough to admit when wrong and then apologize. I have heard nothing from Lowery’s camp or their supporters apologizing for those false rumors. No, no. They continue on like it’s a non-issue. Before you speak of another candidate’s character, you might look at your own candidate’s character.

  • redpens

    Forget “Captain” Kirk. No way, no how, not ever

  • southernilpat

    The time for Illinois conservatives to make a stand was months ago. Conservatives needed to pick one candidate and unite behind him or her to go up against Kirk’s Chicago style machine. I won’t vote for Kirk in the primary but if he’s the candidate in Nov. (which by all likelihood he will be) I will hold my nose and vote for him. Insisting on a “perfect” convervative candidate was how we ended up with 8 years of Bill Clinton. Even Kirk would be better than any of the Dem contenders.

  • keli21

    I would love to post those facts if Joliet Tea Party had followed through with their claims. As far as I know, Voter Vault still states that Patrick Hughes has only voted in the general in 2004 as an independent (because he did not pull a primary ballot). Then he pulled a primary ballot in 2008 as a Republican and then followed through with a vote in the general. Joliet had asked someone to obtain FOIA information to get hard copies of this voting record. But, then one week before the debate that they organized, they met with Hughes and stated that he was having a hard time obtaining hard records to verify ALL of the times that he voted. Of course, according to Hughes, there were numerous times. Then all of a sudden after this meeting, obtaining hard copies of this voting record were no longer so important. So, I’m still waiting to see that documentation. Ultimately, still, according to Voter Vault there is only 3 known votes for Hughes in his entire 22 years of being eligible to vote. I would LOVE for you to provide hard copies of something different. Until I see that, from the multiple people that have verbally confirmed these results – I have no other reason to believe otherwise. Once again, you insult my character and the candidate that I support, while still having no proof to back up your own.

    I did just find this video link that was put out before I even knew who Lowery was – rumors must have been started by Kirk, not Lowery. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7baM2zNZBE
    Watch this, Erick!