IL-3: Here we go again?

by: EricV

Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 11:53:04 AM CDT



         March 22, 2006       

Dan Lipinski55%
John Kelly24%
John Sullivan21%

A third candidate has now entered the primary battle against Dan Lipinski in Illinois' 3rd. Jim Capparelli is by all reports a good guy. He was in the army and is currently a Lt. Col. in the reserves. He followed that with a position in the Will County State's Attorney's office before taking a position as Veterans’ Rights Bureau Chief for Lisa Madigan. He's now in private practice. He's against continuing the war in Iraq (though without details it's hard to say what that means) and dislikes the nepotism that got Lipinski his position.

That said, I can't for the life of me understand why he got into the race. He doesn't have a history as an elected official and his positions don't seem to be substantially different from those of already declared candidate Mark Pera. He admittedly has no money and his supporters are reported as consisting primarily of a "large extended family".

I don't begrudge anyone the right to run. And while I like what I've seen from Mark Pera already, who's to say that it wouldn't have been exactly the opposite if Capparelli had declared first? I don't have any reason to believe that there are any motives behind his candidacy other than attempting to better represent the people of the 3rd (who it would certainly seem deserve a better representative than Lipinski). I still have to wonder though, are we just seeing a replay of the 2006 primary where two candidate split the anti-Lipinski vote while the incumbent skates through without a worry?
EricV :: IL-3: Here we go again?
Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
IL-18's an Open Seat (0.00 / 0)
FYI

Qui tacet consentire videtur - "Whoever seems silent, consents."

Good catch (0.00 / 0)
I had seen the rumor on a Repub blog, but was waiting for some better confirmation.

ltsply2

[ Parent ]
Connections (0.00 / 0)
Got a friend in Springfield that saw the article almost immediately after it hit the net.  Said something soonest I could about it.

Found out the Mt. Vernon Blue Dog is nothing more than a distraction.  Add to that:  Hastert & LaHood gone.  Shimkus is losing his support net (Costello, the So. IL Melissa Bean, notwithstanding).  I'm thinking he's running scared -- apoplectic scared.  Now more than ever.  Almost feel sorry for the low-paid minions that have to put up with his tantrums.

We do have a genuine Dem in the works.  Unfortunately, we have 2 open seats, & IL-10's grabbed attention.  The DLC enjoys a foregone conclusion, & DCCC's obviously maxed out in IL.

Stay tuned.  ;-)

Qui tacet consentire videtur - "Whoever seems silent, consents."


[ Parent ]
Greens threaten Lipinski (2.00 / 2)
Maybe Lipinski can prevail in the primary over these two opponents.  But no amount of Chicago Machine shenanigans will stop the Green Party.  Am I right?  The Greens will roll Lipinski in November 2008.  And Rahm Emanuel too. Come on! Let's hear it for the Greens.  Some enthusiasm, please.

Please stop being an ass. (4.00 / 2)
Neither Greens nor progressive Democrats, the latter of which I am and perhaps you are, can claim much of anything in the way of successes to point to. We don't know which strategy is eventually going to work.

What is clear is that bashing each other isn't going to help. If you want to prove that working within the Democratic Party is the best option, prove it by working to elect some actual progressives.

"In order for somebody to win an important, major fight 100 years hence, a lot of other people have got to be willing -- for the sheer fun and joy of it -- to go right ahead and fight, knowing you're going to lose." -- I.F. Stone


[ Parent ]
is Capparelli open to meeting with Pera? (0.00 / 0)
I heard one of the ward organizations in the city is looking at the race too.

Some of these other challengers may be legit.

It could play out that in some cycle the challengers hold Dan Lipinski under 50% in the Dem primary. The strongest of those challengers--if one of them breaks out as being particularly strong--will then get a one-on-one with Lipinski in the next cycle.


A stronger candidate would be a thing (0.00 / 0)
Mark Pera isn't all that impressive. Here's what NWCPJ had to say after a meeting with him:

For starteres, we didn't see that big a difference between him and Dan Lipinski on withdrawal timelines and benchmarks.  They're what Rep. Lip. voted for in the original supplemental bill that Bush vetoed (... a huge movement in position for Lipinski ...)

Pera does not apprciate the case for immediate withdrawal (Now that we're there, we've got to....), even though the district voted 71% for it last November.  He hasn't heard of Blackwater nor does he appreciate how the threat of a large mercenary force might threaten what remains of this democracy.  Plus he's pretty hardlined on Israel.


Two Questions (0.00 / 0)
First, what does "NWCPJ" stand for? I'm guessing that "CPJ" means "Coalition for Peace and Justice." Most likely NW is some sort of goegraphic designation, but I can't connect it to the 3rd district.

Second, what does "immediate withdrawal" mean? I can't give it any concrete, real-world meaning. Not in a world where Star Trek transporters don't yet exist.

Bill Thomasson

Permission to reprint explicitly granted


[ Parent ]
Two answers (0.00 / 0)
1) You guessed it, NWCPJ is Near West Coalition for Peace and Justice.

2) The language is similar to the anti-war resolution that overwhelmingly passed last November, i.e. "Shall the United States Government immediately begin an orderly and rapid withdrawal of all its military personnel from Iraq, beginning with the National Guard and Reserves?"

The point is Mr. Pera's position on the Iraq war is no different than Lipinski's. And, more importantly, he is not very well informed on the subject.


[ Parent ]
More (0.00 / 0)
What is your understanding of Pera's position on Iraq? What candidate comes closest to your position on Iraq? What can be done to move candidates closer to your position? On which candidates are these methods more likely to work?

ltsply2

[ Parent ]
More (0.00 / 0)
I don't know any more about Pera's position than what he says on his site, he advocates a withdrawal beginning this fall. The only thing I can find re Capparelli's positions was here,  and it says he thinks the surge is working. So, I'd have to say, of the three, Pera's closest. My disappointment is that he seemed so uninformed when he went to address an anti-war group.

As to moving the candidates, NWCPJ is preparing (or has delivered) materials for Pera to broaden his perspective. Perhaps they'll share them with Mr. Capparelli as well. Who knows which candiates are more likely to listen or be influenced? Seems you have actively engage and challenge them which organizations like Blog for America & NWCPJ are doing.

What more would you suggest?



[ Parent ]
Prairie State Blue
Front Page - Back Page


Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


0 User(s) logged on.
Search




Advanced Search


Misc
View
Powered by: SoapBlox