Schaumburg Republican Flips! And other news from our wacky Republican party!

Dillard (0.00 / 0)

I don't get what game Dillard is playing. He's already "committed" to McCain. I don't understand what is going on. Jerome Armstrong at MyDD and the Politico are already using Dillard's McCain connection to disparage Obama. Why would Dillard do the ad? Why would Obama use him if he's connected to McCain? My head is going to explode here.

ltsply2

---

by: EricV @ Mon Jun 25, 2007 at 17:01:46 PM CDT

Personal Friendship (0.00 / 0)

People forget that politicians are people, too. They have friends, and some of those friends are across the aisle. To my mind, it's not totally surprising that Dillard would support someone he likes as a person even though they disagree on issues and he knows his party is going to be furious with him.

He may also figure that if we're going to have a Democratic president it's better to have one who will treat Republicans in Congress with personal respect. And, as we saw in the Illinois Senate, may get more done because he does.

Why Obama wanted him in the ad is pretty straightforward, I think. The whole ad is about Obama's theme of bringing us all together. There are huge numbers of people out there who are simply sick and tired of politicians fighting each other to no purpose. Many of them don't vote. Have you ever thought what would happen if they DID go to the polls? And by showing, in the clearest way, that he can work with people as people, regardless of political affiliation or ideological bent, Obama helps attract those people back into the political process.

Bill Thomasson

Permission to reprint explicitly granted

---

by: wathomasson @ Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 12:41:54 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Two things (0.00 / 0)

1) It doesn't surprise me per se that a Republican would support a Democrat (or vice versa) but it does surprise me when that Republican is already supporting a Republican candidate for the same position. I appreciate that it is still at the primary level, but it is still just strange.

2) I understand the goal of reaching out to people turned apathetic by partisan politics. I don't have a good sense of it's effectiveness (especially as compared to other target populations), but I can appreciate the logic. The thing is that this is a primary, and not just a primary, but a caucus. It is going to take a lot of work to move someone from politically apathetic to likely caucus-goer.

YMMV

ltsply2

---

by: EricV @ Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 12:47:41 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Primaries, Caucuses, and Elections (0.00 / 0)

You're right that the ad does not seem ideally crafted to win the Iowa caucus. Although, having never ived in a caucus state, I have no idea what it would take to get the otherwise politically apathetic out of their chairs and into the caucus room. But I look to see this same ad used for other primaries, including in states where the "unaligned" vote could be crucial. And then I look to see it used in the general election. It looks to me like Obama is positioning himself for the general rather than following the traditional rule of running to the left in the primary and running to the center in the general election.

Bill Thomasson

Permission to reprint explicitly granted

---

by: wathomasson @ Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 14:42:06 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Correct (0.00 / 0)

I think that's the general consensus. This is a good ad for the general or even for an open primary state. Why Iowa is the big question.

ltsply2

---

by: EricV @ Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 14:45:13 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Froelich (4.00 / 1)

I attended an IVI-IPO endorsement session to which he phoned in. He seemed like a moderate, knowledgable, and conscientious legislator so we endorsed him. At the time, I couldn't understand how he could be a Republican. I guess he came to the same conclusion. ;-)

"We are the change we have been waiting for" --Barack Obama reminding us we have to hold him accountable.

---

by: Jim in Chicago @ Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 00:36:04 AM CDT

Oy. (0.00 / 0)

I can only assume he is being motivated by national considerations, because I can't imagine anyone wanting to link themselves to the big poopy pants mess that our "Democratic" leadership down in Springfield are busy making.

Though I appreciate anyone wanting to come over from the dark side, to want to associate themselves with the Illinois Democratic party in its current state of embarrassment is extra brave -- possibly a little crazy.

But good news none the less.

Basic stuff: The common wealth should be used for the common good, not to enrich the well-connected few.  

---

by: Sandra_Verthein @ Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 05:59:35 AM CDT

But What He Said, (0.00 / 0)

as quoted in this morning's Tribune on-line, is that he thought he could do a better job for his constituents as a member of the majority party. He also made noises about the district becoming more blue. And down at the bottom he said something about how his party had moved away from him and, in particular, was no longer appealing to minority groups.

So it seems to be a matter of how he can stay in office, but not necessarily connected to national issues.

Bill Thomasson

Permission to reprint explicitly granted

---

by: wathomasson @ Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 11:37:23 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Beware of gifts bearing Greeks. (4.00 / 1)

Or is it the other way around?

Anyway, I'm not so sure we should be celebrating just yet. If Republicans become Democrats but the same people stay in office, do we really win anything? We don't just need people in office with the letter "D" by their names, we need people who are sincerely committed to the ideals that the Democratic Party professes to stand for.

"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

---

by: Gary Kleppe @ Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 08:17:09 AM CDT

Depends on who's doing the switching (4.00 / 1)

Froelich strikes me as a good guy. The switch also has an effect on the Republican Party, don't forget: making it even more of a party of and for wingnuts.

Did anyone on our side complain when Jeffords left the Repugs and became a Democrat in everything but name? (He immediately began caucussing with and voting with the Dems.)

"We are the change we have been waiting for" --Barack Obama reminding us we have to hold him accountable.

---

by: Jim in Chicago @ Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 11:54:08 AM CDT

[ Parent ]