State Rep. Sara Feigenholtz (D-Chicago) said Friday that she has raised $300,000 in her bid to succeed Rahm Emanuel in Congress, making her the early fund-raising leader...
University of Chicago economics lecturer Charlie Wheelan has announced he has raised $100,000. Attorney Justin Oberman reports he has raised $140,000. County Commissioner Mike Quigley said he expects to eventually match Feigenholtz's numbers. Several aldermen and others have fund-raising committees or are weighing a run.
We've seen people puff up their preliminary numbers before (in the hope of scaring off donors to other candidates). FEC reports will be out soon enough.
No, this is a post about who's online.
If you're like me, you saw Mike Quigley's comment on Facebook: "Mike Quigley changed his website to http://www.quigleyforcongress.... ." Which got me to wondering, who else has a website? Suprisingly, quite a few.
Using Lynn Sweet's post about who has declared that they are running, I searched to see who had thrown up a website (which are basically soliciting donations right now). As you can see, most of those on her list do have a web presence.
None of the websites have tremendous detail. Sara's website buried the detail about the location of her campaign office (1408 W. Belmont Avenue in Chicago). You can find a note about its opening in her blog, where they also posted an issues poll. Both of these would be more appropriate for her front page (where she definitely had room). Instead she focuses on the Latest News, at least that which favors her. As for stands on the Issues, they are nowhere to be found.
Perhaps she is waiting for her poll results!
Otoh, Mike Quigley has the most details about where he's stood on the issues. His list of accomplishments is both detailed and impressive -- and have little to do with Congress. It's not that common to see the words "tough policy wonk" on a Congressional campaign website. I wouldn't question the description. I do wonder about demand for a "tough policy wonk," though. I mean, outside the Editorial Boards.
Justin Oberman, who's main qualification seems to be that he is the son of former Chicago Alderman Marty Oberman (this factoid is listed everywhere I've looked!), wants you to know that he's hired David Axelrod's old firm. He's running on his biography (a-parent-LY), with not a peep about the issues in this race.
Does anyone else see the irony of me harping about issues in a Congressional race?
I'm not walking away from the strong view that campaigns are won (and lost) based on money, MESSAGE and mobilization -- but there's not a spit's worth of message in these websites.
Charles Wheelan seems intent on out-quigleying Mike Quigley. He's "a policy guy, this seems like a unique time to 'walk the walk.'" That's it. Does Wheelan tell us what he wants to do in Congress? Nope. Seems like his biggest qualification is that he's been on television. Three of his website pages are focused on television appearances. That's half of them, if you're counting.
If you are going to tell us that you're "a policy guy," then you should at least detail what policies you support, or oppose, or will propose. Am I asking too much?
Cary Capparelli's Website has a page devoted to his platform, but I think you'll find more platitudes than issues here. And his biography is remarkably sparse for someone I've never heard of before and suggests that he's got a background worthy of details.
Here's the thing: Mike Quigley and Sara Feigenholtz are established political brands in the 5th Congressional District. They don't have to have detailed policy proposals to set themselves apart from the rest of the field. Many Democratic voters already have formed impressions of them, and that will drive their campaigns.
But these newcomers, many who have the background to drive detailed policy proposals, have neither established political brands or an expansive base of support in the district. They pretty much have to get their hands dirty -- or, rather, their websites filled -- with policy positions that seek to differentiate their candidacy from the others. And they haven't.
People who read me (yeah, both of you) regularly know that I can harp about the need for money to run a viable campaign. But money isn't enough. Message is equally important, as is the ability to mobilize support. Issues frame both of these -- the latter because activists are often driven towards a campaign because of agreement on the issues. I would criticize John Leach relentlessly over his failure to get serious about fund-raising, but at least he took the other two (message and mobilization) seriously. This race is not going to be won by someone who's neglected any of these areas.
Victor Forys was born in Poland and "the average cost for a visit at his medical clinic is fifty-five dollars." In a simple website, he at least tells us that he's for Economic Justice and Job Creation, Health Care for Everyone and Immigration Fairness and Justice. He doesn't even attempt expansion of his views on Immigration Fairness and Justice.
Joey Vartanian has an Issues page where he tells us that "Balancing the budget must be achieved by shrinking the government" then he tells us:
We must establish programs and funding to enhance our society, create jobs and rebuild for the future. These programs should be administered on the state and local levels and used to strengthen our infrastructures, update our schools, update our utility distribution and transportation systems, and create green initiatives. The burden of these programs must not be on the tax payers.
He's going to Congress to "establish programs and funding to enhance our society, create jobs and rebuild for the future" but the "burden of these programs must not be on the tax payers?" Does he grow money on trees?
Reading his issues page only made me wonder (given his commitment to health care) if he provided health care coverage to his employees. You have to read the whole thing for yourself. I'm not sure many activists will be attracted to Vartanian's campaign based on what you find there. But they could be looking at other things. (I admit that his whole website makes him seem like a throwback. I'm not sure that's the change we need.)
On the opposite end of the spectrum is Matt Reichel. He's 27, and his website reflects that. Like Vartanian, Reichel has an issues page, but at least it's familiar. You'll recognize the reasoning there. Did I mention he was 27?
The elephant in the corner is John Fritchey, who's "getting prepared to announce a decision in the near future." At this point, I won't venture a guess. What I would like to know is, why are the candidates running for Congress? What do they want to accomplish there? What are their priorities, and how will they achieve their goals (whatever they may be)?
If you're running for Congress to bring Change to Washington, welcome to the club. But if you think that Barack Obama ran on a simple commitment to change, you didn't look around his website. His policy proposals were detailed and well-researched. Running against established political brands, you better bring a sense to the voters that you know why you want to go to Congress, what you intend to accomplish and how you're going to achieve it. Message, message, message. I couldn't find one anywhere on these sites. Correct me if I'm wrong.
As for social networking links, which the Obama campaign used consistently to mobilize supporters, only Oberman has them covered. Feigenholtz and Vartanian both join Oberman on Facebook. |
