Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Doesn't Two-Time L-O-S-E-R Dan Seals Know When to Quit?

Today Roll Call looked at some of the contenders for Mark Kirk's 10th District congressional seat if Kirk decides to go after Roland Burris's U.S. Senate seat in 2010. And looky, looky, a former campaign manager for Dan Seals, two-time congressional wanna-be, basically says Dan has been waiting around this whole time for Kirk to get out of the way, since Seals was not able to come close to beating Kirk in a head-to-head match-up.

Roll Call is subscription-only but the SEIU-front Progress Illinois blog has a story up with an excerpt from the Roll Call article. From what we can see, however, Roll Call made a mistake by listing Seals' profession incorrectly: he's certainly NOT an attorney, and whether he's been gainfully employed at all over the last few years is still unclear. (Of course, considering Seals formerly lied about being a professor at Northwestern University, claiming he's now a lawyer would not surprise me a bit).

The article apparently also notes that Seals would have potential competition from state senators Michael Bond and Susan Garrett. While Garrett once had her eye on the 10th District seat, and Bond is reportedly salivating over the chance to move up the ladder to some higher post, we'll have to see how this develops.

One thing is probably pretty certain: if Seals does run, he'll have some tough questions to answer about just what he's been doing for the last four years that qualifies him to be a congressman besides dogging Mark Kirk. As we've said here time and time again, simply running for Congress doesn't qualify you to be a congressman. If Seals has done so much as joined Rotary in the last couple years, I haven't heard about it, and he's no more qualified now than he was when he lost in 2006 and 2008.

While I have no idea what GOP hopeful would eventually emerge to try to replace Mark if he runs for the senate, wouldn't it be a scream if Seals lost THREE times?

TA's end take on this: If Seals doesn't have the 'testicular virility' to run again for the 10th District unless Mark Kirk ISN'T the opponent, what does that say about what kind of a man Seals is? For anyone who is left behind in the 10th while Mark Kirk goes off to represent Illinois (if that happens), it's still an important issue that we'll be following closely here.


Anonymous said...

John Porter lost to abner mikva a few times before getting in when mikva quit to work for jimmy carter.

The highlights of the article include two former hastert staffers (thanks for losing us congress, fellas) basically saying that if Kirk leaves the seat is seals to lose. Hastert people should be banned from ILGOP politics for the terrific job they've done losing over the last decade.

Elizabeth Coulson for whom Mark's cousin/brother once worked says she is all game to take on Dan.

Matt Murphy and Dan Duffy are mentioned but I have trouble seeing a generic republican winning this seat after the pounding that McCain took.


Anonymous said...

Congressman Porter lost to Mikva by 750 votes in 1978. Mikva lost in 1972 to Sam Young and then Mikva defeated him in 1974 and 1976

Mikva was appointed to the federal bench and Porter won the Special Election in January 1980.

Team America said...

And we're talking about Abner Mikva WHY? Let's move out from the past, people.

FOKLAES- Dan Duffy is anything but a generic Republican.

The problem the GOP has is that we need 10 more Dan Duffys, so we don't have to keep spending our people that are already in office to win new ones.

Anonymous said...

Dan is I'm sure a good guy, the problem is that his state party has done an awful job making it permissible to be a Republican and be successful here for a LONG time.


tikkunolam said...

Dan Duffy might not be a generic Republican in person (I met him once, and I was impressed by his people skills, but he didn't seem like a particularly innovative policy thinker), but his name ID is horrendously low in the district, so starting off at least, his numbers will reflect those of a generic Republican. He won't have any record at all of independence, because it's unlikely he'll do any cooperating with IL Senate Dems, as Springfield Dems aren't particularly good for anyone's election chances. This district expects in Republicans some sense of independence. In 2 years, it will be hard for Dan Duffy to establish that.

His fundraising will also be significantly less than Kirk's has been the past two cycles, and his advertising budgets were a big part of his electoral success. As much as you guys hate Hastert's people, they're not wrong: without Kirk, the 10th is going to be hard to win for the red team. The national party's gonna be playing offense trying to knock off freshman and sophmore Blue Dogs, and won't have time or money for a D +3 open seat.

As fakakta as the state party might be, it's not really their fault that it's not ok to be a Republican in the suburbs. The things suburban families want don't match up to Republican priorities as much as they used to. Suburbs aren't as anti-urban anymore. This district in particular has a strong feel for foreign policy, which Republicans have recently taken some lumps on, in terms of popular positions. Dan Duffy is fairly adamantly pro-life, and while I don't fault him for it in the least, the cold electoral truth is that Kirk has made significant hay out of his Planned Parenthood endorsements. You simply can't blame the nationwide suburban trend blue on Andy McKenna. I'm not defending him, but it's important to get a wide angle lens onto local politics.

By the way, TA:
If Dan Duffy does run, I hope, in the spirit of intellectual honesty, you hit him over the head with a blog-wielded 2x4 for not living in the district, same as you did for Seals. Seems only fair.

Team America said...

Tikki- I agree a congressman/woman should live in the district he/she represents. I doubt Duffy would really run (and we need him more in the state house anyway) but I don't plan on cutting him or anyone else any residency slack.

Anonymous said...

Hey guys, maybe Seals is taking a correspondence course to be a lawyer. Does anyone know what he's doing these days other than caring for the kids while his wife commutes to WI each day to feed the family. I can't imagine that the 10th Dems will want to embrace this loser for a third time. Yes, he might know the district, although that's debatable, but he is not connected in any other way. I'm not sure he belongs to anything that helps people or communities other than himself. He is a loser.
If our Congressman does decide to run for the Senate my hunch is that Garrett will jump in with both feet and run like crazy to get the job. She has made no secret of that plan. She would make any Dan plans disappear in a second.
On our side, I don't see Beth Coulson as viable. Our 'farm team' is weak to non-existant for sure. Maybe Ed Sullivan could be groomed but that's a real long shot. I'm still not convinced that Mr. Kirk will abandon this job in 2010. I'm just not convinced.

Anonymous said...

State Senator Duffy lives in Rep. Bean's district, so he should run against her. He won a four-year term, in 2008, so he can run for another office, in 2010, without leaving the state legislature.

Why isn't State Rep. Coulson viable? She agrees with Rep. Kirk about many issues, and she's been a legislator since 1997.

Phil Collins

Anonymous said...

Did some imply that Seals is a lawyer? Must be a misprint. I'm sure the word they were trying to use is LIAR. That guy can't tell anything straight, so my guess is that he's studying on just how to be a more effective LIAR. Go figure. Just what our State and nation needs, another crook.

R_K said...

Poor Dan Seals. He's probably finding it hard to get a job, what with his extended bout of unemployment and the job market being as bad as it is.

Anonymous said...

As anyone considered Lake County Clerk Willard Helander for Kirk's spot? There's an idea...

tikkunolam said...

Yea, I don't think he'll run either. Beth Coulson does seem much more likely, if Kirk does leave.

You guys seem to deeply underestimate how popular Seals is with the Democratic rank-and-file. After 4 years of being their de facto leader, the major Democratic activists in the district pay Seals a lot of loyalty. He had a considerable primary challenge in 08, and was actually outspent by Footlik, but still absolutely went to town on primary day. As best as I can tell, Seals lost more because of the Cook County lakeshore's desire for independence than anything else. If Kirk isn't in the race in 2 years, expect a lot of voters who were impressed by Seals last cycle to vote for him this time. It'd be his race to lose.

On the employment issue, people understand running for Congress is tough. Kirk himself took a leave of absence to run the first time. Even though Seals has lost twice, they weren't big losses: he's no Ralph Nader here. He's still a viable candidate, as much as this blog would like to deny it.

Oh, Anon 8:50: lay off his wife. Seriously. There are a lot of female breadwinners in the district, and you're not gonna make any friends making fun of them.

Team America said...

tikki- with all due respect, I think you're missing my main point with Seals- it's NOT that we deny his popularity with the 10th District Dems (both the group of that name and the electorate itself)- althought Seals, if he runs, will not have the general anti-Bush/GOP boost he got in 2006 AND 2008 to help, and "Kirk=Bush" doesn't work if Bush is gone and Kirk isn't your opponent. On the contrary, the Dem candidate is likely to be on the receiving end of voter anger with the anti-Blago/Stroger/Durbin sentiment this time around. Obama-mania will have cooled by then and I doubt Obama will further risk his credibiltiy by sticking his neck out for local races like IL-10, although I could be wrong.

My main point with Seals is not that he's not in fact popular with the Dems, but that he has given them no real reason to support him. We know Seals touted himself as an Obama look-alike, but he couldn't ride Obama's coattails last time, and HE HAS NOT DONE ONE THING to boost his thin resume except lie about his work experience. I think even the most hardened Dems will think twice about supporting a two-time loser if they have ANY viable alternative.

The notion that Seals is cowardly marking time and praying that Kirk gets out of his way is also not much of a support-builder, in my opinion.

Of course, maybe I'm simply over-estimating the ability of the electorate to evaluate Seals for what he really is, but we shall see what we shall see, I guess.

Anonymous said...

1. If Beth Coulson is going to run she needs to start ramping up now. Dan will get every dollar he needs from democrats to win this seat.

2. Seals is a force not to be underestimated despite his extreme mental shortcomings. Mark works harder than 99.99 percent of members of congress and raised more than all but 1 incumbent last year and barely beat dan.

3. Kirk for Congress team political skills are severely lacking and nowhere close to where they should be. It's worth noting that Eric Elk oversaw the upset of the decade when his former boss and national conservative icon was beat by a mediocre busisness consultant. As well Dave From got whupped in deep red dupage county by a political novice in 2008.

4. Mark had a lot of advantages in 2000 that beth won't. The party wasn't hated here then, the speaker had a lot of juice, people loved porter, gash was a feminazi that was widely hated, and there is now a democrat machine in the suburbs.

5. The hits on seals wife are fully justified and need to continue. The democrats you may recall regularly bashed kimberly and their ethics issues should not give dan the benefit of the doubt.

Anonymous said...

TA, you are oh, so right in you last posting. The Dems no longer have Bush to bash so Dan and his followers WILL have to deal with Obama and HIS failures, and there will be many, for sure. Dan is not a part of the 10th district. What has he done, what is he doing to make himself known and respected in this district. Does he belong to any of the civic groups? Does he just sit on the sidelines waiting for something to happen. As for his wife, I'd like to have a penny for every nasty remark that has been made about Kimberly. So it seems like turn about is fair play. And the poster didn't say anything but a truthful statement as far as I can see, so knock it off.

Anonymous said...

Dan Seals:

- Unemployed for FIVE years

- Under investigation by Lisa Madigan

- Infamous at the DCCC as a "9-to-5" canidate. They HATE him and he cost the DCCC $8 million.

Team America said...

Is Seals really known as a "9 to 5" candidate at DCCC? Hahahaha! I find that really hysterical for some reason.

Come to think of it, there certainly hasn't been any public outpouring of support for Seals from any reputable Dems since the Roll Call article. And I doubt there will be until the Kirk situation becomes clear and they decide if there's ANYONE else except Seals to go with.

Maybe Seals will turn out to be the Jim Oberweis of the Dems.

Anonymous said...

The liberal feminazis from lynn sweet and the commie times to ellen over at the local pravda outfit have been out to get Kimberly since day one largely because she's successful, attractive and not on their men and America are awful juice.

Anonymous said...

Lynn Sweet, the princess of gloom and doom, and that weird thing who is fixated on our Congressman with her never ending rants and raves are aptly described by poster at 3:17. I'm laughing at the perfect description of those two nut jobs. They provide comic relief of sorts, don't they?

Anonymous said...

Anon, back to the matter at hand. One of the greatest failings of Mark and Mckenna has been the lack of right wing establishment to raise mayhem against the scum-times and lynn sweet over there with their MAJOR bias. No one in the party is holding trash like Neil Steinberg (D-Betty Ford) accountable for daily attacks on the Republican party as a bunch of crazy wingnuts. Steinberg has attended more tenth dems events than written columns on the GOP and his dismissive attitude towards Mark in past writing demanded more from the party than a shrug.

Anonymous said...

Terry Link is at it again:

If you're a driver who hates cameras that ticket you for running red lights, you won't be revved up to support the next version of "cops in a box" possibly coming to Illinois.

Automated enforcement of speed limits would be allowed in the Chicago region and other areas under a proposed state law.

The move is part of a bill that would permit some counties and municipalities to mail speeding tickets of up to $100 for drivers caught going too fast by unmanned, stationary radar cameras positioned alongside roadways.

"I cannot feel sorry for those people caught by camera, because they are breaking the law," said state Sen. Terry Link (D- Waukegan), a sponsor of the legislation, which could move to a Senate vote next week. If approved by the General Assembly and signed by the governor, the law would take effect Jan. 1.

Anonymous said...

That paragon of virtue, that high ranking State Senator, Link, sounded like a dis, dem and doze kind of guy on the radio this morning. Perhaps Dan Seals will be out there putting up the cameras that will now nail drivers who exceed speed limits. Link likes Seals, might want him to have a job. Makes sense, right?

Anonymous said...

Drivers? More like car owners who would pay the price for the actions of drivers.

The car rental companies certainly won't like this one nor the trucking companies and bus companies.

What galls me is all this big brother camera stuff (police mounted cameras, traffic stop cameras and now speed cameras) comes from Democrats, who always claim to protect our individual rights as citizens.

Louis G. Atsaves

Team America said...

If you've ever been driving down I-55 on the way to Springfield and happened to have been passed by cars with General Assembly license plates like you were standing still (they can't be arrested on the way too or from the session) you would see the extreme irony in the legislature pushing this concept.

Anonymous said...

Regarding the title of the Roll Call post you did....
The famous Dan Seals died today, the less famous Dan Seals' career died in November.

Team America said...

Yes, it's too bad about Seals (the singer).

I should probably apologize to everyone who Googled Dan Seals today looking for a picture of the deceased singer and wound up here looking at a pic of Dan (the Pup) Seals.

Sorry, folks!

Anonymous said...

That's the downside of Google, TA. You don't need to apologize one bit. I'll admit, it must be a strange and eerie sight to see that kind of obituary when one shares the same name. Anon 12:29 said it correctly: Dan Seals of this area saw the demise of his somewhat odd career ending last November.

Anonymous said...

The Real (Music) Dan Seals just died :(

Our Other Dan Seals died politically last November.

Anonymous said...

Notice how BAD Terry Link looks and acts? He forgets people, hand is shaking and appears to be 150 years old.

Team America said...

Folks, let's not make drive-by attacks on people (even Terry Link) for personal issues, especially health-related ones. Just be happy you have yours.

Stick to the issues and the political attacks, not the personal ones.

the Management.

Anonymous said...

I failed to see any mention of Jay Footlik.