Friday, October 30, 2009

Pat Hughes Needs the Primary Ballot Process Explained to Him, or a Math Lesson (UPDATED)

I wasn't planning to keep piling on rookie U.S. Senate candidate Pat Hughes (at least not today), but he doesn't appear to understand the primary election process, among other things, or is just really bad at math.

Today over at Illinois Review Pat Hughes denies that he did not have enough signatures to file as of 8:00 a.m. on the first possible day, which was this past Monday, Oct. 26th. Rather, he claims this is all part of his strategy to wait until the last minute on November 2nd to file and jockey for last place on the ballot (assuming he realizes that a few other GOP contenders may have the same idea). Whether you can believe him, considering his campaign recently seemed pretty desperate for signatures as we reported earlier today, Pat also doesn't seem to know that you have to declare a political party in Illinois when you grab your primary ballot. Pat says at IR:

"We'll be filing on Monday with the intention of getting the last place on the ballot. If you can't get the top spot, and bottom is second best. We had a one in 16 shot at getting the top spot in a drawing if we all filed at 8:00 AM Monday morning, so we're waiting," Hughes said. (TA's emphasis)

Um, 1 in 16? While there are a bunch of GOP hopefuls in the U.S. Senate race that we know of (Kirk, Arrington, Wallace, Zadek, Martin, Thomas, Lowry, and Hughes), that only totals up to eight.

If you add in the DEMOCRATS to Hughes' total (Giannoulias, Jackson, Hoffman and Meister) that is four more, which totals 12, but is still not close to 16.

But as most of us understand, Hughes will not be competing against the Dems for ballot position in February. It will just be Republicans, so we're back down to 1 in 8 as far as chances to be top ballot dog go, and as it turned out, only five of the eight filed last Monday.

There's also the possibility that one or more candidates would be knocked off during any challenges which would further increase your odds of getting that top spot.

Now, he's going to have to figure out how to be last when potentially two other GOP candidates may have the same plan. I'm assuming if you hand in at the last minute (literally), there is a similar lottery to jockey for last position. That makes Hughes' odds potentially as bad as 1 in 3 to get last, which isn't too much different than his chances would have been to be first, as it may turn out.

Given how bad Pat is at calculating odds, I'm not too sanguine about how well he can execute this strategy either.

UPDATED 2:30 p.m.: In a different article today at IR, two other GOP senate contenders are mentioned that I did not reference above, a Tom Kuna and an Ed Varga. That brings the total GOP field up to 10, but even with the four Democrats, that only makes 14 total, not 16. So Hughes' math is still off, at best, if he understands that the Dems won't be on the ballot with him, but the closer total makes it seem even more likely to me that he doesn't have a clue about the parimary ballot process and assumed all candidates would be on the ballot together.


Conservative said...


Last week you claimed to have taken care of Pat Hughes with you breaking of the Ditka “story”—Oops.

When both your reporting and your conclusions were rendered faulty, you spent the entirety of your blog today attacking Hughes.

The only conclusion that can be drawn from that is that you and your “puppet master,” Mark Kirk, are deathly afraid of Hughes, as you should be. As I’m sure you know (whether you would like to admit it to yourself or on this blog), Hughes has consolidated the support of many in the IL business and conservative activist communities. What he has accomplished in two months as a first time candidate running state wide for a U.S. Senate seat is breath taking.

I have noticed as you have repeatedly referred to Hughes as your friend on this blog. If you are truly his friend you should consider yourself fortunate. However, I doubt you are his friend, as you seem to take pleasure in hurling baseless and petty attacks against Pat. Mark Kirk is a serious candidate for U.S. Senate. Pat Hughes is a serious candidate for U.S. Senate. While Mark and Pat (and countless others like them) are spending their time, effort and energy for something they believe in, taking time away from their families and exposing themselves and their beliefs to the scrutiny of others, you are revealing yourself to simply be a small and petty person with and axe to grind (for whatever misguided reason) against your “friend.” Every time I read a story about Pat on your Blog, you sound more and more like Andy Martin (not a good thing). We know what his problem is, what is yours?

As for your comments above, clearly what Pat either said (and was inaccurately reported) or meant to say was that he had a 1 in 6 chance (given the 5 other candidates that did file Monday)-petty. In order to be successfully condescending towards someone Larry, by definition you have to be smarter or more accomplished then he is. I know you both, and since you fail in that regard when compared to Pat you probably shouldn’t try.

Team America said...

Conservative - NONE of our reporting on the Ditka story was faulty or erroneous. Please explain your basis for this statement.

If Pat said "6" instead of "16" that makes a lot more sense. As soon as they change the quote over at IR, I can add an update to my story. Until then, your beef is with IR, not us.

I don't like having to point out these issues with Pat. I liked and respected Pat in law school although I've barely seen him since. But I'm a Kirk supporter and I stand by every single thing we've said or reported about Pat. This is politics, I'm for the other guy, this is my political blog, and Pat has screwed up his campaign in so many ways I would be remiss if I did not call attention to it. Pat has made no bones about attacking Kirk for his perceived missteps.

You and he better grow some thicker skin if you're going to play this game (and get smarter about how you play it).

Anonymous said...

Hey Conservative....your guy is a wimp and about to be a loser come February. You want some cheese with that WHINE!?!?!?

Conservative said...


Your final comment so perfectly explains why we need a guy like Pat - this is not a game. People that treat it as such (you for example) by feeling they are scoring points with petty, small insignificant remarks from the “cheap seats” only cheapen the political system and result in a perceived bolstering of their egos.

You may think your response was done in a way to make you seem less petty, but it shows you to be more so.

Team America said...

Oh brother. If this is how you guys fight Pat's political wars, "Conservative," I'd like a Senator with a little more backbone. Whataya gonna do when the Iranian president starts calling you names? This is the big time, not student council.

Anonymous said...

Hey conservative, i can see it now. When Alexi Giannoulis starts hitting you in the general (like you'll get there) who are you going to go cry to? You going to tell SEIU that they are part of the problem and hope they go away? You're pathetic.

Anonymous said...

Hey Conservative....

Your responses are as weak as your candidate.

I have been around for 67 years. The benefit of having won 5 elections is that Kirk is battle tested. This Kirk team has been at the FRONT of the battle between Dems and Republicans and WON. You somehow feel your candidate has what it takes and you are whining about this?!?!

I feel bad for you and want to help you...please look for me at your next fundraiser. I will be the guy next to Hughes with a wine glass in my hand trying to get Hughes enough cash so he can appear at the next local WHINE AND CHEESE.

Anonymous said...


Mark hasn't lead anything in the party. He's spent 5 years on the defensive using trick plays and crafty maneuvers because of an inability to excel at the running and passing games of politics that are things like vision, coalitions and ideas. The surge and capn trade come to mind.

His share of the vote has declined here as has the party's. Things have gotten worse the last 10 years politically, and the cat and mouse has gone stale. It's been bad advice but also a failure to step up, features that seem to have been passed on to the 4 people trying to succeed him.

We'll see if that changes with the senate.

Big difference, though.


Anonymous said...

Patrick Hughes is the disease.

Team America is the cure.

Anonymous said...

According to this list from, the U.S. Senate race has nine Republicans and seven Democrats:
Alexi Giannoulias (D) - State Treasurer & Ex-Banker
David Hoffman (D) - Ex-City of Chicago Inspector General, Attorney & Ex-Congressional Aide
Stan Jagla (D) - Businessman
Cheryle Robinson Jackson (D) - Chicago Urban League President
Robert Jones (D/Write-In)
Robert Marshall (D)
Jacob Meister (D) - Attorney & Ex-Congressional Aide

John Arrington (R) - Ex-Harvey City Alderman, Community Resource Center Founder & '04 US Rep. Candidate
Patrick Hughes (R) - Attorney & Anti-Tax Activist
Mark Kirk (R) - Congressman, Attorney, Ex-Congressional Aide & Afghan War Veteran
Tom Kuna (R) - Businessman, Ex-Teacher & Pro-Life Activist
Dan Lowery (R) - Retired Circuit Judge, Ex-Massac County State's Attorney & Vietnam War Veteran
Andy Martin (R) - Frequent Candidate
Kathleen Thomas (R) - Ex-New Berlin School Board Member & College Professor
Ed Varga (R) - McHenry County Board of Health Member & Professional Engineer
Eric Wallace (R) - Apostolic Minister, Businessman & GOP Activist
Robert Zadek (R) - Businessman, Real Estate Broker, Ex-Mortgage Broker, Ex-Corporate Auditor & USCG Veteran

Phil Collins