There are some recent candidate filings in the race for U.S. Senate in Illinois to report. Pat Hughes, a conservative candidate for the GOP nomination, filed this morning, although he had stated that he was planning to wait until the last minute to file to try to get the last space on the ballot. Whether this is imporant or not, he filed at 10:52 this morning, according to the State Board of Elections website, so I don't know if he gave up on that or what. Another conservative candidate, Eric Wallace, is also expected to file today but hadn't, yet, so I'm not sure what's going on with the Hughes strategy. If it means anything, TA hears that Hughes supporters were still circulating petitions at the Bears game yesterday, so it will be interesting to see how many total sigs he files with.
Ed Varga, an engineer who announced that he was running for the GOP nod, decided against the race and will not run, according to the Northwest Herald, but hinted that he might run in the general as an indepdendent.
Interestingly a candidate for the Green party, LeAlan M. Jones, of Chicago, filed last Friday. You can expect the Dems to challenge the petitions of the Green candidate, as they often do, as the Green party candidate usually takes more voters away from the Dems than the GOP.
Since today is the last day to file, we'll have more info later on the U.S. Senate Race and other races.
UPDATED 3:40 p.m.: Pat Hughes just filed ANOTHER 'something' with the SBE time stamped at 3:05 p.m. Um, usually you can't file petitions in a piecemeal fashion, so I have no idea what's going up. What I do know, though is that Bob Zadek filed at 3:14 p.m., so it would seem that assuming Zadek's petitions are deemed valid if challenged, he's currently the 'last' place ballot guy, unless Eric Wallace swoops in later today (as we expect).
What's Hughes thinking?
UPDATED x2 3:55 p.m.: In the U.S. Senate race, GOP candidate Tom Kuna filed at 3:24. Also of more local interest, in the 59th District, Vernon Hills Trustee Cynthia Hebda filed later this afternoon and will face off against Dan Sugrue and Mohan Manian in the primary to replace former State Rep. Kathy Ryg's seat (Dem contenders are incumbent appointee Carol Sente and also Buffalo Grove Mayor Elliot Hartstein).
TA hears that Hebda was convinced very late in the filing period to make a run and had to scramble to get petitions signed and filed. She is expected to have a lot of support centered in the Vernon Hills area, including help from current Mayor Roger Byrne, whom Hebda had previously challenged for the Mayor's office.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
17 comments:
Hughes could file a packet with a few signatures to get the others to file and then come in with his real packet at the very end. Maybe he does know what he is doing? Doubtful but maybe.
How does your boy Sugrue like his new opponent? She will be tough to beat in Vernon Hills.
Um, Anon 3:58, before anyone gets too giddy over a new entrant into the race for 59, let's remember that whoever emerges victorious among the GOP candidates is going to have to have the support of all facets of the Republican party in the 59th District to have any hope of taking this seat. I'm sure both Sugure and Hebda will have their bases of support, and reagrdless of the eventual victor, I doubt either candidate could win in the general without the support of all Republicans regardless of who you supported in the primary. So keep that in mind as the primary race develops.
I couldn't agree more. That also means if Manian wins also.
TA:
Are you saying there are some republicans that would sit on their hands if their candidate didn't win. Shocking!! Are any of them Sugrue's base? Certainly you wouldn't be one that would take your ball and go home would you?
I will definitely not be sitting on myhands, no matter what the results. Although I don't know much about Hebda, I haven't heard anything yet that makes me think that I could not support her if she wins the primary. The point is that as the campaigns progress, the candidates need to be careful to not alienate the supporters of their competitors as they explain why they are the best for the job.
TA:
I didn't think you would be like that but your post certainly alludes to the problems the party has. Sugrue, while not like this, is from a wing of the party that stays home and pouts when they do not get their way.
May the best person win and all candidates support the winner in November.
Anon 4:26/4:53- you're right on all counts. Sadly, it seems many conservatives, which you would think would be Sugrue's bread and butter, do tend to sulk and not work for the "R" candidate unless they meet the purity standards that they set for themselves (and there's disagreement, of course, even among the "pure" as to who is more "pure" than others).
And you're right that Sugrue is not at all that kind of guy. And to be fair, not all conservatives are either (indeed, many of our local right-wingers supported Mark Kirk for many years), but I know a lot who really do fit that desscription to a "T".
I can vouch that if Dan does not win the primary, he will support the R candidate over the D in the general, and so will I.
TA:
Agreed on all counts.
Hughes withdrew his original filing and is now last on the ballot. Time will tell if he actually knew what he was doing. Probably but I have only met the guy once and am not sure he could find his way out of a paper bag. Kirk is going to crush him.
Chelsea's job as party chief is to snuff out primary challenges, this is a fail. Thunder Dan is the man and shouldn't be facing this nonsense.
The only way hughes wins this race is if ditka gives him mongo, hampton, samurai mike, gary fencik, wilbur, otis, dent and maybe a little chop shuey. Even then he wouldn't have much of a shot.
FOKLAES
FOKLAES, Chelsea is Executive Director of the Federation (having recently replaced Ant Simonian, who retired), which is mainly a fundraising organization that pays for and staffs the Lake County GOP headquarters and assists the Central Committee, which is the official GOP in Lake County. My friend Dan Venturi is the County Chairman elected by the precinct committeemen, and is the official head of the party. But its a common misconception. While there is occasionally friction between the groups, we try to cooperate as much as possible to further Republican goals in Lake County.
Don't worry, though, it's a very common misunderstanding, even among those in Lake County who have been around long enough that they ought to have figured this out by now.
Hughes probably got a boost by Eric Wallace's decision not to run, but his endorsement of Hughes is by no means certain. Hughes will have to kiss a lot of Wallace tush to get that, and Pat is a pretty proud guy, so he's going to hate to have to grovel.
OK, I see 8 candidates with IR favorite Wallace not filing on the Republican side. Or is it really 7? How many times did Hughes file, then withdraw. Can he refile the same petitions? And "active" as of 4:23 p.m. when he filed at 3:04 p.m. means what? Someone beat him for the last filing? Or was the 4:23 entry the last filing?
I also see that someone has already filed a request for copies/review of the Hughes petitions.
Confusing. Anyone with better knowledge of all this can enlighten me at your convenience.
Louis G. Atsaves
Lou- not sure who requested hughes' petitions but you had to figure that would happen.
OK - here's what I understand happened with Hughes- apparently some overzealous Hughes supporter sent their petition directly to the SBE, which was then filed, which is why Hughes had to withdraw that and file his official petitions. I guess there's not an issue with that, but who knows. This is not confirmed officially, but that's what I understand happened.
Do my eyes fool me or do I see an objective, insult-less post by TA their followers?
Fluke or something to look forward to in the future?
Nice job!
Illinois Review has an interview up with Charlie Johnson this AM. Appears that someone mailed in a petition sheet with 10-15 signatures on it to the Illinois State Board of Elections which had to treat it as a filing for Hughes' candidacy.
When the Hughes campaign then showed up to file, they had to arrange to withdraw that sheet so that they could file their petitions, including getting Hughes to sign off on it and notarize the document requesting the withdrawing.
Truth is stranger than fiction and this one is so strange as to be believable.
http://www.illinoisreview.typepad.com/
Louis G. Atsaves
Sadly, it seems many conservatives ... do tend to sulk and not work for the "R" candidate unless they meet the purity standards that they set...
So TA, what do you think that pro-life people ought to do when faced with candidates of both parties who disagree with them on their most important issue and generally tend to hold them in contempt? Pick one and work for them anyway?
Anon 12:00 p.m., I agree that what's good for the goose is good for the gander, and people on both sides of any issue will hopefully be able to be respectful and considerate, even if they end up disagreeing at the end of the day. I recognize that for some people, they have ONE issue (whether it's abortion, guns, gays, whatever) that they simply can't accept a candidate that doesn't agree with them on that issue, and I respect their right to that opinion- but at the end of the day, if you have a litmus test for candidates that means they must agree 100% with your beliefs (whatever they are) then you necessarily limit the candidates you can support, and those candidates will oftentimes not succeed in elections because they do not appeal to a broad enough base of supporters. It is admirable to stick to one's ideals, but if the goal is to win elections and prevent a greater evil (i.e., electing a Dem) to an office, well then, you have a choice to make.
And, getting back to your point, there are people who are equally rabid on their position on both sides of any debate, but it just seems to me that conservative candidates as a rule are more likely to reject candidates that do not conform to all ideals, whereas moderate tend to give candidates more slack. Just my observation.
ANON 12:oo
I think what TA is saying in real terms is that many a pro-lifer will not vote for a candidate that may be 80% with them. The problem is that their opponent is usually 100% against them. If enough pro-lifers decide that they need to be morally correct and not vote for the person that is 80% with them, there is a possibility of the person that is 100% against them getting elected.
Post a Comment