Why didn't the party leaders just help Cegelis get a better campaign team?

[Ken Burch]

If their beef with Christine was that her last campaign wasn't run well enough (this despite their refusal to help), why didn't they just help her find a better campaign manager? If they thought her campaign funds weren't spent properly, why didn't they just
get her a better treasurer? That's the kind of thing the DCCC is SUPPOSED to do, build candidates up, not put out political contracts on them.


Why did recruiting another candidate at the last possible minute have to be the only solution they could think of?

The whole "we had to stop her because her campaign organization has some problems" arguement just doesn't wash.

[mopinko]

1. the whole thing smells,

including the bashers here on du.
just one thing that you have wrong- this was not a last minute thing. they undertook a very public search for a new candidate, starting way back. then had the nerve to criticize the amount of money that she was raising. at first they were holding out for someone rich so that it would look like it was about fundraising. it just took them a long time to dig up someone willing to take on a good democrat.
nothing they say about this campaign passes the smell test.

[Ken Burch]

2. thanks for the clarification on the timeline

Maybe it was just that she actually entered the race so much later.

[Freddie Stubbs]

3. Perhaps her problems were more fundamental that lousy staff

Good staffers can only do so much with an abysmal candidate.

[Gary Kleppe]

4. Yeah right

She's a good enough candidate that Duckworth needs enormous amounts of money and other help just to stay in the race.

[Freddie Stubbs]

6. It is going to take a lot of money to beat Peter Roskam

Better to start early.

[mopinko]

9. no it's not

actually, you forget how much of that money ends up in the pockets of the friends and family of the candidate. but, it will take shoe leather, heart, and someone keeping a close watch on the votes. we have all those things. they don't.

[Freddie Stubbs]

11. Roskam has managed to get elected to the State Senate

He will not be a push-over, especially in a GOP-majority district. The Democratic nominee, whoever she is, will need to be able to raise enough money to get her message out. Roskam had over $800,000 in the bank at the end of last year.

[mopinko]

14. heaven help rahm, et al.

if they do not make the kind of rain for christine that they have for tammy. we shall see.

[Freddie Stubbs]

16. It's easier to make it rain for some candidates than others

Some candidates candidates just present themselves better, have a better life-story, or are more persuasive.

[Gary Kleppe]

19. Those of us in the district...

...have not found Duckworth very persuasive, nor have we been happy with the way she's presented herself.

And if you want to push the rain analogy, some candidates <b>need</b> more rain than others. I hear Duckworth's handlers are offering $10/hour to UIUC students to work for them on election day. That's money that Cegelis and Scott don't need to spend because they can inspire supporters to do the work for free.

Duckworth -- or rather, her handlers -- appeal to people with deep pockets, but it seems, not to the average man (or woman) in the street.

[Freddie Stubbs]

21. If what you say is true, then Ms. Cegelis should have little trouble

Ms. Duckworth. But the venom that I have observed from Ms. Cegelis' supporters suggests that is not the case.

[Gary Kleppe]

22. As I've said many times by now...

...I do expect Cegelis to win the primary. But that doesn't do too much to lessen my outrage at a party that wastes its time, money, and influence supporting a candidate that the locals don't want and working against a candidate who stands for what the party ought to be fighting for.

[Freddie Stubbs]

25. A little bit of competation can be a healthy thing

After the primary we will have a nominee who has had to work her tail off, increasing the voters knowledge of her.

[Ken Burch]

24. oh come on, why can't you just admit the Duckworth thing

has been an absolute disaster? From what I've heard, Duckworth has seldom presented herself at all, let alone
"presented herself well". The general strategy of recruiting veterans as candidates I can't actually quarrel with, but
at least they should be progressive(if possible antiwar)veterans and should have recovered as much as possible from their
wounds. I don't feel that the party has actually shown much respect to Duckworth in literally dragging her out of bed to run
while she was still healing.

And if being a wounded veteran was the certain path to victory, Max Cleland(who I like respect)would still be in the Senate.

The Duckworth campaign needs an exit strategy.

[Freddie Stubbs]

26. Since you brough up Senator Clelend,

I'm sure that you are aware that he was elected to state-wide office four times. He only lost one election.

[Ken Burch]

28. I know, but the swiftboaters got him in the end.

And there's no reason to think they won't get Duckworth at the start.
They should have just worked with Cegelis.

And as to the "she got less than Kerry in '04" arguement, well, of course she was going to get less if the party refused to help her(remember, they declared the seat unwinnable). It goes without saying that Kerry would get more votes since they were still trying to carry the area for him.

[Freddie Stubbs]

29. Speaking of Swiftboaters,

Kerry did better in that district while being attacked by the swiftboaters, while Ms. Celegis was ignored by such groups. How would she be able to stand up to attacks from outside groups?

[Ken Burch]

35. Kerry also had much more money and party support than Cegelis.

And she'd respond by fighting back and passionately defending herself.
You know, the way Kerry wouldn't.

[billyf65]

32. Kerry was on network tv in Chicago?

News to me.

[Ken Burch]

34. I don't understand your question.

nt.

[billyf65]

30. Just wondering...

Just to be clear...is this a prediction of a Cegelis win on March 21?

Just asking.

[Ken Burch]

33. From what I've heard, Cegelis has the volunteers and the energy

Duckworth has money and empty campaign offices.

[mopinko]

31. i'm all for fighting dems that are, you know, fighting dems.

but, maybe they should call it "fighting waffles"

[dogman]

36. Probably because most of what you've heard is from Cegelis supporters.

Here's another take.
Snip>Citizen Action/Illinois gave its official support Saturday to Duckworth in the 6th district race. The group’s decision came after hearing presentations today by Duckworth and fellow 6th district candidate Christine Cegelis. Citizen Action/Illinois is a coalition made up of labor unions, religious groups, health care advocates and grassroots political organizations. It is the state’s largest public interest coalition and serves as one of the leading voices in Illinois on progressive issues.

“I am extremely gratified to earn the support of Citizen Action/Illinois, a group that stands up for seniors, for our environment and for the need for political reform-- and that works for substantive change at the grassroots level,” said Duckworth.

Lynda DeLaforgue, co-director of Citizen Action/Illinois, cited Duckworth’s commitment to public service and her leadership as key factors in the group’s endorsement.

“Tammy Duckworth has a long history of public service to her community and her country. She will be a distinguished member of Congress, a fresh voice for the people of the 6th District, and a strong advocate on issues such as health care, the environment and support for working families. Tammy Duckworth is the kind of leader who will stand up to the special interests in Washington,” said DeLafrogue.<snip
From>
http://www.duckworthforcongress.com/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=11&Itemid=15

[wndycty]

37. I know and have worked with Lynda/Citizen Action. . .

. . .this people are out in front on the issues that impact working people. Most of the new prescription drugs/healthcare programs offered by the state were made possible because of Citizen Action.

[dogman]

38. Yeah, just not Progressive enough for some.

Of course if you holler into an echo chamber you just hear your own spin.

[billyf65]

46. They're part of the conspiracy

Citizen Action is just part of the conspiracy. Along with Planned Parenthood. And Emily's List. And Barack Obama. And Dick Durbin. And Jan Schakowsky. And John Kerry. And Wes Clark. And Max Cleland. And the AFL-CIO. And SEIU. And the Illinois Federation of Teachers. And AFSCME. And The Chicago Tribune. And the Chicago Sun-Times. And the Daily Herald. And the Pioneer Press.

Shhhh. Don't tell.

[Gary Kleppe]

41. Actually, it's Duckworth we've been listening to.

And we've heard:

• She would've voted against bringing the troops home, and in favor of Hyde's resolution to keep them there indefinitely; about the war, she said "there's good and bad in everything".
  
• She hasn't decided whether she was for or against CAFTA.
  
• She would've voted to renew the so-called Patriot Act.
  
• She doesn't have a problem with the US littering places like Iraq with toxic depleted uranium.
  
• She wants to spend billions cutting the Alternative Minimum Tax.
  

All of that doesn't sound very progressive to me. Of course, your mileage may vary.

Oh, and if she's a progressive, doesn't that pretty much kill the argument that she has to be the nominee because only a center-right Democrat could win in the Sixth? Just asking.

[mopinko]

42. still trying to figure out the emily's list endorsement

since she has also been all over the map on choice.
her original statement was that she would support the views of the voters of the 6th on this issue. guess she doesn't know too much about illinois politics if she wants to go along with henry hyde's district on choice. then she decided she better support roe v wade. but on wbez she said she would support parental notification. so how did she get emily's list?
but then, emily's list did not support carol mosley braun for president. didn't endorse her for senate until it was clear she was going to win. don't know how they do nationally, but in illinois, they seem to forget the early part.
money talks.
illinois now is not giving lip service to christine, tho, they are out walking the beat.

[billyf65]

45. Don't forget Planned Parenthood

[Gary Kleppe]

55. Planned Parenthood endorsed both candidates

http://www.ppaction.org/ppilvotes/endorsements.html

[billyf65]

58. Yeah...

By Cegelis-think, does that mean they've only sold half of their soul - or does it mean that maybe -just maybe- they have vetted both candidates and find both up to their standards?

[mopinko]

59. it means that planned parenthood endorsed someone

who supports parental approval, which they oppose. so you tell me how that happened.

[dogman]

44. Things she has said, or your interpretation?

I'd be willing to bet she never said she was in favor of Hyde's resolution and I doubt the rest of her statements, taken in context, say what you say. I've never made the center-right argument because I believe she is center-left.

[Gary Kleppe]

47. Yes, they're things she's said.

The question about Hyde's resolution and the "good and bad" quote were in the Sun-Times.

And I'd take that bet. I know for sure that she dismissed concerns about depleted uranium because we aren't firing it at our own troops. That was at a candidates' forum which I saw and which I have on video. The AMT remark was said, among other places, during the Chicago Public Radio debate, which you can download from their site.

Maybe you haven't made the center-right argument, but others have. See this thread for example.

[mopinko]

48. amt

just the fact that she feels this is an important issue, in this time, makes her look light as helium to me. (this was the subject of her first press release.) when asked why she thinks this should be an issue, she said, "because so many people in the district pay it." so, one more "pander to your greed" candidate. just what the country needs.

[Gary Kleppe]

49. Right

And her specifics about the AMT are just bollocks. She claimed on the CPR interview that eighty percent of the people in the Sixth would be affected by it within a couple of years. You would need to see something like forty percent across-the-board growth in wages before that could possibly happen.

[dogman]

51. Are you sure of the number?

Snip>The Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center says the AMT will hit 3.6 million out of the nation's 131 million taxpayers filing for tax year 2005 (filed in early 2006), and could affect 31 million by 2010 if nothing is done.

To give you a sense of just who might get caught, this year only 1.8 percent of married couples with two kids and an adjusted gross income between $75,000 and $100,000 will be subject to AMT. Next year, that number jumps to 73.4 percent.<snip
http://money.cnn.com/2005/11/09/pf/taxes/amt_101/index.htm

[Gary Kleppe]

54. Am I sure of *which* number? (N/T)

[dogman]

57. The number affected.

The number is a moving target. The statistics in the article and yours don't agree. We all know statistics can be found to back most arguments. I'm simply asking where yours come from and how sure you are that they are correct.

[dogman]

50. I know she is for reforming the AMT.

But did she say she would spend billions to reform it? Reforming the AMT does not necessarily mean eliminating it. Most calls for reform are to index it because over tome it is beginning to impact middle-class taxpayers, not just the wealthy tax avoiders it was designed to catch. I believe this would be important in that CD because these are the people most likely affected by it. My bet was on the Hyde resolution and still stands. Give the wording of the Hyde resolution so we can determine how bad it was. You will note I said in context. The "good and bad" I saw quoted and is a true statement about almost any subject, there is good and bad in everything, that seems like general knowledge and is merely a meaningless throw away line. Those are the ways untested candidates answer questions that they have not yet thought through and are answering to avoid giving no answer. The DU debate is ongoing and needs further research for answers. DU saves American lives short term but the long term effect may not be worth it. Maybe you are satisfied with the answer you have accepted on this subject, many are not sure. As in anything there are risks, some acceptable and some not. If you were in a tank and were to receive hostile fire would you prefer the added protection of DU armor or would you rather avoid the risk of possible future damage and die on the spot from the burning fire of the incoming round? If an enemy tank were approaching, would you rather risk exposure and stop it in its tracks or have it penetrate your lines and kill an untold number of your fellow soldiers? Unlike soldiers like Tammy, you aren't really faced with that choice. As you see a laundry list of items in your words is not quite the same as her words in context.

[Gary Kleppe]

53. Context?

Duckworth was asked about the AMT during the Chicago Public Radio debate. While she refused to offer specifics on what she'd do about it, she did say that fixing it would cost billions.

As for depleted uranium, it's my understanding that it's not used to make tank armor, but rather to make the shells that can penetrate tank armor. If we need further research, shouldn't we err on the side of caution and ban the stuff until it can be determined to be safe? Evidence shows that it's a major health hazard, not only to Iraqi locals (whom we're supposedly there to help -- yeah right) but to our own troops. It's suspected to be the cause of so-called Gulf War Syndrome.

And no, I don't know what I'd do if I were a soldier. Thankfully we have a system of government by civilians, who can look at the effect of things like this in a larger context.

[dogman]

56. It is used as both armor and shells.

That is a large part of the problem. When the armor is hit by conventional rounds, dust is released. The military does need to study this further. Many things take time to be resolved in the military, partially because civilians are involved. Decisions are made that benefit contractors over soldiers, look at the current group running the Pentagon. This is not just a current problem either. For years GIs were given cigarettes in their c-rations. This was good for those who smoked since it was a treat, at the same time it was bad for their health. It is hard to make a person have concern for their long term health when they don't know if they will live another day. Of course this was a huge subsidy for the tobacco companies but the men were not forced to smoke. It is what is known as a dilemma. Is your personal answer the right answer for everybody?

[Gary Kleppe]

60. "The right answer for everybody?"

This isn't a matter of individual choice, like "paper or plastic?" Innocent people are affected by the policy choices that we make.

It's wrong to litter Iraq with radioactive toxins, for the same reasons it would be wrong for us to drop a nuke on Bagdhad. This is so even though the latter option might be very good for our soldiers, assuming we got them out first.

The best option, of course, is to get out and let the Iraqis rule their own country.

[mopinko]

5. perhaps she would be unbought and unbowed

and show them up for the appeasers and cowards that they are.
durbin is a good man, and a good senator. he has also been in politics, in illinois, for a long time. i know everyone thinks their state is dirtier than anyone else's but you can take a look at the george ryan trial to see who runs this state and decide for your self.
so, why should these people over-ride the choice of the actual voters, and the growing democratic party in the 6th. they got plenty of lackies now. we the people demand this seat.

[Freddie Stubbs]

7. Who is going to " over-ride the choice of the actual voters?"

The primary is 13 days away. It would appear the the actual voters have yet to speak.

[mopinko]

8. the people are only choosing because

they fought their tails off to have that choice. if the tammy side had had their way, they would have just bullied us off the field. that ought to be all that needs to be said about them. they are bullies.

[Freddie Stubbs]

10. So running a strong candidate is 'bullying' other candidates?

:shrug:

[mopinko]

12. when you do it the way they did it, yes it is.

yes, they have bullied people, twisted arms. everyone on the ground here knows it.

[Freddie Stubbs]

13. Who's arm was twisted?

:shrug:

[mopinko]

15. you know, i am just not going to take your bait freddy.

really, i am so fucking bored with this stupid game.

[Freddie Stubbs]

17. The game of making allegations that you cannot back up?

:shrug:

[mopinko]

18. sorry, since the takeover of the media, you can only link

to lies.

[Freddie Stubbs]

20. Who took over the media?

And when exactly did it happen?

[Ken Burch]

40. It's not an unchallengeable point tha Duckworth's a stronger

candidate.

It's the hacks playing a hunch, and that's it.

[Ken Burch]

43. Or it might be that her presence in congress would embarass Hillary

by demonstrating that women can be successful Democratic politicians without giving up their principles.

[Willinois]

23. They are afraid of liberal candidates.

Most people who are party establishment types are scared to death of running very liberal candidates. Many of them in that area don't take Cegalis seriously.

[Freddie Stubbs]

27. Maybe they don't think that a GOP-majority district will elect a liberal

Perhaps they are on to something.

[goodhue]

39. it's not the messenger they have a problem with . . .

it's the message

[Padme Amidala]

52. All the good guys have endorsed Cegelis

She doesn't need the DCCC. It's time they learned to support the best candidates.