I am increasingly concerned about who the Democrats will nomimate for the IL Senate race, and today's Washington Post article only underscores my concern.
It wasn't just NJ & VA. I have been and m increasingly concerned about national outlook for Dems in 2010. We know what happens in mid year elections. We know what happens to incumbents anywhere when the economy is bad (and I mean anywhere....incumbents pounded in Japan over the summer as well). I think we can safely assume that there will be Dems in purple to red Congressional seats that will be washed away in 2010. When I hear about states like Delaware, Illinois, New Hampshire, etc. (3 that have become fairly reliably blue) being competitive...I start to fear the worst.
In Illinois, the big issue (other than the common national ones...health care, the economy, Afghanistan, etc.) that we know is going to be defining, is corruption. After Blago, it is inevitable. While voters haven't cared much in the past, I have to believe they will care more this year. And if us Dems are frank, our party doesn't have such a great record. I believe that, in part, Mike Quigley owes his seat in Congress to his record as an independent, reform-minded Democrat.
Dems better be smart in who they nominate if they want to keep Obama's seat. I don't have anything against Alexi G. per se, but I plan to look around. Superficially (which is what I know so far), I believe David Hoffman would be a good altnerative, and don't know much about Jackson (other than she worked for Blago) or Meister. My suspicsion is there will be little substantive issue differences between the candidates....if that turns out to be the case, I'm going for the electable one.
See below for link.
What do y'all think?
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/...