I just attended a debate in Deerfield, IL among the Democratic candidates for Congress from Illinois' 10th district, currently represented by Mark Kirk.
Dan Seals and Elliot Richardson both gave strong presentations and agreed on nearly every issue. Seals has several advantages over Richardson, including name recognition and a clear understanding of issues in all corners of the district, from running before (and nearly beating Kirk even though Kirk was the best-funded congressional candidate in the country as well as an 8-year incumbent at the time). Seals is exceptionally well-informed and does a great job of communicating and connecting with voters.
Julie Hamos arrived 27 minutes late for a scheduled one-hour debate, and blamed her young staff for not being able to read maps well.
Hamos' performance has definitely improved throughout the campaign, but she continues to reference her experience in Springfield frequently which, given voter perceptions, is not much of a selling point. In addition, those of us who've heard her before are beginning to think of her mentions of being a daughter of Holocaust survivors, a woman, and a Jew in a similar way that Joe Biden perceived Rudy Giuliani's mentions of 9/11 - she just needs to add more nouns and verbs. Her identity politics (basically her closing message was that she can win because she's a Jewish woman) are offensive, and I don't remember hearing any of this stuff in all the years that she's been a state rep in my area.
As a Democrat who wants to elect the second Dem in 100 years (the first was Abner Mikva) to represent the 10th, Seals is the clear choice. Most Dems agree, as he is way ahead in the polls. And before any Hamos folks challenge his poll as being a few months old, Hamos has polled at least twice, once last week, and we have yet to see those results. The silence is a bit deafening.