IL-14 100% counted - NOT final

100% of the precincts in IL-14 are counted and John Laesch is trailing Bill Foster by 365 votes.

However, absentee ballots, including those of our troops - like John's brother I presume - serving away from home have not been counted.  Canvass is not complete or official.  Should be completed by tomorrow.  Campaign has attorneys to guide it through this process.

This has been such a strange and amazing night.

In his remarks to the crowd John said, progressives have, one way or another, "moved the ball forward" an incredible distance in IL-14, when we have run a race this close against a Blue Dog who spent $2million to his $120,000 or so.  And we have.  Sorry this is so short, but this has been a long, long day, and will post new diary tomorrow.

•  Thanks for the info!

  What a great fight!

  by psycho liberal on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 09:52:59 PM PDT

  •  Rahm's a fucking idiot!

    If Laesch doesn't pull this off it's just another Cegelis-Duckworth deal...Rahm'll make sure the DCCC pours millions into this, bypassing 20 other great candidates around the country just to support his own fucking ego.

    This truly is THE biggest outrage of the evening, in the entire fucking country, as far as vote results and the reality of the status quo's concerned.

    "Change?" Tell me about it, Barack! Same shit (as '06), different day...the names change...but the reality stays the same.

    Fight this one, folks, please...

    Signed,
    A guy in NY that's tired of the party status quo trying to override the true WILL of the people!!! Fight this, please!

    by bobswern on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 10:23:50 PM PDT

    •  Yes. We. Will NT

      by daddy4mak on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 10:25:58 PM PDT

    •  Get a Rec

      for all the love of Rahm.

      by Peter Laesch on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:02:22 PM PDT

    •  You work your side of the street

      ...and we'll work ours, thank you very much.

      Signed,
      A person who actually lives in IL-14.

      by Gaelic American on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 01:22:48 AM PDT

      •  Did you support or vote for Foster? n/t

        by bobswern on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 02:07:32 AM PDT

        •  Redheaded Liberal is her former ID

          She works for AFSCME and never scored with John years ago.

          by llbear on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 05:24:21 AM PDT

          •  Believe it or not

            I am a DKOS newbie. My name is Brian Doyle. I live in St. Charles. You have me confused with somebody else.

            by Gaelic American on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 08:19:39 AM PDT

•  Go John!

  Sounds like the winner is going against megabucks Oberweis, though.

  by musicsleuth on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 09:54:48 PM PDT

  •  I've talked to a Republican County Clerk

    She couldn't pronouce John's last name correctly & was gracious to give me vote totals herself.

    Precinct Chairmen and election judges have told her that they themselves caused confusion. Two stated that they have given the wrong ballots for the wrong elections - confusing Special Primary and General Primary - so some people voted twice in one election and not at all in the general.  That went on for two hours in one precinct with a lot of early voters, and for an hour in another.

    These folks have integrity - yup - Republicans with integrity.  They hate that is has happened.

    I don't know if the votes cast helped or hurt either John or Bill Foster.  But this is a mess.

     

    by llbear on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 10:49:11 PM PDT

    •  It's a bit of a head scratcher to be sure.

      Foster has nearly identical vote totals for both the general and special primary, which makes sense to me considering a supporter would likely vote for the same person in both elections. Keeping that in mind it's difficult to understand how on earth Laesch got 3000 fewer votes in the special vs. general election?  I can't believe that only the Laesch supporters would be screwing up.  The (R) candidate totals match up closely also so how could only he lose roughly 10% from one to the next, but nobody else?  

      by jwinIL14 on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:24:00 PM PDT

      •  There were 16% more votes cast

        in the general than in the special, but these were divided among four candidates, not three. Joe Serra got almost 6000 votes in the general; I wonder how many of those people didn't vote in the special because their favored candidate just wasn't there...and how many of them switched over to someone like Foster for the special.

        Laesch got 12.6% more in the general, Foster 0.3%, and Stein 16.3%.

        Today's odd fact: Stein's vote totals were both repeating numbers: 4949 in the special, 5757 in the general. At least, those are the numbers prior to the absentee results being applied.

        by sardonyx on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 08:59:50 AM PDT

        •  the number of honest mistakes made by

          election judges has the County Clerks ready to cry.  Then there are judges who turned away Democratic Voters for the Special Election because "this election is to fill a Republican vacancy."

          by llbear on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 10:15:52 AM PDT

          •  "...to fill a Republican vacancy."

            Oy. Judges.

            Now that you mention it, the Republican total for the general was 77,762, and for the special was 73,043, only 6.5% less. This could well explain why the decrease between the two was so much less on the Republican side.

            A worrying note: over 2500 more people in IL-14 pulled Republican ballots for the general than pulled Democratic ones. That isn't a great sign for November.

            by sardonyx on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:33:28 AM PDT

            •  not neccessarily...

              the races (for presidential and for IL-14 house) on the republican side were a great deal more heated.

              once it's john McCain v Obama, a great number of independents and democrats will come out to vote straight ticket

              you wont' believe how many people who I called said straignt up "oh, i only vote in the general"...these were Dems!!

              which kinda tells you why we have bluedogs in the first place

              p.s. ( i did convince one o fthem to go vote anyways)

              by daddy4mak on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:47:31 AM PDT

•  too bad Pera got

  trounced by the douchebag Dan "Benedict Arnold" Lipinki. Let's hope Laesch pulls this out.

  by michael1104 on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 09:54:57 PM PDT

  •  new name

    We've recently taken to calling the incumbent in IL-03 "Odious Dan". It seems to fit.

    by Christopher Walker on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 09:01:01 AM PDT

    •  Love your signature

      by llbear on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 10:16:32 AM PDT

•  Damn girl,

  You're quick.

  We're behind you, John.  100%!!

  by edwardssl on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 09:56:18 PM PDT

  •  Oh, and goodnight, y'all.

    It was fun tonight (I booked out before saying goodbye to everyone).

    by edwardssl on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 09:58:45 PM PDT

•  thank you

  for your activism

  by JackDawkins on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 09:56:24 PM PDT

•  Wow.

  What happened?  Earlier John was trailing by quite a lot.  I've supported John since I met him at Yearly Kos...I would love to see him pull this out!

  by poe on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 09:57:21 PM PDT

•  365

  so close.  

  by John DE on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 10:04:08 PM PDT

•  now you'll have to really answer my question....

  about what we do in the case of a split ballot

  by daddy4mak on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 10:04:34 PM PDT

  •  What are the vote totals...

    ...for the Special Primary Election (for Hastert's unexpired term)?

    by Randall Sherman on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 10:10:22 PM PDT

    •  Foster is ahead by 8points.

      by soozler on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 10:15:07 PM PDT

      •  Correction

        Foster, Bill  31,910 42%
        Laesch, John  31,587 42%
                        327 / 63,497 = .0051498

        That riggers by Illinois law an automatic recount.

        The county clerks do not want their reputations tarnished by rumors of badly conducted elections.  I expect them to be filing amicus curie briefs about confusion within many precincts.  

        Serra, Joe  5,947 8%
        Stein, Jotham  5,757 8%

        by llbear on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:40:17 PM PDT

        •  Are those...

          ..numbers for the November General Election Ballot or the Special.  Also. do you know when the date of the Special election is and when the term ends.  i would assume it ends shortly after the November election so any incumbancy would have limited help in the November election.

          by delver rootnose on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:44:27 PM PDT

          •  That was the Trib's 100% count

            for the general.

            Special General is
            Name Party Votes Vote %
            Foster, Bill Dem 31,792 49%
            Laesch, John Dem 28,053 43%
            Stein, Jotham Dem 4,949 8%

            U.S. House Special - District 14 - GOP Special Primary
            568 of 568 Precincts Reporting - 100%
            Name Party Votes Vote %
            Oberweis, Jim GOP 41,029 56%
            Lauzen, Chris GOP 32,014 44%

            by llbear on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:47:10 PM PDT

          •  Special Election is slated for March 9th

            making it the 1st election in Illinois to be held on a Saturday.

            County Clerks lost a suit to delay the election due to problems of getting machines changed over in time.

            The re-count required by Illinois law will follow tomorrow's canvass - and that re-count may cause the Clerk to re-file their suit.

            by llbear on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:56:58 PM PDT

        •  Are those the right numbers?

          Wouldn't it be the margin of victory divided by the total number of votes cast (that is, also including Stein and Serra)? That would make the numbers:

          323 / 75,201 = 0.0042952

          which looks even deeper into recount territory.

          Of course, these numbers can change once the absentees are added into the totals...like who's in the lead as the recount commences.

          by sardonyx on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 09:11:30 AM PDT

          •  Heh sardonyx

            that's the least of the issues here right now.  Recounts, special election occuring on March 8, people from both parties and all sides grousing all over the county about how screwed up logistically that election was, an AG looking into whether there's a problem with counties erasing the memory cards from the special election within two weeks, because they need them cleared in advance of the special general on March 8, when it may still be in recount territory as they are erasing them, eh, it's very, profoundly weird here right now.

            by Downtowner on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 09:22:31 AM PDT

            •  tell the AG

              not to worry about Kane Co. memory cards at least.  I'm sure Co Clerk Cunningham has another duplicate set in his briefcase "in case of emergencies."

              by raisin on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 09:35:00 AM PDT

              •  LOL

                only I should probably be crying instead...

                by Downtowner on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:11:24 AM PDT

            •  I remember reading at the time

              about the timeline for the special election being way too tight, and this is going to make it that much worse. What a mess. I feel for you there.

              There were a couple of elections in the 2006 cycle where one candidate won the general, but another won the special. Not just the Lampson/Sekula-Gibbs in TX-22, either. It's so odd when that happens: someone running in the special to be an instant lame duck, because they won't be on the ballot for the general.

              by sardonyx on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:38:08 AM PDT

  •  I know, right?

    That little exchange between us is living in my mind right now as forethought akin to ESP on your part, because it still may well end up that way.

    Who woulda thunk it?

    Well, you I guess!

    by Downtowner on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 12:07:32 PM PDT

    •  i think i'll hire me out as an intuition consltnt

      or intiution based pollster...LOL...except I can only intuit worst case scenarios and crazy stuff.

      I also was 99% sure that this was going to be  a race which was going to be decided on under 500 votes.

      and i also figured Pera was gonna lose big.

      by daddy4mak on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 12:58:44 PM PDT

      •  Hello? CNN? Gimme Larry King. Thanks -

        Hey, Larry - I finally found a pundit you can use, way better than those clowns you had to suffer through on Super Tuesday.  

        Yeah! His intution-based progostications puts those other guys to shame. Wadda ya mean he guesses?  That's what your guys do now.  He's just better.

        I'll send right up.

        by llbear on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 08:50:26 PM PDT

        •  LOL!! nt

          by daddy4mak on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 09:02:52 PM PDT

•  PLEASE PLEASE

  Let John somehow win this thing.

  by Populista on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 10:11:20 PM PDT

•  Tom Bowen needs a new job.

  This should be Fosters seat.  Laech will get chewed up by oberwies

  by soozler on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 10:11:41 PM PDT

  •  hey..not if our fellow Dems don't already start

    accepting DEFEAT!!!

    thx for the morale boost, bud.

    by daddy4mak on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 10:16:19 PM PDT

    •  Laesch got owned last year.

      by soozler on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 10:17:11 PM PDT

      •  how is that? nt

        by daddy4mak on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 10:18:18 PM PDT

    •  Soozler is soused

      I think.

      by llbear on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:57:56 PM PDT

•  Rahm Emanuel can kiss my ass...

  ...and everyone's ass that went out and voted for Laesch tonight, too!!!

  Outspent almost 20:1....and look at the freakin' result!

  Fuck you, Rahm!

  Best of luck fighting this one...it's the righteous thing to do, dammit!

  by bobswern on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 10:15:08 PM PDT

  •  I don't want Rahm Emmanual

    anywhere near my ass, thankyouverymuch

    BTW: I'm gay, old, bold, and a sight to behold - but not that needy.

    by llbear on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:44:37 PM PDT

•  Laesch seems pretty bad

  His campaign was so bad he couldn't even get 3,500 people who voted for him in the regular primary to vote in the special election as well.

  I don't think that sort of organization and campaign skill is what we want to fight a tough primary.

  Pretty pathetic.

  by Adam T on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 10:41:53 PM PDT

  •  you know adam...

    I never been a big Laesh supporter but you know you really shouldn't piss on any democratic candidate or those who support them.  If they loose they will feel bad enough anyway.  Let the post game analysis go for another day.  If you support his opponent you will need these people and their energy to defeat a republican in IL-14.

    by delver rootnose on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 10:59:41 PM PDT

    •  You may be right

      I just think that his supporters need to acknowledge
      1.That he made a pretty pathetic screw up

      2.That if he wins the general primary he may need to step aside because he clearly can't win the special election primary.

      by Adam T on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:11:56 PM PDT

      •  you know i really shouldn't comment on this...

        but.  i think considering the money spent by Foster this race shows that energetic, if not crazed, grassroots people make up for lots of money.  But like I said now is not the time for shitting on them.  Wait a few days after final results to do the inside politics thing and then talk about how John or others can do better next time.

        Point number 2 confuses me.  If john does win the general but Foster wins the short term special i would think the power would reside in the person in the general for the full term not the race for the shortened partial term.  And the difference between the two is ballot position.  I know stupid reason but not all voters are as attentive as people who post here.

        by delver rootnose on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:20:08 PM PDT

        •  Foster's election is up first

          Why would anybody vote for him if they know he won't be on the ballot in November?

          That way, you'd be giving the special election to Oberweis.  If he becomes the incumbent there is probably no way Laesch could beat him in November.

          So, if our primary concern is electing the Democrat, if Laesch pulls out the general primary, it would be best for the party if he stepped aside.

          by Adam T on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:31:34 PM PDT

          •  ok last time I'll comment on this...

            ...I suggest other do the same but i see it the other way.  Why would anyone vote for Foster if he isn't on the ballot in November.  If Foster does win the special then maybe you have a point but I don't think If Laesch wins the general ballot primary he should not make any descision about staying or going until after the special.  If Foster looses the special or does not try then by default John is the best candidate for November.

            Of course John has to win the General election Primary and that is very close now.

            by delver rootnose on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:36:55 PM PDT

            •  Ok, that is possible

              He could say that he will step aside if Foster wins the special election.  If Foster loses, he'll stay on for the general election.  

              That would be fair.

              I'm sure I was a bit brusque and rude, be we here call ourselves the 'reality based community' and it should hardly be controversial to say that any candidate who can't tell a full 10% of his supporters that they have to vote in 2 elections has some major problems.

              by Adam T on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:46:05 PM PDT

              •  Early yesterday

                I was volunteering to help place Laesch signs and heard about Kendall County precincts where supporters of John's who had gone to vote were told they had to take a Republican ballot if they wanted to vote in the special, because Hastert was a Republican, so a Republican must replace him.

                Laesch took Kendall over Foster 53% to 41%
                And that's just one of the many screw ups of this special election.

                The Laesch campaign did tell it's supporters to vote twice (trust me on this, I myself walked three precincts as a volunteer, more than once, and called those voters repeatedly to get them out, and ALL of the scripts were very heavy on the "vote twice" language.)  But, setting aside Foster, all the candidates had drop off, in fact there was a 10,000 vote drop off from the general to the special.  Not surprising in an open primary state where Obama was on the ballot and non-aligned voters pulled Dem ballots for the first time, but are not necessarily Dems, and are not necessarily interested in pulling ballots at all for the special.  

                And before you jump all up and down and think Foster was better able to get nearly all of his supporters to go through and pull a second ballot and vote all over again, and his greater percentage over Laesch in the special is a sign that the Laesch campaign somehow screwed up, tell me where you think Serra's 6000 votes went in the special?  Serra (who says he thinks Iraq was a great idea and we should stay) is to the right of either of them,  and wasn't on the special ballot. Of the choices left to them, Foster is certainly closer to conservative than Laesch.

                There are a host of factors involved in these counts that you are not taking into account.

                IL-14 2008 Primary (100% Reporting):
                Foster, Bill 31,910 42%
                Laesch, John 31,587 42%
                Serra, Joe 5,947 8%
                Stein, Jotham 5,757 8%

                IL-14 Special Election Primary (100% Reporting):
                Foster, Bill 31,792 49%
                Laesch, John 28,053 43%
                Stein, Jotham 4,949 8%

                by Downtowner on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 04:07:08 AM PDT

                •  Dear Sleepless in Geneva,

                  Amazingly clear-headed thinking for no sleep at all since 4AM Tuesday.

                  by llbear on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 05:02:56 AM PDT

                  •  GENEVA???

                    I live in St. Charles, where we refer to that community as "evil Geneva."  Sheesh!

                    Other than that insult, thanks. I do crunch numbers (i.e. mostly do market analysis for communities) for a living.  After decades of that, I can read stats in my sleep.  Obviously literally in my sleep.

                    by Downtowner on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 05:23:36 AM PDT

                    •  Well, if you were in Geneva

                      you'd be sleepless.  Wanna argue? I'm ready. ;-)

                      by llbear on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 05:29:23 AM PDT

                      •  Hey

                        I slept from two in the morning or so to five in the morning or so - I'm all fresh.

                        by Downtowner on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 05:39:12 AM PDT

                •  Thanks DT, that explanation helped me undertand.

                  by jwinIL14 on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 08:36:42 AM PDT

                •  Hmmmm

                  Good thinking and interesting point.  

                  by Adam T on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:23:06 AM PDT

              •  And also

                "that would be fair"?

                In what way would it "be fair" for Foster to win a primary for a seat with a limited ten month term, Laesch to win a general primary for an open seat, and then expect Laesch to step aside for Foster?

                If the chips fall this way when all the votes are counted, and Laesch somehow goes insane over the next day or two and decides to agree with your assessment of "fair," I can assure you his progressive supporters will tar and feather him.  

                I'll bring the tar.

                by Downtowner on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 05:45:36 AM PDT

                •  I got the feathers!

                  by edwardssl on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 09:35:02 AM PDT

                  •  Honey!

                    I got the honey.  I'm assuming that this one could be saved if sweetened.... but tar is OK.

                    by llbear on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 10:07:56 AM PDT

      •  I was

        one of the people keeping track of the numbers as they came in from our poll watchers. There were many precincts where Foster had more votes in the special election than he did in the general. Those tended to be the precincts where Joe Serra did marginally well (7-10%) so we are thinking the Serra voters simply voted for the first name on the special election ballot.

        So, if not for Serra, Foster would have had less votes in the special election, as well.

        by flautist on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 04:54:06 AM PDT

  •  Adam - you may be in for a very rude shock

    Out-spent 20 to 1, John right now is .0081111 down. Then there's a slew of absentee ballots, Armed Forces ballots, and miscounted precincts [there are always those].  This thing ain't over.

    On the other side of the huge pile of money, there sits Oberweiss battered and bruised after a viscous election.  Oberweiss - the guy the Republicans dumped for Alan Keyes.

    Even Bill Foster has a chance against him - but John Laesch will have a rather huge army aided and abetted by Obama and Stein supporters - and they are just as determined to take this district Blue as John's.  

    by llbear on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:00:54 PM PDT

    •  ILbear...

      ..don't forget the Cegelis lesson.  If you win you will need the Foster people just as much as they will need you if they win.  Flame wars at this time are very counterproductive.  Trust me on this.  Duckworth lost by a very narrow margin in a district I feel is less republican than IL-14.

      Support your guy but leave the analysis of the vote till later unless it is related to something that actually may change the vote count.

      Just my $0.02

      by delver rootnose on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:08:58 PM PDT

    •  Also...

      you might want to get advice from people who went through close elections recently in the area.  I know Joe Vosicky had a very close election in 06.  You guys might want to ask others for help in this matter.  Legalities and all.  for example in recounts little things like not initialed ballots can be thrown out.  Or ballots cast on the electronic machines may be problematic.  You also need to know where to focus your efforts.  You don't want to challenge counts in Precincts where your opponents are strong.

      by delver rootnose on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:14:16 PM PDT

      •  I'm a veteran of re-counts

        I can't remember at this hour [hell, I'm so old that I may not remember at any hour] but I think it's 6.

        Top quality election lawyers are needed - by all sides - because no one really knows who won either the General Primary of the Special Primay.

        by llbear on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 12:01:32 AM PDT

•  Hard to tell what happens

  but it does seem a split ballot with the two elections in one day is the case.  Jim O. Despite his millions of dollars seems to have lots of experience losing elections.  I think chuckle head commenting above is giving him too much credit.

  by Peter Laesch on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:00:07 PM PDT

  •  Pete - this ain't over

    John may have won.

    Tomorrow I kicking in another $1,000.00.

    by llbear on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:03:06 PM PDT

  •  Hey Pete

    It's craziness here.  But not all of the ballots, including yours, are counted.  Stay tuned.  John, as always, is keeping a level head about him.

    by Downtowner on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 05:47:46 AM PDT

    •  Yeah, amazing how calm and collected

      he was when I was about to jump out of my skin!

      by edwardssl on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 10:16:24 AM PDT

•  in regards to IL-14..

  ..in 06 in IL-06 Tammy Duckworth won and Christine Cegelis lost by very slim margins in a less attended election.

  However after the election, from my point of view, the Duckworth people did little to embrace the Cegelis activists, who were bitter at the time, and basically to them by various means to fall in line, even to the point of using the Tammy's troops motif.  There were attempts to see if the Duckworth people would compromise and accept the Cegelis people and their positions.  This met with limited success.

  The reason I mention this is that whoever wins immediately needs to praise the losers and meet with them and their supporters and try to come to an understanding on unifying teams.  This may mean that platforms need to be changed, or presentations of the platform need to be changed.  However if this is not done I must note in districts like IL-14 where there has been Republicans for long times the loosing party can walk away, and thus give the Pukes the win, with out much change to the local political landscape.  I know this would be met with derision, but from a motivating point of view people and money(donors) really have nothing to push them but the chance of a win after yet another long fight.

  Thus it is in my opinion imperative that now even before the election is finalized there should be some sort of Ku-By-Ya moment and the teams involved need to say something to the effect of ‘I am going to fight for the votes but we all ran a good race’ and suggest a meeting on how to move ahead as a team regardless of who wins.  This is very difficult because of emotions and egos but in a district like IL-14 it will be hard for Democrats to win when all are pulling in the same direction.  You really can’t sacrifice anyone for the effort.

  Just my opinion though.  Take it for what it is worth.

  by delver rootnose on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 12:02:43 AM PDT

  •  Amen, brother

    Dems in IL-14 need to raise a big tent. I voted for Foster. But, I appreciate the energy and passion of those folks here who voted for Laesch.

    If Foster wins, I hope that John Laesch's supporters will consider how vast a difference there is between Bill and Jim Oberweis.

    Foster wants to end the war in Iraq. Oberweis will continue writing the blank checks.

    Foster "believes that it is long overdue for all Americans to have guaranteed access to a basic level of health care at a reasonable cost." Oberweis wants "to reintroduce incentives for managing one's own health care expenditures."

    Foster wants fiscal responsibility. Oberweis wants to cut funding for PBS and the NEA.

    Foster is a scientist who favors a data-driven approach to social problems. Oberweis is an ideologue who will tow the conservative line on guns and God.

    In 2000, I voted for Ralph Nader because I believed that there was little difference between the Dems and the Republicans. I was inspired by the promise of changing politics as usual, just as I am again today with Barack Obama.

    Bill Foster has also made political reform a central plank in his platform.

    He may have lots of money. He may have the backing of Washington insiders. But it is wrong, I believe, for John Laesch's supporters to dismiss his candidacy as a hack job.

    Apparently, about half of the voting Democrats in this district agree with me.

    by Gaelic American on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 01:58:24 AM PDT

  •  I'm very sure

    that should he lose the general, Laesch will ask his supporters to support Foster, and its likely that most will vote for him.

    But I think you are asking more than you know of people you don't know, if you expect John's supporters to support Foster to the same degree they supported John.

    The majority of John's supporters are Progressives, which Foster most certainly is not.  The majority of Progressives find one or more of Foster's positions simply repellent.  I myself find his refusal to rule out pre-emptive war with Iran, and his position on immigration, when I have two Latina granddaughters who are daily subject to discrimination, and his position on healthcare, simply unacceptable.  

    Moreover, those of us who have seen Foster at work at debates or otherwise in public settings in the district are, to be brutally frankly, almost certain he can't win.  I majored in English and minored in Communications, and however brilliant of a scientist he may be, his communications abilities in settings like debates are just painful to watch.

    Want to know why a Republican elected official who told me Oberweis would win months ago said he would?  She said, Oberweis may be a total asshole, but at least you can stand to be in a room with him for more than five minutes - which was more than she could say for Lauzen.  And she's right.  I know both men and Oberweis in person is quite the personable and charming asshole.  So most of us hold a dim view of the possibility that Foster, who reads answers to questions from note-cards at debates, can go up against this charming asshole, who has something like 53 million in personal wealth to Foster's 5 million, half of which he's just spent to get this close to Laesch, in an R+5 district and win.

    So what you have here is a plea to people who don't think this nominee can win and who are pretty convinced that, if the miraculous could happen and he does, we will have just elected a new pain-in-the-party's-ass Blue Dog, to put the kind of effort into supporting him that we put into Laesch being this close, while only spending $100,000 to his $2 million?

    Let me give you my personal view on what kind of effort we are talking about here, and please keep in mind I am by no means an out-of-the-ordinary volunteer for the Laesch campaign.

    I work two jobs, one of which takes me on the road frequently, but also provides me with enough flexibility that I can turn down clients (but alas also the income that comes with them which I can ill afford).  I am also divorced, and provide almost all childcare for my grandchildren, ages six and seven, so my daughter can work, and as you might guess from the grandchildren part, I'm not all that young.

    I've turned down clients I can ill afford to pass on to free up hours to help John win this primary.  I have literally worn a hole in my left tennis shoe and acquired an extremely painful heel spur, walking two precincts in addition to my own.  I have spent so much time on the blogs and so much time phone-canvassing, that even the work I currently have for a reduced client load is backlogged.  I watched a movie after we had to stop calling on election night - the first time my television has been turned on since last spring when I first got involved in this primary.  

    I am exhausted, mentally, physically and financially, but would frankly have reached down and pulled out more to get a good Progressive candidate I think has a good shot at getting elected for my congressman.

    But if you think I am going to put my life on hold until November (and this is two election cycles in a row where I have) to expend that sort of effort for a candidate I frankly think we will all be back here talking about primarying (if he should by some miracle get elected) in two years as the "new Lipinski" and who I honestly and sincerely don't think could win an election against Oberweis unless he receives both a personality transplant and a stunning level of financial support within from elsewhere, say, the next week or so because the special is just one month away, you have to be crazy.

    And am sorry if that sounds like a personal insult, it wasn't meant to be, it was just meant to reflect the level of incredulous disbelief with which I think the typical Laesch volunteer will greet the suggestion that we throw "our support" to Foster if he should win, because I honestly don't think people saying this have a good grasp on the definition of "our support."  

    "Our support" is a thing beyond our votes, is tied deeply to our belief that John actually connects with voters in a way that means he could beat a Republican in an R+5 district, and to our agreement with his progressive positions on the issues, and I do not think the depth of it (not to mention the personal financial blow of it, the foot soaks and the lost voices from phone banking suffering of it, the mental fatigue of doing nothing all at else with your spare time of it) has been calculated into your thinking.

    So I think those who are calling for an extraordinary level of support to take this seat, if Foster does win the primary, should think about taking a leave of absence from their jobs, their families, and their lives, and putting the kind of work into getting him elected that Laesch supporters have been putting in for near to a year, before you ask us to throw "our support" behind this Blue Dog.  If Foster wins over Laesch, I'd suggest to you that will be time for the people who think the priority should be to take this seat, even if the goal is to elect a Blue Dog so long as he has a D after his name, to step up and put this kind of work into Foster's campaign, before you ask us to do more, because we progressives have been stepping up in IL-14.  

    Foster's entire field team for this primary consists of 70 workers hired and brought in from the failed Dodd campaign in Iowa.  If he does ultimately win this primary against John, I think he's going to need to hire more.

    by Downtowner on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 05:18:38 AM PDT

    •  I agree with all 3 of you above

      I'm not giving up but we must face the fact that the ultimate catastrophe is an Oberweis win.  That old "the enemy of my enemy is my....well...er... someone I have to deal with until we can get someting better" certainly applies here.  As distasteful as it may be, we must vote for Foster.  Without John, there's no choice.

      At the Dem Ball in Dixon a week ago Foster came over to our table and I introduced us as the Laesch group and he said that on Feb 6th we'll all be Democrats. That's the first thing I heard him say I agree with and he's right. I'm not sure Foster even has the financial staying power for two elections against Ob.    

      by Joseph Stupec on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 05:42:01 AM PDT

      •  He's pretty much

        screwed I think.  It's one thing to bury a progressive candidate whose supporters are giving to him in $5, $10, $15 increments in millions worth of TV ads to win, it's another alltogether to think his dwindling fortune can do that to the massively wealthy Oberweis, and from a sheerly analytical point of view, that is most scary of all, because Foster has no other game at all to this point.  And only four weeks to get and execute a brilliant new one?

        by Downtowner on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 05:52:00 AM PDT

      •  And maybe so, Joe

        but there's a vast world of difference between Joe Stupec voting for Foster "no matter how distasteful that may be" and Joe Stupec showing up at the campaign office every morning with delicious pastries and a warm welcome and getting everyone situated and directing traffic and organizing sign drop offs, and answering the phone and keeping everyone's morale up, and always, always pitching in wherever he's needed, etc, etc, etc.

        Don't think this fellow volunteer doesn't appreciate all that you do.

        by Downtowner on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 06:00:18 AM PDT

      •  I'm coming in this afternoon.

        Tell Jen to call Dick Simpson immediatally.  Nap time.

        by llbear on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 07:26:24 AM PDT

    •  thankyou for all that you do & did NT

      by daddy4mak on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 06:33:57 AM PDT

    •  DT, you've express my feelings

      exactly.

      Thank you for that.

      And thank you for all you did for the campaign.  So many of the volunteers have spent the last couple of years working hard to get this candidate elected.  And when I hear fools at this website expressing with extreme audacity that the campaign didn't work hard and put in enormous effort (which I heard from SOME Foster supporters here OFTEN), then they shouldn't be a bit surprised when people like me tell them to take a hike.

      Yep, I'll vote for Foster rather than Oberweiss if John doesn't prevail.  But I KNOW it won't do any good.  Oberweiss, for a multitude of reasons, IMHO is going to make mincemeat out of Foster.  Foster has the personality and charisma of 2-day old white bread.  He doesn't connect.

      by edwardssl on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 02:14:49 PM PDT

    •  Wow, this comment is really worthy of being

      its own diary.

      Well put.

      by homerun on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 04:12:31 PM PDT

      •  you are so right...i practically cried

        Lisa B. is an inspiration.

        by daddy4mak on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 04:41:06 PM PDT

    •  I do understand where you...

      ...are coming from.  I experienced it to a lesser degree in 06.

      However to win in IL-14 you will need everyone pulling in the same direction.  The margin if a Democrat wins in IL-14 will be measured by less that 2% in my guess.  So it comes down to a difficult personal choice, support the person you put some much effort in beating in the primary or settling in for a long Republican incumbency.

      On a personal note I suggest that you do not invest so much into ANY politician.  But that is just my opinion.

      by delver rootnose on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 08:45:32 PM PDT

      •  that's only true if it's a party line decision

        when people can't really tell the difference, they'll go for their party..

        But if you have an inspiring candidate who is actually very different on some key issues, you might consider voting for him, even if he/she doesn't agree with everything you stand for.

        this is why John Edwards always showed in national polls to be beating every republican out there. He actually represented something really different.

        People want to toss the status quo...republicans are the status quo. Putting up a democrat that acts like a republican isnt' giving a real choice to people.

        as a side note, your last line is almost insulting...if one believes in ideas, and those ideas represented in a candidate...they should be commended for putting the level of effort put forth by JDL supporters

        by daddy4mak on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 09:13:45 PM PDT

        •  well sorry if I seemed ..

          ...insulting but politicians are people and rarely live up to the ideals passionate supporters create.

          Great effort is to be admired but I do not think should neglect their own well being for someone who does not love you personally, especially since it weakens you for further efforts.

          by delver rootnose on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 09:36:46 PM PDT

          •  This is another mistake

            that people often make about Laesch supporters.  This is not about our "feelings" or about John.  This is about a candidate who we can see is electable and one of the rare ones out there right now who agrees with where most Americans stand on the issues and isn't isn't afraid to say so in public.

            Nor, would you call it "passion" if you had ever slogged through long, rote, repetitive phone calls, or canvassing conversations.  It's often slogging boring dull work.

            I don't find it insulting, I just find it sadly and persistently missing the point: John's supporters support him because we have studied the candidates and asked them where they stand, and he's the one who isn't afraid to talk it through, listen to new ideas from the voters, and, yes, I've seen him incorporate something someone said in a position paper more than once. We are high-information voters.  I have myself stood toe to toe with John, told him he's flat wrong about an issue, wrangled with him for months about it, buried him in research about it, then watched him ask a whole bunch of other random people he meets out and about what they think about that issue and listen to what they say.

            So we study all the candidates, make the logical choice of the one who supports the will of the American people on issues like Iraq, and healthcare, and the fair trade, and is willing to keep thinking and learning from just random people in the street, and make a logical choice to support him over a Blue Dog and we are told we are "passionate" about our candidate, when the fact is John's supporters are intellectually engaged with him, because he's intellectually engaged with the American people.  He doesn't read his handlers talking points from cards at formal debates, he has honest to God two-way debates about the issues with random people he meets in diners.

            Staff John for a visit to a diner, where your average candidate would have a talking point or two at hand and would shake hands all around and your job, because you are staffing John, is to do your damndest to keep him on schedule for his upcoming interview, appointment, etc, because what's going to happen is a spontaneous town hall meeting, where they are talking just as much as John, and you can't get him to stop listening and asking questions.

            What we mean when we say John is engaged with the voters - and his supporters - is that we are intellectually engaged with him in a never-ending debate on the issues, as he is with us.  I find it tragically sad that people persist in believing or characterizing the intellectual engagement of any candidate with the voters as some sort of mindless hero-worship.  I think this phrase is bandied about to much, but that right there is "what's wrong with our political system."

            We don't have ideals about John, we have debates with him.  And I think I can safely say I am not about to have my bubble sadly burst by John's inability to live up with them, considering the fact that I tell him I think he's wrong on a running basis whenever I think he is.  Which is a hell of a lot more often than I expect you think.

            And thank you for your concern, but like I said,  for a John supporter my effort was not atypical.  We just pushed ourselves hard because active Dems here are spread pretty thin, and the rare electible progressive came along we thought we could put over the top in a Republican district - and because no less than full-out full-on effort is required to put such a grassroots candidate over the top in a Republican district, or against an onslaught of paid marketing from the guy who isn't talking to voters.

            If John wins this primary, as he still might, I expect we will be back to the salt mines, but if he doesn't I don't expect we're going to find another electible Dem candidate to take this district for another couple of decades at least.  And that, not the possibility of John's loss in and of itself, is the only thing about this that has me near to tears.

            I've promised to do some blogging for some good local Dem candidates, but this extraordinary nexus of opportunity, electible candidate, and timing is not something I expect to come again in my back yard within my lifetime.

            by Downtowner on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:02:32 AM PDT

          •  John Leasch is a great candidate I don't love

            I can't tell you much about him personally.  I haven't spent a full hour with him let alone days and weeks it takes to really know somebody.  

            The only time I tried to eat with him was two weeks ago at a coffee shop.  He spent the whole time meeting everyone else who was there - which is typical.

            What I'm attempting to do is elect someone who will listen to my point of view, will argue honestly with me when he or she believes I'm wrong, and will vote for what they believe is in my best interests rather than what is politically expedient.  John does that.  That's all I ask.

            by llbear on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 11:06:49 AM PDT

    •  Foster's positions are sensible

      Thank you, DT, for taking the time to debate these issues. I understand your point about support being a thing beyond our votes. Obviously, you have invested yourself tremendously for John Laesch's cause.

      Let me start by telling you why I support Bill Foster. I am a parent. My wife and I both work full time in order to afford a middle-class life style and maintain health insurance. Unfortunately, our relatives do not live close by so our two-year-old son goes to day care ten hours a day. Suffice it to say, I've not done any door-to-door canvassing.

      My biggest concern is the federal deficit -- $9 trillion or roughly $30,000 for every American. Our country is obliged to pay that money back. Sooner or later, we will have no choice but to raise taxes AND cut spending.

      I absolutely agree with Bill Foster when he says that it's "immoral to leave each of our children with tens of thousands of dollars of government debt, just because our generation wants to receive more government services and payments than we are willing to ourselves pay for." Therefore, I consider his position on healthcare to be sensible and pragmatic. Sure, I would love a new government entitlement. But, there's no such thing as a free lunch.

      As for Iran, there is a long-standing tenet in international law that "preemptive war is justified by an imminent threat of attack, a clear and present danger that the country in question is about to attack you. In such a case a preemptive attack is recognized as justifiable." (See this article.) Bill Foster is not the only Democratic candidate to differ from Laesch on this point. Jotham Stein described Laesch’s stance (i.e., against a pre-emptive war in Iran no matter the impetus) as "extreme."

      As for immigration, there is no justification for discriminating against a person or group on the basis of ethnicity, culture, or language. If I thought for a second that Foster's position was even remotely based in racist nativism, I would not support him.

      Fosters principles for immigration reform are:

      --Avoid breaking up families.
      --Minimize economical impact on businesses. Special worker visa programs should be established for industries that cannot meet their needs with documented U.S. citizens, and for immigrants with special skill sets.
      --The number of worker visas issued should reflect the actual unmet need for workers and not be used as a tool to drive wages down for U.S. citizens.
      --"Impact Fees" paid by businesses hiring workers from visa programs should fully cover the additional burden of non-citizen immigrants on our schools, police, and health care systems.
      --Do not reward those who jumped in line. Those who crossed the border illegally should be in line for citizenship behind those waiting in their home countries, and those undocumented immigrants who qualify and choose to stay in the U.S. as part of a worker-visa program should be subject to the non-citizen "Impact Fees" until such time as they may qualify for citizenship.

      I have heard people describe Foster's proposal for a  tamper-proof Worker Identification Card as "scary" but I really don't get that. I had to register for the draft when I was 18. I have a tamper-prone Social Security Card that enables just about the dumbest crook to wreak havoc with my credit. What's the big deal?

      Finally, as for Foster's debating skills, I've heard this rumor but I've not witnessed it myself. Frankly, I'm not certain what impact it will have. I doubt those debates will be televised. Like it or not, I think many voters get their information via web sites and sound bytes--and Bill comes across just fine in those media.

      Well, I think that's enough for this epistle. Until the next time....

      by Gaelic American on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 09:39:00 PM PDT

      •  There is a difference...

        ...between preventive attack and preemptive attack.

        What you describe above is a preventive attack not a preemptive attack.  What we did in Iraq was a preemptive attack.

        by delver rootnose on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 10:29:12 PM PDT

      •  All the tweaking

        Foster can do to his website in reaction to the word being out among the Latino community on his employee id card stand, is not going to change the fact that the word is out in the Latino community on his voter id card stand.  Frankly, any candidate who started this cycle pandering to the Republican efforts to incite anti-brown feelings on this issue, has done our local community a grave disservice in continuing the politics of hate.  I don't accuse Foster of doing so out of any personal anti-brown sentiment, I accuse him of putting his foot thoughtlessly into a volatile social situationthat he does not understand, wherein actual people are in danger, because he is disengaged from the local community and tends to want to apply technological solutions to people-oriented issues.

        Foster's position on healthcare will maintain a for-profit health care system that insures that the insurance industries, not the healthcare system, are taking the lion's share of the healthcare dollar - estimates range from 60% to 80% of healthcare dollars going to insurance companies.  Foster's position will insure, likewise, that these insurers, not Americans and their doctors, are making the lions share of decisions about treatment, a situation which one notable diariest here has described, I think appropriately, as "murder by spreadsheet."  You are preaching to a deadly well-informed voter on this particular issue - I am a leukemia survivor who is not only uninsured, but uninsurable, and my household and my daughter's household, are on the verge of medical bankruptcy because of that history and her Type I diabetes.  I have seen my daughter's life recently endangered by the current state of our profit-driven healthcare system.  So until you are driven, by such an endangerment of a loved one, to look hard enough at the details of Foster's healthcare position, to discover what the facts really are, I expect you will continue to view it as "good enough."  Trust me, it isn't.  Nor is it in any way economically logical or sound.  Brilliant he may be, but on this issue he is woefully underinformed and flat out wrong.  

        Pre-emptive war, as described by international law, presumes the threat of imminent attack by a foreign nation and is defensive in nature, a sequence of events that is as unlikely in the case of Iran as it was in the case of Iraq.  Moreover, it was a departure in the case of Iraq from the entire history of this country in relation to war.  Good Dems need to stand up in public and be willing to say they are not willing let Bush's Iraq disaster stand as the new precedent for how we go to war in future, and our current discussion about Iran presumes that Iraq is now somehow an acceptable precedent.  This is a deal-breaker issue for most progressives, and many, many Dems.

        As I said to delver rootnose above, Foster will find that most Laesch supporters are high information voters, and his handlers pre-prepared responses are not answering our questions, or our concerns.

        by Downtowner on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:35:54 AM PDT

  •  Foster's has an expensive group of volunteers

    AFSCME - who wants something out of Rahm will be out there working. They will be required to.  Sort of like Gaelic American formerly known as Redheaded Liberal.

    Then there is the semi-pro teams formed in Iowa - not native to the district & have no prior connections to the area.

    The Laesch campaign will be picking up AFSCME - absent her - Congressman Phil Hare's people in Whiteside County and a few hundred Obama supporters with nothing to do locally until the Wisconsin primary.

    We'll thrive.

    by llbear on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 05:21:09 AM PDT

•  Thanks downtowner

  Just wanted to offer my deepest gratitude to you and all the others who worked amazingly hard on this primary.  

  Thank you!  You rock.

  by raisin on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 09:42:50 AM PDT

  •  Thank you

    you rock a bit yourself.  We need to get YOU elected county clerk.

    by Downtowner on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:12:57 AM PDT

•  Thanks for the IL-14 diaries

  Hopefully you'll keep posting update diaries on IL-14, at least until the final result is known? (and of course through the upcoming vote, if Laesch can pull this one out)

  A pity this IL-14 race never hit the Dkos front page, to my knowledge, (tho Pera in IL-03 did get a lot of mention there, which was nice.)

  Good luck John gaining those 365 votes!

  by homerun on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 04:10:11 PM PDT

  •  I went to all 9

    websites and got the final totals (looking for a loophole) and I get a total difference of 355.  Let us pray: now i lay me down to sleep...........

    by Joseph Stupec on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 07:55:50 PM PDT