Golly, it seems like eons ago, but checking up on it, it was less than forty-eight hours ago that I wrote this:
Needless to say, for the NRSC and the Republicans in Washington, Kirk is preferable to whatever second-string state legislator the party could have persuaded to run.
Turns out, the veracity of that statement can now be called into question:
Illinois Rep. Mark Kirk (R) will not run for the open seat of Sen. Roland Burris (D) in 2010, a stunning reversal from just 48 hours ago when Kirk signaled to National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn (Texas) that he would make the race.
Kirk's decision...followed a meeting of the Illinois Republican congressional delegation on Thursday in which his colleagues refused to back Kirk in a primary against Illinois Republican Party Chairman Andy McKenna due, in large part, to his vote in favor of President Barack Obama's climate change bill.
So, to recap: Kirk's own House colleagues, whom he has worked alongside for the better part of a decade, were unwilling to stand by him because he sided with the President ONCE. Kirk dutifully joined the party of NO on the stimulus, badmouthed the President to the Chinese, and voted against the budget.
Not good enough. He had one brief moment of independence. And in the Republican Party, even in a blue state like Illinois where occasional apostasy from the GOP party line might be a prerequisite, independence is not to be tolerated.
This is stunning, because Kirk seemed to be the GOP's only chance at political redemption here. With Lisa Madigan out of the mix, Kirk was a Republican whose occasional bipartisanship (and it is only occasional) might have kept him close to the Democratic nominee. Recent polling bore this out: Kirk might not have been leading presumptive Democratic frontrunner Alexi Giannoulias, but he was either tied or slightly trailing. Within striking distance.
This incessant Republican crusade for absolute and total ideological purity is an awesome sight to behold. When your polling numbers are circling the drain, and 72% of voters have a negative opinion of your party, one might not expect such insistence on strict adherence to a thoroughly rejected political worldview.
Alas, for Mark Kirk, it was not to be so. Now, Andy McKenna, a former state chairman of the Illinois GOP, will be the almost certain nominee against Giannoulias (or, alternatively, one of the other host of Democrats eyeing the race). Kirk's loss is certainly the Democratic Party's gain.
It is mystifying to think, of course, that the Illinois GOP has deluded itself into thinking that it was also in THEIR party's best interests.
UPDATE (1:37 PM PT): Cilizza is now walking his report back, but only a little bit:
Although Kirk has already told several national Republicans today that he will not run for the Senate, there is an ongoing effort now to convince him to re-think that decision, according to several sources close to the discussions.
(hat tip: NU Fan)
FURTHER UPDATE (3:30 PM PT): CQ takes it a step further, implying that Kirk is not getting out at all. Other sources say he is "mulling it over." All in all, this is a pretty darned dysfunctional bunch.