Trends in IL - GOP Analysis

[muon2]

The Chicago Tribune published a lengthy article analyzing the state GOP going back to 1968. It's a solid article and they explore the roots of the party's problem as it develops over many years. Their conclusions fault many factors that have added up to the current disorganization. It remains to be seen if the new state party chair, Andy McKenna Jr., can rebuild the orgainzation.

Here's the link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0501160322jan16,1,7102893.story?coll=chi-news-hed

[Keystone Phil]

It remains to be seen if the new state party chair, Andy McKenna Jr., can rebuild the orgainzation.

He's party chair now? Great! I remember I supporting McKenna and Ryan in the Senate primary, thinking they would both make great nominees. Hopefully he can get that party back together. Things aren't looking great but, in my opinion, they can only go up at this point.

[nclib]

Interesting article, although Illinois has been getting more Democratic for some time now. Compared to the national average, Illinois has been trending Democratic every election since 1976.

Illinois margin compared to the national average:

1976 Rep.  4.03
1980 Dem. 1.81
1984 Dem. 4.87
1988 Dem. 5.63
1992 Dem. 8.68
1996 Dem. 8.97
2000 Dem. 11.51
2004 Dem. 12.80

[Moooooo]

Illinois will be a Democratic strong-hold for a long time.  Espeically with that fine new Senator you have.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Interesting article

[CARLHAYDEN]

A very interesting article.

If you check the data on Illinois, you will find that it has more elected local officials than any other state.

The problem is that in Illinois, the Republicans became excessively reliant on the Goveno, and let their local political assets wither away due to nonuse.

In addition, they became largely reliant upon the Democrats screwing up to elect statewide officials.

I suspect that the Illinois Republicans have 'bottomed-out,' and will state a gradual revival.

The revival may be dependent upon the Democrats 'screwing up' again, and on the continuing population movement from Chicago to the suburbs,

Due to the 'screw up' nature of the Republican party organization in Illinois, Bush chose not to seriously contest that state.  If he had, he would have done significantly better than was actually the case.

[Storebought]

This is more or less the same story as Nassau County, NY. A corrupt patronage machine that used tired 1960s Agnewism to maintain control over suburban voters.

The way the self-important "moderates" ran the Illinois GOP (and the NJ- and NY-GOP) is telling as well. In fact, I'd say that their control was the problem:

GOP moderates, then, and to a lesser extent still now, viewed the GOP as an exclusive country club. Sure, they more or less shared the tax-and-spend (oops, I mean, "fiscally conservative") social liberalism of the Democrats, but they just couldn't bear to associate with "those kinds of people" who made up the Democrat Party base. Because of their social elitism, they long sneered at those rude hicks who voted GOP out of conservative instinct. In fact, they still do.

Great example from an interview with self-described Kansas GOP moderate on a PBS documentary about Nancy L Kassebaum's son: "The people to the left of me just need a little work; the people to the right of me are nuts." Indeed.

The social moderates' place in the GOP was unnatural; hence, the outright bribery and leasing of public office to cronies to maintain the moderates' position in government.

Not that a conservative GOP rule in Illinois would have been unbroken, either. Whenever the GOP suffers from a conservative rigor-mortis, they lose at the polls, as the GOP should. But the same sort of contempt for their voter base, Jacksonian-style spoils system, and, yes, immoral conception of politics would never have afflicted a right-leaning  IL GOP as badly as it had.

[phk]

Alan Keyes is part of the reason.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Keyes was just a symptom.

[muon2]

Alan Keyes is part of the reason.

As CARLHAYDEN said, Keyes was only a symptom. As the article points out the problem has been building for a long time. A strong organization would not have seen a need to call upon Keyes in any case.

As an activist, I can confirm the lack of use of the grassroots by the state party. The decline in use has been evident even over the last 10 years. In the 90's there were frequent appeals to precinct organizations in safe areas to move troops to contested districts. These appeals came from state leaders. By 2002 the appeals had dwindled to individual candidate appeals for help. No sign of state influence was present as it had been years before.

Another sign was in one of the county organization's big fundraisers. It used to be set up to have a lower cost tickets that brought out a large turnout among the rank-and-file. That tended to energize the party base. Over recent years the ticket price increased which improved the overall revenue, but sharply decreased turnout. Though many local organizations pointed out the problem with this, the county persisted in going for money rather than people.

[FerrisBueller86]

Ah, my home state until 5 years ago.  I STILL know Illinois politics better than Virginia and Iowa politics.

I can't believe that the Republicans imported Alan Keyes as their Senate candidate.  Couldn't they have run one of the other Republican candidates?  Couldn't they have picked an obscure candidate?  Couldn't they just have run unopposed?  As a Democrat, I am gleeful that the party embarassed itself by running Keyes.  (One funny story I heard - When Republicans were passing out their GOTV flyers listing all their candidates, they excluded Alan Keyes from the list.)

The Republican Party really collapsed from the fallout of the driver license scandal, in which governor George Ryan was eventually implicated.  The importation of Alan Keyes really drove a nail into their coffin.

I'm sure the Republicans will be back, though.  The Illinois Democrats looked dead after the stunning defeats of 1994.  Let's hope the Republican Party cleans up its act.

[BobOMac2k2]

As long as Chicago keeps voting right we will have no problem. And as long as our people keep Ryan (both senate candidate and former Gov.) in mind things will look great for us.

Doesn't hurt that Obama will be around for at least a term and a half.

[Smash255]

This is more or less the same story as Nassau County, NY. A corrupt patronage machine that used tired 1960s Agnewism to maintain control over suburban voters.

The way the self-important "moderates" ran the Illinois GOP (and the NJ- and NY-GOP) is telling as well. In fact, I'd say that their control was the problem:

GOP moderates, then, and to a lesser extent still now, viewed the GOP as an exclusive country club. Sure, they more or less shared the tax-and-spend (oops, I mean, "fiscally conservative") social liberalism of the Democrats, but they just couldn't bear to associate with "those kinds of people" who made up the Democrat Party base. Because of their social elitism, they long sneered at those rude hicks who voted GOP out of conservative instinct. In fact, they still do.

Great example from an interview with self-described Kansas GOP moderate on a PBS documentary about Nancy L Kassebaum's son: "The people to the left of me just need a little work; the people to the right of me are nuts." Indeed.

The social moderates' place in the GOP was unnatural; hence, the outright bribery and leasing of public office to cronies to maintain the moderates' position in government.

Not that a conservative GOP rule in Illinois would have been unbroken, either. Whenever the GOP suffers from a conservative rigor-mortis, they lose at the polls, as the GOP should. But the same sort of contempt for their voter base, Jacksonian-style spoils system, and, yes, immoral conception of politics would never have afflicted a right-leaning  IL GOP as badly as it had.

The Nassau County GOP simply became too comfortable.  In Nassau the GOP pretty much controlled everything (held the county exec's office for 70+ years), same thing with Suffolk County and most of the congressional districts on LI were Republican.  Things started to turn in the 90's starting when Clinton won Nassau County in 1992 as the area was going through some changes and becoming more socially liberal (going back to 1960 the GOP won Nassau every year with the exception of Johnson in 64, and it probably goes back further just can''t look it up now)  Suffolk still went to Bush in 1992, but barley (by 2%).  As the 90's went on the effects on the local level became a bit bigger, but the GOP was still holding on to the major offices.  By 1996  the shift was really on at least on the Presidential level as Clinton won Suffolk by 14% and Nassau by 20%.  As the 90's went on some of the Congressional seats started to slip away from the GOP.  The 2000 Presidential election saw similar results to 1996 in both Nassau & Suffolk.  As this was going on Tom Gullota's approval was dropping fast.  Things got so bad that his own party did not want him to run for re-election in 2001.  Because of his horrible management one of the richest counties in the United States had a junk bond raiting and was in big debt, and this during the most prosperous times in this nation's history.  Tom Suozzi absolutley DEMOLISHED Bruce Bent (won by a 2-1 margin in a county which has more registered Reps them Dems which is basically unheard of in a non-incumbent election).  Rick Lazio soon followed by winning the Suffolk County exec.  Over the past 10-15 years Long Island itself has gone through quite a tranistion.  The area has become more socially liberal and the machine Republican politics which dominated both counties politics for so long or no more. 

In 1988 Bush won both nassau & Suffolk by double digits and the GOP dominated Presidential elections on Long Island over the past 50 years with the exception of Johnson.  In the early 90's 4 of the 5 Long Island Congressman were Republican, and the Republicans owned the Congress on Long Island for many years.  As late as 2000 the GOP had both county executive seats for 70+ years.  Now Nassau has gone Dem in 4 straight Presidental elections, Suffolk 3 straight, 4 of the 5 Congressman from Long Island are Dems, both County executives are now Dems and will win re-election rather easily

[BobOMac2k2]

The GOP's problem isnt disorganization... its their hatred for their own party members.

They forced Fitzgerald from seeking another term and the forced Ryan out of the senate race.

Obama would still be a State Senator if it was for the GOP.

[muon2]

Both parties in IL have plenty of infighting and dislike for fellow party members. The difference is that the GOP has grown more top-heavy with an old guard, and lost touch with the grass roots. That's disorganization. Watch in the next 12 months to see if the GOP can regroup with many new faces mixed with a few regulars, much like the Dems did after their wipe out in 1994.

[Smash255]

The GOP's problem isnt disorganization... its their hatred for their own party members.

They forced Fitzgerald from seeking another term and the forced Ryan out of the senate race.

Obama would still be a State Senator if it was for the GOP.

Ryan would have gotten demolished against Obama regardless, although not as bad as Keyes.  Point about Fitzgereald is a good one though

[BobOMac2k2]

No, before the whole scandal Obama was a nobody.

If Republicans and the press didn't make a big deal about Ryan's divorce you would have had a different Keynote Speaker at the DNC and Ryan might be a Senator now.

[Keystone Phil]

No, before the whole scandal Obama was a nobody.

If Republicans and the press didn't make a big deal about Ryan's divorce you would have had a different Keynote Speaker at the DNC and Ryan might be a Senator now.

I agree. Ryan could have won that election. Obama did have the edge, no doubt about that, however, Ryan could have made the race a lot closer. Obama would have had to actually campaign in Illinois instead of going around the country on behalf of other candidates.

[BobOMac2k2]

I would have voted for Ryan. Obama is just too boring for me.