tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post702025392879869648..comments2024-03-26T13:05:52.830-05:00Comments on For What It's Worth: Lessons learned from Electoral Board actions... could ballot access rules be relaxed?Jack Leyhanehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15884163579967286888noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-65800448391714487822018-02-14T21:23:39.216-06:002018-02-14T21:23:39.216-06:00No new campaign gossip? Has there been a verdict i...No new campaign gossip? Has there been a verdict in the Jessica O'Brien trial?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-13280660213127715162018-02-14T15:49:26.750-06:002018-02-14T15:49:26.750-06:00LIKE I TOLD YOU BACK IN THE MIDDLE OF DECEMBER, EV...LIKE I TOLD YOU BACK IN THE MIDDLE OF DECEMBER, EVERY 6TH SUBCIRCUIT CANDIDATE STAYED ON THE BALLOT. I AM LATINO AND I UNDERSTAND THE 6TH SUBCIRCUIT. WEBBER JUST MAY BEAT BEACH AND UNDERHILL, IT IS THE YEAR OF THE WOMAN.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-21243529551160264242018-02-14T11:58:29.967-06:002018-02-14T11:58:29.967-06:00Anon 2/11 @ 10:26 p.m.wrote "You want real re...Anon 2/11 @ 10:26 p.m.wrote "<i>You want real reform? Why do independents have to file almost 10 times the number of signatures as democrats? Because Madigan wants no opposition, that's why.</i>"<br /><br />Um, Anon, why this obsession with Mr. Madigan? I'm no insider, but I'd bet you a box of donuts that this is an area in which there is unanimous, bipartisan agreement. Nor is this a new requirement. Madigan wasn't a pup when political wiseguys froze out independents in Illinois. Lincoln may not have been a pup then either.<br /><br />Anon 2/11 @6:05 p.m., who thinks the signature requirements entirely too loose, also wrote, "<i>I bet the Republicans let the guy [Arthur Jones, a professed Holocaust denier] on the ballot [in the 3rd Congressional Dist.] just so that Madigan would have to put some effort into ensuring that the nazi doesn't win.</i>"<br /><br />Well, Anon, a couple of things. First, the Republicans didn't "let" Jones on the ballot. He gathered the required signatures and filed the required paperwork. That part of the process is open to anyone who is willing to meet the prerequisites.<br /><br />Second, I think you're giving "the Republicans" entirely too much credit here.<br /><br />William Lipinski, the incumbent's father, faced no opposition in the 2002 general election. In 2004, after William Lipinski had bequeathed the seat to his son, Krista Grimm ran as a write-in Republican, losing by roughly a 33-1 margin.<br /><br />In 2006, Lipinski defeated Ray Wardingley. You may remember him better as Spanky the Clown. Wardingley was the last Republican candidate for Mayor of Chicago, in 1995. In 2006 <a href="https://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/ward-room/The-Chicago-GOP-Clowns-Nazis-and-Boobs-90229752.html" rel="nofollow">Wardingley bested the very same Nazi nutball who's running unopposed this year in the 3rd District Republican primary</a>.<br /><br />In 2008, Lipinski bested Michael Hawkins; in 2010, he beat Michael Bendas. In 2012, the Republican standard-bearer was Richard L. Grabowski. In 2014, the Republican candidate was Sharon M. Brannigan. (Last year, Brannigan resigned her post as a Palos Township trustee because of Facebook comments about immigrants from the Middle East.) None of these are what you might call household names.<br /><br />In 2016, the Republicans had no candidate at all against Lipinski.<br /><br />So, Anon, in imagining that Republicans conspired to run Jones---why anyone would do this I can't imagine, but whatever---you give the Republicans entirely too much credit. There are Republican voters in the 3rd Congressional District, but no recognizable Republican party. The "two-party system" is a sham in CD3 as it is in most places in Illinois (in most places Downstate, it's the Democrats who don't exist as an organized entity).<br /><br />Finally, about those signature requirements: It took all of 603 signatures for Nazi Jones to qualify for the Republican primary in CD3. That compares to the 8,075 signatures required to run for the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District as a Democrat this year. Well, you say, apples to oranges -- so, OK, it would have taken 3,206 signatures to get on the primary ballot for the MWRD as a Republican. (And only two filed as Republicans for the five MWRD vacancies... because there is, for all intents and purposes, no Republican Party in Cook County.)<br /><br />It also shows you which offices the professional pols think important. As Richard J. Daley might have said, back in the Bad Old Days, a Congressman has no jobs worth having, and most of those are out of town besides. Anyway, Anon, the signature requirements aren't particularly loose for those offices that the professional pols think to be important.<br /><br />Jack Leyhanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15884163579967286888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-1602838824593178472018-02-12T23:01:53.664-06:002018-02-12T23:01:53.664-06:00Jack is such a bad MOFO that folks don't want ...Jack is such a bad MOFO that folks don't want to open their doors. Go figure.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-16480209852194555252018-02-11T22:26:59.757-06:002018-02-11T22:26:59.757-06:00You want real reform? Why do independents have to ...You want real reform? Why do independents have to file almost 10 times the number of signatures as democrats? Because Madigan wants no opposition, that's why.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-50233236444426763122018-02-11T18:05:00.545-06:002018-02-11T18:05:00.545-06:00The signature requirement is already too loose. A...The signature requirement is already too loose. After all, we have a Nazi running for Congress. The fine folks of the Lipinski/Madigan Third Congressional District (also home of the Third Cook Subcircuit) just put a Nazi on the ballot. And no, I don't mean the current Congressman for that If a Nazi can get signatures but these democratic committeemen can't, well, that tells me that the problem isn't with "looking scary" or "police warnings to not open your doors," but rather that the Democratic Party ain't worth a damn and that its committeemen are too lazy to do the necessary work to get and stay on the ballot. I bet the Republicans let the guy on the ballot just so that Madigan would have to put some effort into ensuring that the nazi doesn't win. Remember the Governor's race of 1986 and the Larouchies? Yep. This has those same undertones, but on a smaller level. Go get 'em Mike.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-37697498693967992462018-02-10T15:17:24.040-06:002018-02-10T15:17:24.040-06:00Wow, posts that evoke 2 responses from Jack. "...Wow, posts that evoke 2 responses from Jack. "Reform" Spurs such debate. I just want to know the name of the lawyer who is knocking off these candidates and hire him or her next cycle! I also want Howard Brookins as my only opponent because I will be running unopposed really quick.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-76162577075054750062018-02-10T14:30:47.453-06:002018-02-10T14:30:47.453-06:00Very nice blog Jack. You used your "snow day...Very nice blog Jack. You used your "snow day " well. I certainly agree with the comments about the paid circulators as you get what you pay for. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-24866856639362371692018-02-10T14:00:19.550-06:002018-02-10T14:00:19.550-06:00Anon 2/10 @8:24 a.m. -- I congratulate you on your...Anon 2/10 @8:24 a.m. -- I congratulate you on your success. I don't think I'm particularly scary, but I kind of like your explanation.<br /><br />But let's not confuse things. If I could get someone to open the door, I generally got a signature. The hard part was getting someone to open the door -- and that's the part that I think may well be getting harder and harder.Jack Leyhanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15884163579967286888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-61489303029067580632018-02-10T13:55:24.162-06:002018-02-10T13:55:24.162-06:00Anon 2/10 at 8:19 a.m. -- I think you thought you ...Anon 2/10 at 8:19 a.m. -- I think you thought you were disagreeing with me. You wrote, "<i>They will talk the talk and take your money for 'slating' but in the end they are just stealing your money and only 'reform' when the system no longer works for them.</i>"<br /><br />But I think that was basically what I said. Only I didn't accuse anyone of stealing. I don't see how making such an accusation helps anything.<br /><br />Here's the deal: Those in power seek first and foremost to remain there. They won't purposefully loosen the reins, even a smidge, for anyone else -- but opportunity arises when those in power "have problems" with the status quo. Of <i>course</i> they're doing it for their own benefit... but if some of the rest of us might benefit also, isn't that a good thing?<br /><br />As for "fraud" -- this is such a loaded word. When one goes door to door, one can more readily verify that persons are signing in their proper names. When soliciting signatures in a parking lot or tavern it is harder to verify that persons are really registered and really signing their own names. One can easily ferret out the wiseacres who sign as Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck -- but one may fail to catch the juvenile humor in the purported signatures of Ben and Eileen Dover or Ignatius P. Daly. A high failure rate <i>may</i> be indicative of deliberate fraud... but it may not be. I've seen 'pattern of fraud' raised in a great number of petition objections in this and other election cycles -- but the existence of such a pattern is, for whatever reason, not typically found as a fact in most resolutions.<br /><br />And if some vendors/consultants have, um, colorful pasts, well, that's a matter of public record (especially where a matter has resulted in an Appellate Court opinion). Candidates should investigate the background of <i>anyone</i> they hire -- but the candidate who refuses to deal with anyone who is not purer than Caesar's wife is likely to wind up not dealing with anyone at all. Good luck getting elected that way. On the other hand, a person who has previously cut corners and has been punished for same should know better than anyone what is permissible and what is not. You, the candidate, should have standards and expectations and insist that anyone assisting you adhere to those standards. But I don't think that you can expect any formal regulation of political professionals that is in any way similar to the regulations which we must adhere to as lawyers.Jack Leyhanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15884163579967286888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-10840615314672398962018-02-10T08:24:40.335-06:002018-02-10T08:24:40.335-06:00Jack,
You must be a scary guy. I had -- tops -- 1...Jack,<br /><br />You must be a scary guy. I had -- tops -- 10 people not sign my sheets. The other 4,392 were impressed that I knocked on their doors. Consistency and assertiveness pays off. Laziness and sloth yields whining when you are deservedly tossed off. How many sheets did Coplan, Karkula, Brookins, Sumner or Silverstein pass for themselves? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-54771847340895730442018-02-10T08:19:53.798-06:002018-02-10T08:19:53.798-06:00The signature requirement is 1,000. Not 5,000. Not...The signature requirement is 1,000. Not 5,000. Not 8,000. But a measly 1,000. The real story here is that none of these committeemen have people to do the work. They will talk the talk and take your money for "slating" but in the end they are just stealing your money and only "reform" when the system no longer works for them. Brookins and Silverstein didn't even try to get good signatures. I wonder how many of hose "circulators" even exist or how many empty lots or bar stools in the 21 and 49 wards were listed as addresses. You knock on the doors of people who live in their areas and ask the voters for their opinion of either of these individuals and you are likely to get an earful. Well over 80 candidates have filed to be on the ballot this year and the overwhelming majority got their signatures. But the moment Howie and Ira and Toad have problems people start demanding "reform." Ok. Why don't we reform the election code so that when people commit election fraud they are permanently banned from circulating petitions. I have read repeated articles this cycle about that convicted FELON still circulating for candidates despite the fact that he committed fraud in connection to signature collection. Why don't we reform THAT. Here's the kicker, he advertised collecting signatures for winning judicial candidate currently on trial in federal court for mortgage fraud. Hmm. That's a confidence builder.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com