Political Punch

Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Previous | Main | Next »

The Prism of that Illinois House Race

March 09, 2008 2:58 PM

In the special election to replace retiring House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Illinois, Democrat Bill Foster beat Republican Jim Oberweis, 53%-47%.

"In a stunning upset Saturday that could be a sign of trouble for Republicans this fall, a little-known Democratic physicist won the special election for a far west suburban congressional seat long held by former GOP House Speaker Dennis Hastert," writes the Chicago Tribune.

"In a major blow to the Republican Party, Democratic former physicist Bill Foster on Saturday took the solidly Republican far west suburban seat held for the last 21 years by former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert," proclaims the Chicago Sun-Times.

Not surprisingly, Obama supporters are selling the result as a sort of proxy Obama-McCain face-off, since Obama did a TV ad for Foster, while McCain stumped for Oberweis.

There's another way to look at the race, though. Clearly Foster was comfortable having Obama campaign for him even though the district is something like 2-to-1 Republican.

Does anyone know if any of the Democrats running for Congress in 2006 in Republican-leaning seats had Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, campaign for them so publicly?

I ask because Clinton heralds the fact that she won over Republican voters in her state. But there were some hotly contests Democratic House races in New York two years ago, and Clinton was on the top of the ticket. And I'm pretty certain she didn't appear in any TV ads for an of those Democrats -- ultimately victorious now-Reps. Michael Arcuri and Kirsten Gillibrand not to mention long shot Rep. John Hall (formerly of the band Orleans).

Thoughts?

-jpt

March 9, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (47)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I'm a Democrat in Foster's district. I worked hard for Foster, lived through the nail-biting Saturday night returns, and cheered myself hoarse at his victory party. It still hasn't completely sunk in for me. My bedrock Republican district, which has had a virtual party hegemony at a local level and a Republican Rep. in Congress every day of my entire life, against all odds and expectations, and despite vicious negative attack ads and huge financial advantages for the other side, voted in a Democrat. The world has rocked on its axis, and we who witness it are practically stunned speechless. I can't overstate the shock factor of all this- Foster won in places that we thought were nearly impossible to win.

Any of you who don't get that this is largely thanks to Obama campaigning for Foster just don't understand what things are like in my district, or how those Obama ads were received. This is so big, on so many levels- it's such a CHANGE! If Foster wants to retain his seat in November, it would help HUGELY to have Obama at the top of our ticket, to push up Democratic turnout once again. This is our chance to turn a little more of that Red into Blue.

Obama likes to say that when we are asked if we can make a difference, we need to say, Yes We Can. Foster said in his speech on Saturday (and now I can say from my own personal experience): Yes We Did, and Yes We Will.

Posted by: DuPage Democrat | Mar 10, 2008 6:14:21 PM

Obama campaigned for Lieberman and Clinton campaigned for LeMont. Doesn't make sense, since lieberman has been pro-war and Le Mont was anti-war.

You have to ask where does he really come down to on this issue a speech or his statements and votes since being in the US Senate.

Posted by: Melissa | Mar 10, 2008 10:01:54 AM

I can't believe this man, he could campiagn for Foster but, he couldn't show up for the State of the Black Union in New Orleans. (Hillary was there) This man really does have a huge ego, just like George Bush.

Posted by: Melissa | Mar 10, 2008 9:58:18 AM

Dogsoldier,
I doubt very seriously if TCG supports Hillary's competitor. He's a smart guy, seems to support a Republican agenda, stated in a previous blog that he was a Huckabee backer and has significantly adapted his writing style to become more engaging in this blog. I guess its conceivable he shifted to support the other candidate, anticipating how the winds will blow in November for the R candidate. Day by day this thing shifts in Hillary's favor, so we have to continue to be vigilant against the emotional diatribes here.

Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Mar 10, 2008 1:10:22 AM

Obama thinks that guy winning is all because of him.

Now if that is not Egotistical, self-righteous crap. The man has no shame and would stoop to anything.

Posted by: seah | Mar 10, 2008 1:02:01 AM

Obama was the featured speaker for Joe Lieberman at his largest re-election fundraiser against Lamont. He called Lieberman his mentor, and stressed how he was "sorely" needed back in Washington.

Should that be considered a plus or minus for Obama.

We certainly know how Lieberman feels about the Democratic party, and "how much help he has been to us", and our end the war effort! Also, not surprisingly Lieberman has endorsed McCain for president

Hillary Clinton also supported Lieberman , I think.

Posted by: Mike | Mar 10, 2008 12:53:15 AM

Change is difficult, but necessary!

Posted by: Jack | Mar 10, 2008 12:53:09 AM

Why is it that so many supporters of Senators Clinton and Obama feel the need to demonize each other? Neither of the candidates are perfect.

After 8 years of Bush this country needs radical fixing. Personally, I strongly support Barrack. And believe it or not, I'm not naive about the man and his character. Nor are the vast majority of his supporters. I'm also confidant that Hillary's people feel the same about her.

In truth they voted the same way on 64 of 66 senate issues. So there is really little difference in policy. Their styles are what seems to distinguish them.

So why can't the real issues of change from the Republican approach to settling the country's problems be what we are discussing? What does it matter if we gain the nomination and lose the war against the GOP.

Posted by: DaCoach | Mar 10, 2008 12:33:45 AM

Pat,
Yes. and Obama is also this generation's mood ring. The suckers who voted for him saw all good at first but now it changed color

Posted by: geevill | Mar 9, 2008 11:10:02 PM

TCG good points. I suggest what is important about your posts is your flexibility to discuss with respect. That's so critical because it shows it is quite possible for a Clinton supporter and a Obama supporter to respectfully discuss matters of contention in a civilized manner. That, in my opinion, is the path toward a unified democratic party.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | Mar 9, 2008 10:41:30 PM

Dog

Not calling you out. IT's the people on the inside we elect to act on our behalf who should be held accountable.

It is their job to get things right. It is our job to take care of our families and pay our bills. We count on them to work as hard as we do and they get some big $ and live important lives.

Sometime they take the easy way out. And We all know people who take short cuts in our day to day lives. But there is such a thing a personal responsibility. And I'm calling people out.

These guys took a pass leading up to the war. They did. Kerry wanted to be pres and did not want to look like a wimp. He voted for the war even though he was against it. Hillary did something similar.

Does anyone remember Bill42 taking the position before the SC primaries that he was against the War. First time anyone heard this. So what did Hill and Bill think about the war vote at the time? No one will know. So we are left with the conclusion that she knew it was a bad idea but played along, or was duped by Bush, or was just in over her head.

That is it.

Posted by: The Commander Guy | Mar 9, 2008 10:30:19 PM

TCG none of us knew at the time to what extent Bush was using the intelligence community to cherry pick knowledge that Senators like Clinton received. It was only years later any of us understood the scope of Chaney and Bush's complicity. I do not know about anyone else, but I do try to make decisions on what I know as opposed to what I do not know. However little I may know at that time. Nevertheless, I do look back and sometimes wonder how I could have been so stupid for doing this or that. That's just the way life comes at you I suppose.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | Mar 9, 2008 10:13:52 PM

Westie and Dog

Can trust Colin Powell. And that's understandable. They don't have double top super secret security clearances.

They don't both have access to the inside info, say like BoB Graham who went berserk over the fact that Kerry, Clinton and various other Red State Dems rolled over.

Hillary says she ready on day one. With all the inside info, she wasn't ready that day. She was hoping that Colin would cover her back...but that's not a luxury a statesman has.

Posted by: The Commander Guy | Mar 9, 2008 10:09:15 PM

Westie and Dog

Can trust Colin Powell. And that's understandable. They don't have double top super secret security clearances.

They don't both have access to the inside info, say like BoB Graham who went apolpleptic

Posted by: The Commander Guy | Mar 9, 2008 9:55:41 PM

WCM, I really did trust Powell as the one in Bush's cabinet to guide me through that mess at the time because he was the outside guy I thought. Anyway, TCG, I suggest every democrat held their finger in the wind on this one. And I further suggest it was the American public feelings itself, at that time, who caused many to vote as they did. Should we hold all democrats this Iraq war vote as a new standard then we'd have approximately ten democrats left on congress at all.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | Mar 9, 2008 9:55:18 PM

'Mandie, that wind was blowing at above 80 per cent, I would have too.

Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Mar 9, 2008 9:50:18 PM

Dogsoldier, you can add WestCoastMessenger to that list. I'm not easily shnookered and trusted Colin Powell immensely. This was a moment of a fall from grace for all the United States of America has ever stood for. Unfortunately, Powell caved to other hawks and here we are billions of dollars later, mired in a muck.

Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Mar 9, 2008 9:48:51 PM

Westie

She had her finger in Da Wind prior to the Irak War Vote.

Not exactly a profile in courage.

Posted by: The Commander Guy | Mar 9, 2008 9:46:34 PM

TCG, good points. Regards to Hillary Iraq vote, I'm from the center, center small right of democratic party and I too at the time this vote was taken believed what Bush, the news media and especially Colin Powell reported because of all the Bush cabinet I trusted Powell. Now, many in Obama's camp itself voted for that same Iraq war vote including Kerry, Dashle and so on. I do not hold it against them because I believed as well. It would be foolish for me to say otherwise. So I have no problem with Clinton's vote.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | Mar 9, 2008 9:44:27 PM

Poor Poor Barrack Obama

He should list all his campaign donators.

He should list the charities he gave stolen money to from his campaign fund.


Since he said Rezko and company only game him at the most 20k, then it went up to 60k, now he has given away 168k.


Wonder if he has any money lurking from other shady characters?.....

Wonder how he pays his high level staff.

They working for nothing HAHAHAHAHA yea sure for how long now?

Posted by: seah | Mar 9, 2008 9:42:43 PM

Post a comment





 

POLITICAL VIDEOS