The New York Times profiled the race on the 3rd:
“I had no money, and lots of people didn’t even know I was running,” she said in an interview. “This time it’s a whole different ball game. People know who I am and what I’m doing.” In recent months, Ms. Bean has nearly kept pace with Mr. Crane’s fund-raising pace and has picked up endorsements from well-heeled national groups like Emily’s List, which supports female candidates.
Several of Mr. Crane’s longtime supporters, however, scoff at suggestions that he is vulnerable. “Where they’re getting the idea that this race is close is beyond me,” State Senator Wendell E. Jones said.
Some people at Friday’s street fair said they thought Ms. Bean had a chance to win.
“She has the strength to go against him,” said Mark Thieme, a 52-year-old postal worker. “There are more young people in the district these days. For a lot of them, Crane is a pretty distant figure.”
Ultimately, this District is Republican, but not nearly as it was when Crane started out–slowly, like the rest of the collar counties, the area is more and more competitive–running a fiscally conservative Democrat who is socially moderate and strong on the environment is the perfect match for this district. While ideally the 10th should be competitive, Mark Kirk is a moderate who is hard to beat. Crane is way right and out of step with that District.
A few feet away, though, Bob Geary, 45, a hotel security director who was sharing a hot dog with his 7-year-old son, said he would stick with Mr. Crane.
“Being in the House of Representatives as long as he has brings money to this state,” Mr. Geary said. “That’s exactly the reason I’m voting for him.”
Although Mr. Crane has made a career of denouncing deficit spending, he has amazed some people, both here and in Washington, by supporting President Bush’s large deficits. That has led Ms. Bean to criticize him as “a deficit hawk who turned into a dove,” but he makes no apologies.
“We’ve had special circumstances,” Mr. Crane said. “The war on terror is a high priority. We have to take care of that first; then we’ll get back into balance.”
Of course, Crane isn’t really bringing much in so the idea is a bit bizarre. Crane’s arguments for a huge deficit are exactly the problem if one is worried about long term deficits–one has to make choices now about spending and if one chooses to spend for war, one has to tax for it. He’s unwilling to pay for it.
ArchPundit