2004

Ryan’s Cheekiness Is Sloppy

ArchPundit April 27, 2004 No Comments

From the Capitol Fax:

QUOTE OF THE WEEK ”We never really say anything negative about our opponents, we’ll keep that throughout the general. I think voters want that. They want to hear about what issues you care about. How you want to change America and Illinois for the better. They don’t want to hear negative stuff,” Jack Ryan told Peoria’s WEEK-TV yesterday.

This is the same Ryan, you will recall, whose campaign referred to Barack Obama on Friday as “to the left of Mao Tse-Tung.” It’s the same candidate who, just last Thursday, toured the state falsely claiming Obama had voted for hundreds of tax hikes that he had actually voted against (WEEK reported on this fly-around, by the way). It’s the same Ryan who criticized Obama for attending a hip-hop convention rather than show up for a Cook County Medical Society meeting. It’s the same Ryan whose spokesperson called Obama’s politics, “truly extremist liberal.”

From Schoenburg last Sunday (no link)

Springfield State Journal-Register’s Schoenburg writes ex-teacher/ex-investment banker Jack Ryan (R) “is going to have to do a better job of preparation if he wants to be a serious contender” against state Sen. Barack Obama (D). “Lesson 1: You can’t leave the details to your hired guns. You have to know what you’re talking about.” Ryan, at a presser: “What we’ve found is over the last four years Barack Obama has supported 428 tax and fee increases.”

It turned out that 146 of the fees and taxes came from one bill, SB1028, which created the IL FIRST infrastructure program in ’99. The rest — more than 280 fees and taxes — were in just one other bill, SB1903 from ’03. That was the state’s budget authorization for FY ’04, which Obama voted “No” on. Ryan spokesperson Kelli Phiel “argued when told of the snafu that Obama still supported the state budget paid for by the fees.” Phiel: “If you vote for a budget, you have to find a way to pay for that budget. If you don’t have a plan to pay for that, it’s a de facto vote.” Ryan aide Dan Proft said Obama plays the legislative game of voting for spending programs but not being “accountable for financing that spending.”

“Even if there is an argument to be made by following this path, Jack Ryan certainly didn’t put it that way at the news conference. Not only didn’t he explain that he was accusing Obama of supporting fees Obama didn’t vote for, Ryan didn’t even seem familiar with the bills involved. And if Ryan knew that Obama voted against the bill calling for most of those fees, but didn’t say so, while repeatedly saying that Obama ‘supported’ them, that’s the next thing to dishonest. This was the same press conference where Ryan misread a chart,” saying “We now have more employees working for the state than working in manufacturing companies.” The chart actually listed 841K as the number of workers in all government jobs, not just state jobs. “And, when asked, Ryan didn’t know the origin of that chart”

The first sign of the unpreparedness was at the Chicago Tribune Editorial Board meeting where he didn’t know about the Kjellander payment from the state bond deal. Overall, the undercurrent of the coverage on the guy is that he is a lightweight. Whether that is fair or not, this kind of disconnect between the charges, reality, and his awareness is going to send him down the toilet in terms of press good will—a dangerous place to be–just ask Rich Williamson and Al Salvi.

Unfortunately for Ryan, there are no longer eight Republicans in the race for U.S. Senate. It?s just him. And it?s time to do some homework.

Obama/Ryan Analysis

ArchPundit April 27, 2004 1 Comment

A site I check in on every once in a while is Russ Stewart’s. He does a weekly column on Chicago/Illinois politics–not quite a blog, not quite a regular news column. But one that caught my attention (and was mentioned in comments) was his column on the Obama/Ryan race.

The key graphs to me reflect the demographic changes that Illinois is undergoing in relation to Republican voters:

What is a detriment, however, is the stupor of Illinois’ Republican voters. Republican turnout has declined appreciably. In 1996, when conservative insurgent Salvi upset the party-endorsed “establishment” candidate, Lieutenant Governor Bob Kustra, the primary turnout was 791,645. In 1998, when conservative insurgent Fitzgerald upset the “establishment” candidate, Comptroller Loleta Didrickson, the turnout was 719,522. In 2002, when “establishment” candidate Jim Durkin beat Jim Oberweis and anti-abortion conservative John Cox, the turnout was 825,231.

This year turnout in the Senate primary dropped to 638,502, which is 186,729 less than in 2002, 81,020 less than in 1998 and 153,143 less than in 1996.

Most troubling for the Republicans and Ryan is the fact that from 2002 to 2004, turnout dropped by more than 48,000 in Cook County, 45,000 in DuPage County, 27,000 in Lake County, 29,000 in Kane County, 13,000 in Will County and 146,000 Downstate. The only Collar County where Republican turnout was stable was in McHenry, where turnout declined from 30,636 to 28,758.

It is a bad thing to be a one-party state. While the Speaker is holding the Governor’s feet to the fire over the budget a realistic opposition is better at holding the ruling party from excess. This is why, as in the last post, I mention Republicans who are approaching issues seriously–Illinois needs them–not in the majority mind you, but as a serious opposition party. Right now, with the Republican lurch to the right, that is increasingly a problem. Cross is a moderate, but more and more Leader types are influencing the Party to the right in a moderate state. There is a malaise in the Republican Party and they need a renewal based on the median voter, not purity of thought.