Like a good recruiter, he sets up a list of qualifications and sees who meets them.
He concludes Jack’s the guy. Now the statement that I think is simply not correct is that Jack was the best guy to win: “Nonetheless, most astute political analysts on the scene in Illinois would say Jack still had a shot to win and perhaps more importantly, Jack had a better chance than anyone else to win.”
I would argue most of the astute analysts thought there was little chance, but the best people to do it were Jim Edgar, Jim Thompson, maybe Judy though I disagree as would Jeff, and Steve Rauschenberger.
I think most people had already concluded Jack! was a disaster. Why?
Let’s start with the Kjellander deal. While everyone is claiming that Kjellander knee-capped the guy, I think Jack! was just the sort of empty suit Kjellander wants in the GOP. When asked by John Kass what all the candidates thought should be down about Kjellander, Jack was talking about the Treaty of Westphalia and didn’t know anything about the Bear Stearns deal. Steve Rauschenberger, who had the nomination for the taking from the party, said Kjellander needed to go and even challenged him for the spot of National Committeeman.
Second, let’s move to the press hated Jack! and his campaign guys. They were annoying, they attacked people on crap that was silly–Jack! couldn’t even explain his own talking points on the tax raising claims against Obama.
Third, Jack!’s staff turned a minor story about taping into a full blown national laughing stock.
Fourth, Jack! had no message. While people close to him rave about his bit on empowerment the reality is that if that was his message he couldn’t get it out.
Fifth, Jack! was down between 10 and 22 points in a Democratic leaning state with Barack tracking with John Kerry very closely.
Did Jack have a chance before lying to the press, the Party and the people? Sure, Obama could have turned out to be a space alien.