A Kennedy for Illinois? At the very least, it would bring Joy to the state

I’m sure some political operatives are going to say I threw my vote away. They may argue I cost the Democratic Party in Illinois any chance the party had of deposing Bruce Rauner as governor.

Will Kennedy need more family help to win?

But I’m not going to regret that I went to an Early Voting Center on Monday and cast a Democratic ballot for the gubernatorial campaign of Chris Kennedy and his lieutenant governor running mate, Ra Joy.

I DIDN’T RULE out the possibility of backing the officially preferred candidate of the Democratic Party establishment, J.B. Pritzker, until the last minute. In fact, about the only Dem who I gave no consideration to is that of Robert Marshall – the perpetual fringe candidate who always finds something to run for.

All you’d have to do is get him an “Uncle Sam” suit and he could be Lar Daly – the perpetual candidate of the Chicago past who always ran for something so he could spout off his isolationist “America First” ideology.

But back to my choice of a gubernatorial candidate who will take on the winner of the Republican primary to be held March 20. Whether it be Rauner or Jeanne Ives, the state senator from Wheaton, my preference would be for a part of the Kennedy clan (the son of Bobby) to take a shot at living in the Executive Mansion in Springfield (which Rauner and first lady Diana have spent so much of recent years having remodeled).

It’s not that I’m enamored with the Kennedy “aura,” or that I feel some need for our political scene to become a part of the Kennedy legacy (there are several legislators and Congress members of the family who hold office in other parts of the country – along with the big three of JFK, RFK and Teddy).

Is Marshall the modern-day equivalent?

BUT MY ATTITUDE is the fact that a large part of why I never thought much of the prospect of Bruce Rauner as governor is that he is one of the “big money” interests to whom the political establishment turned to provide the campaign donations that enable people to run for office.

Much of what Rauner had in mind when he ran for governor in 2014 (taking advantage of a weak Republican primary with no real front runner) was that he was eliminating the middle-man, running for office himself so he could attempt to just bark out orders and impose policies that would benefit business interests.

PRITZKER: Too similar to Rauner?

In that sense, I see Pritzker as being the equivalent – even if his ideological leanings on social issues is such that he generally prefers Democratic candidates. I'm not swayed by the J.B. advertising spots showing people flashing "five" fingers (as in the number of tuition increases at the University of Illinois system that Kennedy was a part of approving).

I don’t know that I believe the “solution” to the “Rauner Years” in Illinois is to come up with a Dem version of Bruce.

LOOKING AT THE other candidates, I see in Daniel Biss, Bob Daiber and Tio Hardiman specific knowledge in a single area (Hardiman is most serious on issues related to urban violence), but not enough knowledge overall that I would think they could oversee all of state government.

Which leaves Kennedy, who has appropriate stands on the social issues for all except those deluded enough to think Ives is what Illinois is all about.

A 3-1 GOP ratio

I do see one potential problem – yes, I saw the Chicago Sun-Times’ front page Monday morning. The big story about “Illinois’ Big Spenders” who provide more than one-quarter of all the cash available to all candidates seeking political office.

Those four include Rauner and Pritzker themselves. With the other two being Illinois’ wealthiest resident, Ken Griffin, who will be a solid Rauner backer, and Richard Uihlein – who has had a political falling out with Rauner and is now focusing his attention on finding a conservative ideological replacement.

Can his son do the same for Illinois?

WHICH MEANS THAT a Kennedy campaign, if it were to prevail beyond the March 20 primary, likely would have all the big money going against it. He’d probably have to turn to Kennedy money in order to remain competitive – and I can already hear the “carpetbagger” allegations that will be tossed out against him (even though he has lived and worked in Illinois for more than three decades).

Since I doubt a defeated Pritzker would suddenly turn into an enthusiastic Kennedy backer willing to help fund him. And even if J.B. tried speaking out in favor of Kennedy, I can already hear the “hypocrite” allegations that would be used against him.

But as some have speculated, this may be an election cycle in which the incumbent is so deep in doo doo (because the ideological right is so rigid in its own attitudes) that this may be an election where Rauner’s financial edge (the roughly $50 million of his own money he’s promised to pledge) might not be enough to ensure his victory.

If that is the case, then perhaps a Rauner vs. Kennedy brawl for Illinois governor come the Nov. 6 general election will give the “Land of Lincoln” a real choice – rather than just a pick between two rich guys trying to buy a political post to assuage their egos.

  -30-

EDITOR'S NOTE: The Chicago Argus "management," which in reality is little more than me, myself and I, is under no delusion that this "endorsement," so to speak, will sway anyone's vote. It's more about explaining my own political leanings and biases so that one can place other commentary published here in a proper context. Although I doubt I'm alone in Chicago or Illinois in being wary of the thought of a Rauner/Pritzker political brawl.

What would Lars Daly think?

Robert Marshall is a physician from suburban Burr Ridge, and he once served a four-year stint as a village trustee in his hometown.

Yet to political observers, Marshall will be remembered for something else. He’s a perennial candidate. Every four years, his name turns up as he runs for an elective office.

WE, THE PEOPLE of the great state of Illinois, have had the chance to choose Marshall to be our state’s governor, our senator in Washington, and one of our congressmen (if we happened to vote in the west suburban district that includes Burr Ridge).

Marshall has not even limited himself to a single political party. Most of his campaigns have sought the Republican Party nomination. Yet of late, he calls himself a Democrat. Perhaps he sees the same trend that most other Illinoisans do and doesn’t see a point to being a Republican.

This election cycle won’t be any exception.

Marshall is one of several candidates seeking the Democratic Party’s nomination for U.S. Senate, wanting to replace Roland Burris after his term ends next year.

SO THOSE PEOPLE who are so disgusted with the mainstream candidates that they can’t bring themselves to vote for any of them (in this case, Cheryle Jackson, David Hoffman and Alexi Giannoulias) can now pick Marshall, whose views on social issues are somewhat to the right of center, but apparently not so far right that he identifies any longer with the GOP.

This isn’t even the first time Marshall has sought the Senate. He ran in the Republican Party primary in 1996, getting 5 percent of the vote in losing to Al Salvi, who ultimately lost the general election that year to now-Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill.

Admittedly, Marshall has his bragging moment – the one time he ran in a general election (1998 for Congress from the Illinois 3rd District), he got 27 percent of the vote. Now-retired Rep. Bill Lipinski, D-Ill., took the remaining 73 percent.

But Marshall is likely to run the same type of campaign this year as he has in the past. He’ll pop out of the woodwork on a couple of occasions to claim that our elected officials are negligent on certain issues, and he will serve to hold the more serious political candidates accountable.

PERSONALLY, I’M CURIOUS to hear what Marshall will say about the bumbling manner in which officials are handling health care reform. I’d expect it will be his chief talking point as he works his way to another 5 percent of the vote come the Feb. 2 primary election.

Not that Marshall is the only perennial candidate who filed nominating petitions with the Illinois State Board of Elections to get a place on the 2010 primary ballot.

William “Dock” Walls III is seeking the Democratic Party’s nomination for governor, for those of us who don’t like the idea of Pat Quinn or Dan Hynes.

His actual experience was a job on the Chicago city payroll (“Confidential Assistant to the Mayor” was the actual title) back in the days of Harold Washington as mayor.

IN RECENT YEARS, he has run bids for Chicago mayor and for Congress, challenging Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill. Rush kicked Walls’ butt, which means that Walls has one thing in common with Barack Obama – who also once got an Election Day beat down from the one-time Black Panther.

Candidates like Marshall and Walls are on the ballot every year, using the access to Election Day ballots to give themselves a chance to express their views on the issues. Once the election passes, they go back to their daily lives until the next election cycle.

There’s also another type of perennial candidate – one who takes on the same opposition every Election Day.

That is the category in which one should place Rev. Anthony Williams. The resident of suburban Dolton has run several campaigns against Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., D-Ill. He has run in Democratic primaries and as a Republican.

THIS TIME, HE has filed nominating petitions to be the Green Party’s nominee for member of Congress from the Illinois 2nd District.

Williams’ line has been consistent through all his campaigns. He does not like the idea of Jackson as his member of Congress, and he wants to give people who live in the far South Side and surrounding suburbs district a chance to vote for somebody else.

It helps that in past elections he had the support of the Shaw brothers, of whom Bob is now running for Cook County assessor in the next election cycle. He claims to no longer have their active support, but he’s still an outspoken Jackson critic.

Another potential perennial is someone like Daniel Seals of Wilmette, who in recent elections has challenged Rep. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., who has indicated he wants to move up this time to the U.S. Senate. Seals, who gave Kirk a competitive campaign last time, now wants the to-be-abandoned seat, but faces a serious challenger in the form of state Rep. Julie Hamos, D-Evanston.

THEN, THERE ARE candidates like Patrick J. Ryan of Chicago, who is running for an Illinois House of Representatives’ seat from the Southwest Side. He has run for the same seat in several recent elections.

The occupant of that seat? Illinois House Speaker Michael J. Madigan, D-Chicago.

Which means that Ryan is likely to remain a perennial candidate even after the 2010 elections, just like Williams and Marshall and all the rest.

But of course, all of these people pale in comparison to Lars "America First" Daly, the Illinois native who ran for so many offices during the mid-20th Century, including president, usually on the Tax Cut Party ticket. None of the 21st Century perennial candidates is about to don an "Uncle Sam" suit on the campaign trail like ol' Lars used to.

-30-