Gianulis does 180, blesses process and split votes, others weigh in.
When this process began, Rock Island County Democratic Chairman John Gianulis and likeminded partisans were vehemently asserting that committeemen which he and other county chairs appointed after the primary must be allowed to vote in selecting a replacement for Lane Evans on the general election ballot.
There were dire warnings of court battles and many rather hyper-ventilating and bizarre comments here and elsewhere arguing for that plan of action.
They even went as far as to invoke founding fathers and other blather in suggesting that if only duly elected committeemen were give the vote, somehow this would "disenfranchise" those in vacant precincts.
17th District Democratic Central Committee chair Don Johnston has since determined that only those committeemen elected in the primary vote, and that they can split their allotted votes in any way they choose as well, leading to a very open and transparent process.
Things change, apparently.
In a May 18 letter to the 396 precinct committeemen who will elect a Democratic nominee to replace Rep. Evans for the November ballot, Mr. Gianulis reminded committeemen they are free to split their vote, but also re-affirmed his endorsement of Phil Hare, Rep. Evans' district director.The article by Kurt Allemeier goes on to say that Gianulis, despite his mention of splitting votes, says he expects 90% of committeemen to not split their vote and give all of them to one candidate.
"I want to make sure we Democrats support a transparent and open process," Mr. Gianulis wrote. "Therefore, I encourage each committeeperson to fully support one candidate or split their vote among the quality Democratic candidates that have been nominated as they see fit."
Mike Boland disagrees, saying he thinks there will be a fair amount of vote splitting.
Evans has also been making calls to urge support for Hare.
Sen. Jacobs even managed to get into the story by saying Evan's sounded "...better that he has in a long time." when Jacobs spoke to him.
Schweibert was happy to hear Gianulis' call for transparency and feels Gianulis' statement reflects that he recognizes that, "there are other quality candidates out there."
Mr. Gianulis said he wanted to remind committeemen of the process and make sure their ballots are returned in time to be counted June 6.Another story mentions the crucialy important warning to committeemen to check the math if they split their votes.
"It is the future of our party," Mr. Gianulis said. "It is the crucial thing for the Democratic party in Rock Island County.
"We've gotten stronger, and the Republicans haven't gotten stronger," he said. "We've got to keep working harder."
If, for instance, a committeeman has 100 votes to cast and he votes 51 for one candidate and 50 for another, it will be an overvote of 101 total and the entire ballot will be thrown out.
Committeemen must be sure that the total of all the votes cast doesn't exceed the total they're entitled to.
If they vote less than their total allotment of votes, it will still be counted however.
posted by The Inside Dope @ 5/24/2006
24 comments
24 Comments:
I recieved the call from Evans and I would agree with Jacobs that Lane sounded great. He really pulled it all together for his brother Phil. Phil is the best choice for Evans replacement. Lane sounded so strong that I fgeel obligated to do the right thing for Evans as he has always treated people of the district with respect and I will give my support to the wishes of Lane Evans and pledge my votes to Phil Hare. I encourage all of you to do the same.
John G. has the votes for brother Hare. This is why he says to vote your concience. He wants everyone to know that this is an open transparent process. Johnston all but elected Phil Hare when he made the process where you sign your name on your ballott. Great work brother Johnston. You have done a great job.
I think that this is the best system to fill the democratic nomination. Johnston has done a great job of getting this process to work. Having the committeepeople sign their name is a stroke of genius. This will lend credability to the process and will make sure that my committeperson votes for Hare as I instructed him to do. Now I will know. Johnston has done a great job.
I don't think Hare supporters will split their votes for two reasons:
1) They're not voting for Hare because their constituents want Hare, they're voting for Hare because John Gianulis and [supposedly] Lane Evans endorsed Hare;
2) Hare supporters are not proficient enough at mathematics to confidently split their vote without fear of invalidating it. If they could add, they'd see that area job and union roll numbers are less than they were 20 years ago and they wouldn't be voting for Hare.
John G. quit whining about the appointed pc voting when they figured Phil has enough votes to win with just the elected pc voting. If the vote is either a) close, or b) someone other than Hare wins there will be a court challenge to the voting procedures.
Anon 8:12 and others...
Gee, it just makes your chest swell up with pride when you hear that John G. and the gang are getting votes due to fear of retribution rather than genuine support.
It must make Phil Hare feel all warm and fuzzy to know that most of his votes are cast out of fear rather than actual support.
Not to get too philosophical, but isn't it a bit dangerous to have that sort of grudging, forced, support, as opposed to earned and sincere support?
I'd hate to have support a mile wide and an eighth of an inch thick.
Seems like it could erode and collapes nearly instantly when the chips are down.
This is politics. If you can't take it go somewhere else and play bean bags!
I am proud to have cast my vote the way Lane wants me to. Phil is the best choice. The people win when Phil wins!
Yeah you! Like anonymous 16:47 sez, if you don't like your politics incestuous, dirty, unfair, and slimy, go somewheres else and play!
Udderwise, shut yer yap!
I will vote for Hare because the leaders told me to and now Johnston has made it where I have to sign my name on the ballott and it will be public information. The thing that rubs me wrong is that every piece of mail where Hare claims to be so pro-Union his mail is not Union made. I know there are a bungch of excuses they would use about this, but it6 would have been nice to see a Union bug on his mail. It is easy to do the talk. It is harder to walk the walk. I hope Hare learns from this. Next election if he gets mail without a Union bug I will vote for the other guy.
If Lane is so healthy and doing so damn well, why isn't he in D.C. representing my interests instead of pedling influence in an election he stepped out of?
Why is the next headline - Evans resigns ranking member seat on Veteran's Affairs Committee ???
Make sure you sign the ballot.
If it doesn't contain your signature there is no way for us to know to that you want Phil Hare. On June 7, 2006, Democrats will join together and discuss who voted for who.
So make sure you properly sign your ballot before you send it back and let your concious be your guide!
The People's will is never "incetious, dirty, unfair, or slimy." For you to say it is is nothing more than a Republican tactic that will not work!!!!
Yeaaaaaaa!!
Three cheers for rule by intimidation and threat of retribution!!
A Thugocracy - just what the founders had in mind.
You're right, the people's will is never slimy. But the will of just a handful of leaders somtimes is.
A select handfull wrote the Decleration of Independence. Are you saying they are "slimy"?
Ours is a republic, not a democracy.
There is nothing wrong with knowing who votes for who. How else would a politcal party know who to reward and who to punish if followers failed to sing their ballots. If you have nothing to hide, you will have nothing to worry about.
All your talk about "thugery" is plain crazy. John G. is 89 years old. He can barely walk. If you find yourself intimidated by him, you are seriously troubled. All I can do at this time is pray you find the courage to vote for Congressman's "Brother Phil Hare." Thanks Heavens for Phil Evans!
Not to imply that John G. is anything close... don't misunderstand.
But a lot of mafia figures were elderly too, and if you valued your life, you'd better fear crossing them.
John G. isn't the one who does the dirty work.
It's commenters here who absolutely gloat, and make thinly veiled threats by saying in essence, "We know who you are and how you voted... watch out!"
It doesn't take a genius to see the thuggery in that.
You don't comment on the fact that it wasn't an internet chat room that made the Declaration of Independence but a handful of backroom dealers. If you were around back then you would be complaining that it was only a handfull of shady backroom dealers. Get with the program.
You don't comment on the fact that it wasn't an internet chat room that made the Declaration of Independence but a handful of backroom dealers. If you were around back then you would be complaining that it was only a handfull of shady backroom dealers. Get with the program. This country was built on the backs of these Backroom Dealers. Other counties in the 17th have Blogs. Not John G. He prefers to do things the old fashiond way in the back room. When Phil wins you will see that it wasn't for the bloggs.
Those posting all this craziness about the process are doing it to sound extreme and act extreme. No one in their right mind should assume that they represent the Democratic party. That's what makes blogs like this what I would call "bottom feeders," like "Speak Out" on the Internet.
Anon 22:42
A. This isn't a "chat room"
B. The founders weren't deciding how to game the system to get their favored candidates in office by doing everything possible to avoid throwing the choice to the people. (or even giving committeemen a secret ballot)
C. Thanks for giving me so much infuence that you feel it's necessary to taunt that I won't have determined the winner in this contest. Is that like whistling past the graveyard?
Whatever it is, it's ... well, I won't say.
As I wrote in a comment to a post above, if you think I think I can swing elections, you're nuttier than a fruitcake.
D. Just where do you get the impression that I care who wins? Where exactly do you get the idea that I'm trying to prevent Hare from winning?
Did you miss the parts where I defended Hare from the silly idea that he's not qualified simply because he doesn't have a college degree?
Or is it that you're confusing my opposition to the way some people want the process to go as opposition to Hare?
The fact that R.I. county bosses are dicating ... actually ordering... committeemen to vote for Hare of face unspeakable horrors is what sticks in my craw, not necessarily Hare.
If you were interested in being honest, you'd realize that I've never written an negative word about Hare at any time.
Sometimes, though I know it's tough, things just aren't as simple or black and white as you may wish them to be.
Tom,
Can you articulate to me why Phil Hare should get my vote over Sullivan or Schwiebert in a way that doesn't talk about loyalty to Lane or John Gianulis?
I admire and respect both Lane and John, but I don't want them doing my thinking for me.
I'm all for jumping on a bandwagon once a vote has been cast and counted; but until that happens I prefer to use my vote in the best interest of the whole, not the personal interest of a few.
It's taken me a while to understand what creeps me out so much about comments (or press releases) on the local blogs from the Evans Cult members.
Reading tombenson's comment above, it finally dawned on me----- for some, the Democrat Party is a secular fundamentalist religion.
Let me paraphase benson's comment, and tell me if this doesn't sound like some fundy preacher giving testimony: I was sitting with Brother John when he got the call from Jesus and I heard Jesus ask Brother John if he would support Him. Jesus is 100% genuine...Brother John did not hesitate for a moment in his answer to Jesus and said "Yes, yes, Lord, send me, send me!"
I'd say that little testimonial would be worthy of Jimmie Swaggart. Even Brother Dope gets in on the act with his assertion that only Democrats stand up against corruption within their party. It's the "true believers do good and will be saved while the heathen are evil and will be cast out into darkness", riff. In other words, only the true believer Democrats are saved in the Secular Fundamentalist Democrat Party, er, Religion.
And let's get real here, anyone who can say that Lane Evans has provided "strong leadership" or has provided "outstanding leadership", without busting a gut laughing, and with complete disregard for fact, is someone who is truly willing and able to make a leap of faith.
Here's another fervored testimonial from a true believer: "I recieved (sic) a call from Evans and it was a great call...this made me feel very good about appointing (sic) Hare...Evans will be Hare's chief of staff." Hallelujah! Jesus, oops, I mean Evans, saves!
Creepy.
Anon 23:42
If you want this to become full of "top-feeders", then why to you only comment to complain?
If you feel that commenters views are extreme... and they often are, no doubt... then why not offer your more moderate voice to the proceedings?
If people think like you do, sit back and tut-tut and only comment to say how dumb comments are, but yet don't offer their own views and opinions, then what good is it?
It's like I've said before. If you want to let the inmates run the asylum, then fine. But unless you participate by offering your more reasonable comments, and you step in to chastise and rebuke those who you feel are messing the place up, then you'll get more of the same.
The tone of this blog depends on who participates the most.
If you sit back and don't put in your two cents, then the yahoos will have won. It's that simple.
You have a valid compliant. Now do something about it besides complain.
If you don't participate, then you really shouldn't complain, in my opinion.
Highxlr8r...
Good question, and I don't have any links, but I've seen the committeemen's ballot and it says that it must be signed to be valid and counted. No further explanation.
Someone somewhere made that decision. It may be to comply with the law, or it may have just been part of a deal to John G. so he and the boys could still enforce dicipline and crack the whip for Hare.
Tom, that's an interesting metaphor, and I've been on some pretty nice rafts in my time.
If floating down the Mississippi River is a metaphor for going with the flow of the desires of the people within the 17th District, then I'll be sure to stop off in Quincy for lunch. If following the party leadership upstream is a metaphor for going against the desires of the voting public, send me a postcard from Dubuque.
Been there, done that, perhaps...except for running for office and actually holding office...and no one in the field has worked in Washington.
Question really is: What are the tangible accomplishments that separate Phil Hare from the others?
I don't see an answer in your comment. What I see is loyalty and followership. What I don't see is leadership.
Phil is the only person that was able to win Lane's appointment. I think that is a major accomplishment. Don't you?
Post a Comment
<< Home