![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Primary Update: Illinois edition
Mar. 28th, 2012 08:29 pmWhile on vacation last week, I did get some time spent in the state in which the campaign was making its most recent stop.
Living in Illinois for years, I can tell you that campaigns are over by the time they get to the Prairie State. So, this was sort of an exception to that (but not much of one) in that there were two viable candidates.
Also note, since I messed up in my last post. Illinois is the Bluest of states.
First of all, I would say that I saw more Santorum signs than Romney signs. Neither had impressive displays. Judges and other local races dwarfed them by leaps and bounds. Still, literally traveling through out the entire state, I can't honestly say I saw more than 3 Romney signs.
Santorum was in Southern Illinois which is something candidates just don't do; and my Mom went and saw him.
Mom doesn't have the heart of a blogger so you will get no more insight than Rick spoke for an hour and brought his family with him (No real revelation). It did sound like the audience was sizable enough and satisfied.
Hate Santorum's policies (and I do), but you got to give him credit for pounding the pavement and for generally being successful when he does.
Romney won Illinois decisively (47-35), but Santorum carried everything south of Springfield- generally winning Blue Counties by ten percent, and in the Red counties, usually ahead by 20.
I feel it worth noting that I didn't see or hear any candidate ads, only the SuperPac ones.
Those were the ubiquitous Restore Our Future ads ripping on Santorum.
I was familiar with their anti-Newt, anti-Perry, and anti-Paul work, but that was all pre-Iowa caucus.
They attack Santorum for voting to increase his salary while in Congress (I will give Romney that fact. He never once voted to increase his Congressional Salary. Now, if Willard had spent any time in Congress, I assume he would have done the same. He just never was in congress).
They also attack Rick for porkbarrel spending which includes the mandatory mention of the Bridge to Nowhere, and for spending tax dollars on a Teapot Museum.
Personally, I was hoping that thousands of teapot enthusiasts would be galvanized to get out on that Tuesday and tilt the thing over to Rick.
Oh, and it goes without saying, I saw dozens of Ron Paul signs- some homemade and some that were from 2008 with Duct tape on them to cover the year (yeah really)- but he only got 9% statewide (and only got 9% in the college-located county).
Living in Illinois for years, I can tell you that campaigns are over by the time they get to the Prairie State. So, this was sort of an exception to that (but not much of one) in that there were two viable candidates.
Also note, since I messed up in my last post. Illinois is the Bluest of states.
First of all, I would say that I saw more Santorum signs than Romney signs. Neither had impressive displays. Judges and other local races dwarfed them by leaps and bounds. Still, literally traveling through out the entire state, I can't honestly say I saw more than 3 Romney signs.
Santorum was in Southern Illinois which is something candidates just don't do; and my Mom went and saw him.
Mom doesn't have the heart of a blogger so you will get no more insight than Rick spoke for an hour and brought his family with him (No real revelation). It did sound like the audience was sizable enough and satisfied.
Hate Santorum's policies (and I do), but you got to give him credit for pounding the pavement and for generally being successful when he does.
Romney won Illinois decisively (47-35), but Santorum carried everything south of Springfield- generally winning Blue Counties by ten percent, and in the Red counties, usually ahead by 20.
I feel it worth noting that I didn't see or hear any candidate ads, only the SuperPac ones.
Those were the ubiquitous Restore Our Future ads ripping on Santorum.
I was familiar with their anti-Newt, anti-Perry, and anti-Paul work, but that was all pre-Iowa caucus.
They attack Santorum for voting to increase his salary while in Congress (I will give Romney that fact. He never once voted to increase his Congressional Salary. Now, if Willard had spent any time in Congress, I assume he would have done the same. He just never was in congress).
They also attack Rick for porkbarrel spending which includes the mandatory mention of the Bridge to Nowhere, and for spending tax dollars on a Teapot Museum.
Personally, I was hoping that thousands of teapot enthusiasts would be galvanized to get out on that Tuesday and tilt the thing over to Rick.
Oh, and it goes without saying, I saw dozens of Ron Paul signs- some homemade and some that were from 2008 with Duct tape on them to cover the year (yeah really)- but he only got 9% statewide (and only got 9% in the college-located county).
