Halvorson Concedes

Well, it is Chicago. What other urban and near suburban districts can we get Bloomberg to dump millions of dollars into to defend? Of course, you know that won’t be the spin here. This will be touted as a huge victory for gun control, and evidence that Obama’s agenda is popular with voters.

Related posts (automatically generated):

  1. Make it So! Elect Debbie Halvorson
  2. Sugarman Not too Pleased With NICS Deal
  3. Democrats See Opportunity in 2014 on Guns

6 thoughts on “Halvorson Concedes”

  1. “This will be touted as a huge victory for gun control. . .”

    I just switched on MSNBC, knowing what to expect, and that is exactly what Rachel Maddow is doing. Of course it is hard to argue with, since all of Bloomberg’s TV advertizing focused only on gun control, and the 55 – 23 Kelly/Halvorson margin is so wide it would be hard to say there was any other issue in the race.

    1. There were other issues in the race, but there’s no spinning that it wasn’t a big issue in the race. Of course, gun control is popular among Democratic primary voters in Chicago and near suburbs. Not really too shocking. This was a long shot to try to pick up, but Bloomberg felt he had to defend a seat he never should have had to defend.

  3. Halvorsin later ended up capitulating and supporting “universal background” checks. I think anyone from the lot would have pretty much voted against our interests in one form or another. I’m glad more pro-gun people didn’t get involved in the Halvorson campaign or the fallout would have been much worse.

    1. Yes. With hindsight perhaps, a loss in a true head-to-head battle would have been worse.

      I’ve only scanned the paper this morning, and taken a cursory glance at the network news on TV, but based on that small sample, it doesn’t appear the mainstream media is finding anything of interest in that race. While certainly the politicos were watching, as a propaganda victory it should be pretty hollow, except for those who go looking for propaganda.

      1. Andy: Exactly right.

        So is there actually a Republican running at all in this race or didn’t they bother fronting one, considering the Democratic plurality?

Comments are closed.