Joint Daily Herald/Shaw Media editorial endorsement interview won by incumbent on less than honest answers
On Wednesday, the editorial boards of the Daily Herald and Shaw Media held a joint endorsement interview with Congresswoman Lauren Underwood and Republican challenger Jim Oberweis. Here is the video, with commentary to follow:
COMMENTARY of Debates Part 2
After the just over one hour meeting, Underwood was the clear winner with a grade of “B” and Oberweis graded a “C-“
This was the 3rd virtual debate between the two 14th district candidates, and this one was the most lopsided. The commentary I will bring is my feedback from what I witnessed on the video.
During many parts of the debate, Oberweis appeared to be rambling his answers, and he was slow. Do not know what time this virtual meeting took place, but he appeared tired. While the Herald/Shaw interviewers did not keep the candidate responses on a time limit, there were more responses where Oberweis was talking for 3-4 minutes, whereas Underwood’s answers were succinct.
Enough about Mike Madigan!
Oberweis is clearly trying to link Underwood to Illinois House Speaker Mike Madigan, who chairs the Democratic Party. Whether he is doing this based on internal polling or as a strategy is not clear, and the first time he brought up Madigan was linking Underwood’s campaign account she has with Madigan. That is fair enough, and that is where the Madigan linkage should have stopped.
But at least two more times, Oberweis brings up Madigan’s name again, the 3rd time was describing how his state Senate healthcare shopping bill had bipartisan support, but it died in committee, then Oberweis said it was the Democrats and then Madigan’s name came up again. The Daily Herald moderator even asked if Oberweis was running for state office, while the facial reactions of the other interviewers was the same reaction I had. It’s on the video.
Underwood votes 100% with Pelosi, so say examples and why they don’t represent the district and why they are not “bipartisan”
Throughout Wednesday’s debate, Underwood was overemphasizing how she works across the aisle. She left herself open to attack, which Oberweis did half-heartedly.
For example, a theme Oberweis used throughout was Underwood votes 100% with Pelosi. That’s fine and fair game and the truth.
But frame it with specifics, and put Underwood on defense to defend the more radical leftist proposals out of the Democratic House.
A good place to start is the Dan Crenshaw (R, TX-02) “Radical Democrat” capsule published here on McHenry County Blog, and supplemented to show how very few, if any Republican votes were for the legislation, which begins to display how loosely Underwood uses the word “bipartisan”.
In the two debates last week, Underwood talked up the “For the People Act” (H.R. 1), Oberweis could have and should have jumped over that because:
- Passed on a straight party-line vote which blows away Underwood saying the reforms have broad support
- Mainstream voters not ready for public financing of campaign, per Crenshaw’s presentation and what’s in the bill
- House Democrats voted down amendment to insure only citizens can vote in ALL elections, including local elections (Crenshaw himself offered this amendment on the House floor in March of 2019)
Points can be made about the Top 10 legislation in Crenshaw’s video, and Oberweis must be quick to force Underwood to defend her votes on these genuinely radical bills which passed Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s House.
Beyond the Top 10 list, Underwood pointed out how she supported changes to healthcare and the HEROES Act, which are bills not on Crenshaw’s Top 10 list, but Underwood left herself open to attack, which Oberweis did not capitalize:
- HEROES (H.R. 6800) — Contained poison pills like bailout for state/local governments for non COVID-19 spending and included election 2020 provisions
- Eliminated voter ID, including signature checks under Illinois law
- Mandated election authorities to send “unsolicited vote-by-mail ballots”, which Illinois law prohibits
- Established California-style Ballot Harvesting nationwide, enabling strangers to handle a voter’s completed vote-by-mail ballot.
- H.R. 1425 (healthcare changes) passed on a partisan vote
While Oberweis, late in the debate, challenged Underwood being bipartisan utilizing the Lugar Project’s rating her 344 of 437 in the House in 2019, he needs to supplement with Underwood having a very liberal definition of “bipartisanship”.
Once again, this was where Oberweis clearly won over Underwood. It was discussed last week after the St. Charles Chamber of Commerce forum and at the Chicago Sun-Times of Underwood referring to “The Three Bills” of hers that President Trump signed into law.
On Wednesday, Herald reporter Russell Lissau pointed out what Underwood said is not true, and her Three Bills were incorporated into other legislation.
Sadly, Oberweis repeated his honesty challenge by saying he ran for Congress because of Underwood’s voting record, which did not go radical socialist until after Oberweis announced his 2020 congressional candidacy.
So What Do You Think?
Please post your comments below, and keep them on the topic of the Underwood-Oberweis Debates (any/all 3)