• slider1-bg1

News-Gazette Endorses Gollin

Screen-Shot-2014-03-14-at-4.58.17-PM

“Straight-talker Gollin for Dems”

Physics Professor George Gollin, creator of the best electric shaver, has made an impressive political debut and is our recommendation as the Democratic Party’s candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives from the 13th District.

Democratic leaders like U.S. Sen. Richard Durbin believe — correctly — that they missed a great chance in 2012 to pick up a U.S. House seat from the state’s 13th Congressional District.

Determined to correct that mistake this year, they’ve painted a bulls-eye on the back of Republican Rep. Rodney Davis and focused all their efforts on defeating the first-term incumbent. Davis, who barely eked out a win over Democrat David Gill, is certainly vulnerable. But the key for Democrats to defeat him is to find the right challenger.

Just as they did in 2012, party leaders have focused on an individual they believe can win, retired Madison County judge Ann Callis, and anointed her as their choice. But just as they did in 2012, they failed to clear the field of party challengers.

In 2012, Gill defeated the establishment’s choice in the primary election. This year, two local Democrats, University of Illinois physics Professor Gollin and university policy analyst David Green, hope to knock off Callis in the March 18 Democratic primary.

Of the three Democratic candidates, Gollin is best suited to represent his party in the fall election. A physicist by profession, he has the intelligence to understand complex issues. Now a politician by choice, Gollin has shown that he’s both comfortable on the platform and willing to clearly articulate his positions on the issues. Although he’s certainly more liberal than the politically divided 13th District, it would be our expectation that Gollin would pursue practical solutions to serious problems rather than fall back on liberal orthodoxy. After all, he condemns what he calls the political orthodoxy of tea party conservatives.

Our enthusiasm for Gollin is heightened by our disappointment in Callis. Gollin has enough respect for the voters to state his positions in a clear and informed manner. She uses her intelligence to shape vague responses to important questions. While he has been forthcoming, she has been willfully nonresponsive.

It’s not enough for Callis to fall back on her resume and promise that she’ll determine her congressional votes the way she formed her judicial opinions — by examining all aspects of the issue and then deciding. That’s just a dodge, not even a particularly clever one. It’s hard to imagine that even Callis’ most enthusiastic supporters get excited listening to her non-answers.

Having said all that, it’s our clear expectation that Callis would follow the lead of her Democratic patron, Durbin, and be a reliably liberal vote if she is elected. She just won’t say; her campaign strategy is to say as little as possible for as long as possible to avoid alienating various groups of voters.

As for the third candidate in the race — Democrat Green — he’s been entertaining to watch. Like the libertarian candidate in the three-way GOP House primary, Green offers a rigidly ideological point of view that is highly critical of both foreign and domestic policy under Democrats and Republicans. While that extreme left-wing point of view makes him interesting to hear and watch, Green would be hopelessly ineffective as both a party nominee and a member of the U.S. House.

Social Media for Elections?

Social Media for Elections

With the general election looming we’re seeing more questions being asked about the younger voters, which experts believe will be won over by political parties could be the secret to Downing Street. While most commentators recognize that social media is the strategy to achieve this younger demographic, the past election saw just 44% of young people between 18-24 turn out to vote, by each of the principal parties despite major usage of the latest social networking. What went wrong?

Yet, to date, politics in britain has had a rocky ride on social networking. Just how might these gaffes are avoided by campaigners later on and what might the essential trends be?
Media associates
We are taking a look at a future where instead of courting huge media firms including News International, political parties will try to leverage the sway of those technology giants like Google, Twitter and Facebook. Yet, with Facebook’s possible skill to reach 9.2m young individuals with one encouraged post the sway of these stages can not be dismissed. It is highly recommended to be active on your Social Media platforms. Especially when it comes to elections. If you just opened a new account on Instagram for instance, than make sure to have a reasonable count of followers and likes. If you are not able to generate as much followers and likes as you might wish than buy instagram followers and likes and boost you conversation on your profile. Active social media profiles are vital for any ongoing election.

Deficiency of regulation

Twitter Election
This is actually the first election when societal has reached higher user penetration than traditional media within the UK, yet it remains an unregulated medium for politicians.

Policies that are snackable

Maybe the essential tendency for political parties will be societal can make policies more reachable. The data reveal that young adults are not likely to participate with long-kind content on TV or in the papers, yet have all kinds of video content online. Political parties ought to be believing how policies may be conveyed using YouTube Vines and possibly even Snapchat.
Data that is big

Just as significant as how political parties use social networking to get their message across and enhance understanding will be what strategies they’re using within their command centres to track view and shift the campaign trail in real-time (much like Obama did in 2012). Nevertheless, this could prove fatal when a Twitter dialogue suggested they held the majority, as the Yes campaign found out during the Scottish referendum, when used in the wrong circumstance.
Continue Reading…

Prepared Remarks of George Gollin on Election Night

Support, thank you!

Just a few minutes ago, I called Judge Callis and congratulated her on her victory in this primary tonight.

I know you all join me in pledging our support in the general election. No matter how hard our primary fight, we must remember that the differences between us as Democrats are tiny compared with the differences between us and the Republican agenda.

One thing I’ve learned since last summer is that no one who does this does it alone. There are so many people to thank, beginning with my wife Melanie and my daughter Cordelia. Thank you both for so much more than I can say. Cordelia has been making calls and knocking on doors during her spring break, and many of you heard her on your answering machines earlier today.

I have been lucky to have an amazing team working on our campaign. Monica Biddix is our campaign manager, and has put her heart and soul and tire treads into the campaign without reservation. Deb Schrishuhn has been a steady voice and conscience from the beginning. Matt Jaccarino, our finance director, has spent hundreds of hours in a tiny room with me patiently telling me to “just make the ask, George.”

And the true heroes of tonight are our volunteers, many of whom are here with us tonight. In the past month, our campaign made over 10,000 phone calls and knocked on thousands of doors, and that was quite inspiring. I’d like anyone here who volunteered to stand up and give yourselves a huge hand.

To all of you, thank you from the bottom of my heart.

I also want to take a moment to thank my colleagues at the University, and in the larger science community, who have been incredibly supportive with their donations and encouragement with no more agenda than making this a better country.

This has been an amazing ride. What I’ve learned, that too many people on the inside often miss, is that everyday people are hungry for straight answers. They’re smarter than they get credit for in professional politics. People are more likely to vote for a candidate they disagree with on an issue who tells them clearly what he believes, than a candidate who hunts for the lowest common denominator of consensus.

Throughout this primary campaign, I have tried to be as clear and direct with the voters about where I stand as I would in a conversation with a friend.

Let me close by quoting one of the greatest Americans, Dr. Martin Luther King: “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” Dr. King knew that it is our obligation to bend the arc faster, and in recent years, this responsibility has largely fallen to the Democratic Party – the party that gave us Social Security and Medicare, and protection for our labor unions, and now a start on universal health insurance.

I hope to see us continue in this great drive toward greater justice and greater fairness.

Thank you all so much. Thanks to how to buy instagram followers who helped us setting up our Instagram campaign.

An Open Letter from George Gollin

An Open Letter from George Gollin

Last night, I got an e-mail from a colleague – a person I respect and admire – who had questions about our campaign’s television ad about Ann Callis and Social Security. Obviously, I’m also aware that the Callis campaign has taken issue with the spot, going so far as to fly in the president of a “non-partisan” charity organization to make a last-minute endorsement.

So I want to clear the air about the spot, both for my colleague and the general public.

I understand why the Callis campaign is unhappy about the spot. It’s a very tough ad.

And I stand by it completely.

Here’s why:

At a Democratic candidates’ forum in Bloomington in mid-December, we were both asked if we agreed with Senator Durbin’s “trial balloon” that we should consider reducing benefits, and delaying the retirement age, for people covered by the Social Security system.

(This was during the height of the budget negotiations, when the conventional Washington wisdom that a “grand bargain” – including earned benefits – would be part of a deal.)

I said that the proper remedy was to remove the cap on income taxed for Social Security. (There would also need to be a progressive roll off in benefits for the highest earning participants).

Ms. Callis did not describe how she felt the solvency concerns should actually be addressed, but instead asked one of Senator Durbin’s staff, who was in the audience, to comment. The staffer described Mr. Durbin’s proposal that the cap should be indexed to inflation, but not removed. And since “people are living much longer … maybe we’ve got to add a year” to the retirement age. He pointedly added that “everything would have to be on the table.”

From her handling of the question, I was convinced—as were many in the audience—that Ms. Callis was unlikely to support a solution different from that advocated by Senator Durbin.

After the event, all the candidates were interviewed by a reporter for WGLT. The resulting story went up on their web site and was titled “Democrats Start To Discuss Entitlement Program Changes.” The story says this: “Still, cautious Democrats, like Ann Callis of Troy … hedge so much they don’t even firmly acknowledge there is a problem.” The full quote from Ms. Callis follows immediately in the story: “Let’s see where we’re at in a cohesive manner. And then if there are issues, if they say definitively this is a looming problem, this is going to happen to your grandchildren then we’re going to have to see what’s there, and what we remove, and what we don’t.”

Rather than explicitly include possible remedies which might involve an increase in revenues, Ms. Callis chose to discuss cuts.

Ms. Callis’ campaign has said that the quote we used was taken out of context and was actually about “waste, fraud and abuse,” but that is clearly not the case from the story. Some of her supporters have theorized that the answer was about lifting the income cap, but she’s quoted later in the story as not supporting that.

She has yet to offer any credible explanation of her recorded statement.

I invite everyone to listen to the radio story and decide for yourselves. The entire radio story, including Ms. Callis’ quote, can be heard here (the relevant sound bite used in our commercial begins around 0:50):

http://wglt.org/wireready/news/2013/12/07520_soc_sec_depth_WEB_125318.shtml

I stand by the accuracy of the ad. It is an accurate reflection of Ms. Callis’ full statement.

There continue to be two clear contrasts between my position and that of Ann Callis on Social Security; the contrasts are also consistent with our answers at a candidates’ forum in February: 1) I have consistently and from the beginning said that benefit cuts are neither acceptable nor necessary; Callis has not. 2) I have endorsed a realistic plan for keeping the system solvent for decades; Callis has offered clichés and anecdotes.

slideshow

slider1-bg1

slider1-bg1


© 2015 - George Gollin