Jim Nowlan: Will the Illinois GOP show up for the 2026 state elections?
In contrast, Republicans have no bench of experienced, well-known prospects to speak of. Because of extreme gerrymandering, the GOP has few state legislators and no statewide officials whatsoever. Attractive but no-name candidates are being counseled by Republican insiders that this is a no-win year for the GOP and it's better to stay out.
Will the GOP even show up with a slate of credible candidates for the U.S. Senate, the governorship and all other statewide offices?
After all, the party in the White House generally does poorly in the midterm election. And Gov JB Pritzker has more money than Croesus ($3.7 billion, according to Forbes) and seemingly giddy enthusiasm for spending it. Recent history shows he stands ready to bankroll all the Democratic statewide candidates with more than enough money to blow away the opposition. After all, he wants to show national Democrats that he leads his party to victory up and down the line.
GOP woes don't end there. Illinois Republicans are divided into a downstate (outside the seven metro Chicago counties) that is enthusiastically pro-Donald Trump, versus the suburbs, where moderates and Democrats reign.
For example, DuPage County and its 920,000 residents used to be largely white and GOP. But the times, they are a'changin'. According to the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP), a language other than English is now spoken at home in nearly one-third of the households in the six counties surrounding Cook. Republican George Ryan won the governorship in 1998 with 70% of the DuPage County vote, whereas Trump garnered 42% of that county's vote in 2024.
GOP nominees for the U.S. Senate and governorship will have to declare their position on Trump, a no-win situation: Come out strongly for Trump and lose the suburbs or come out against Trump and watch voters downstate sit on their hands in November. Be wishy-washy on Trump, and lose votes across the board.
And who will bankroll GOP candidates in the face of such dour prospects? Billionaire Ken Griffin has departed Illinois for Florida, with his millions for GOP causes. Make no mistake: Big money has replaced party organization as the engine of candidate success.
Lightning does strike, however. In 2004, little-known state Sen. Barack Obama entered a crowded field that sought an open seat in the U.S. Senate. Trailing in the polls throughout in the Democratic primary, Obama surged to victory when, near the end of the primary, the front-runner's candidacy imploded almost overnight as a result of juicy revelations of messy marital discord.
In the general election campaign that followed, the attractive GOP nominee dropped out of the race because of sexual peccadilloes revealed in unsealed divorce records, and Obama skated into the U.S. Senate. The rest, as they say …
I expect there will be no-name and, maybe otherwise, very attractive candidates on the ballot next year for the GOP but with little money.
I have mentioned money several times in this essay. In the past decade, Pritzker has spent $400 million on his own and associates' campaigns. A Democrat, he even sabotaged the Republican primary campaign for governor in 2022. In that year, according to this newspaper, Pritzker spent $24 million to boost the nomination of possibly the weakest of his possible opponents for the general election. Pritzker's money advertised that Darren Bailey was 'too extreme' for Illinois — which was, irony definitely intended, an attractive message for a big swath of conservative GOP primary voters. Shameful politics.
Big money, corrosive of democracy, could be the overarching issue for Republican candidates in 2026: 'You can't buy my vote! Don't let JB Pritzker continue to buy elections in Illinois!'
Lightning does strike. But you have to show up.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
32 minutes ago
- New York Times
China's Biotech Is Cheaper and Faster
Just outside of Shanghai, in the city of Wuxi, China is building its future of medicine — a booming biotechnology hub of factories and laboratories where global pharmaceutical companies can develop and manufacture drugs faster and cheaper than anywhere else. Amid the Trump administration's tariffs on China, I figured manufacturing hubs like this one would be wracked with anxiety. But when I visited Wuxi in April, government officials insisted that its research hub was flourishing. They were proud to tell me about their superstar labs and companies that are continuing to thrive. The fact that Chinese biotechnology stocks have surged over 60 percent since January seems to bolster this claim. The city's researchers certainly seemed positioned to be busy for decades. In its quest to dethrone American dominance in biotech, China isn't necessarily trying to beat America at its own game. While the U.S. biotech industry is known for incubating cutting-edge treatments and cures, China's approach to innovation is mostly focused on speeding up manufacturing and slashing costs. The idea isn't to advance, say, breakthroughs in the gene-editing technology CRISPR; it's to make the country's research, development, testing and production of drugs and medical products hyperefficient and cheaper. As a result, China's biotech sector can deliver drugs and other medical products to customers at much cheaper prices, including inexpensive generics. These may not be world-changing cures, but they are treatments that millions of people around the world rely on every day. And as China's reach expands, the world will soon have to reckon with a new leader in biotech and decide how it wants to respond. One such company that embodies the Chinese approach to biotech is Wuxi AppTec. It's a one-stop shop for pharmaceutical research and development, streamlining everything from early-stage drug discovery to young scientist recruitment and medication production. The company, whose clients have included Chinese firms like Innovent and Jiangsu Hengrui, as well as American and European drugmakers like Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline and AstraZeneca, was involved in, by one estimate, a quarter of the drugs used in the United States, including blockbuster cancer drugs. Though the Chinese government bargains hard with both foreign and domestic pharmaceutical companies to provide products at the right price in exchange for market access, the low prices that Chinese consumers pay are ultimately the result of Chinese biotech companies' ability to test and manufacture drugs at a pace far faster than their American counterparts. So far, American biotech giants don't seem to mind the competition, since their own use of companies like Wuxi AppTec allows them to dedicate more of their money to breakthrough research. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Ukrainian sniper breaks world record with 13,000-foot kill shot against Russian forces: report
A Ukrainian sniper unit on Thursday reportedly broke the world record for the longest confirmed sniper kill, eliminating Russian troops from a distance of more than 13,000 feet. The shot, fired by a Ukrainian-produced rifle and aided by artificial intelligence and drone guidance, left two Russian soldiers dead in the area of Pokrovsk, Ukraine, the Kyiv Post reported. 'The record-breaking shot was made on Aug. 14, 2025, using artificial intelligence under the guidance of [an unmanned aerial vehicle] complex with a 14.5 mm alligator rifle,' said military journalist Yuri Butusov, according to the Kyiv Post. The shooting took place amid increased Russian attacks in the area surrounding Pokrovsk, which was once a city with more than 60,000 residents, the Post reported. The previous world record belonged to a 58-year-old Ukrainian sniper who eliminated a target from a distance of around 12,400 feet, the outlet added. The record-breaking shot reportedly took place a day before President Donald Trump's closely-watched summit Friday with Russian President Vladimir Putin. 3 A Ukrainian soldier in the sniper unit of the 108th Territorial Defense Brigade readies a rifle during training on Nov. 4, 2023. Anadolu via Getty Images 3 The previous world record was held by another Ukrainian sniper who took out a Russian soldier from nearly 2½ miles away with a high-tech rifle known as 'Horizon's Lord.' SBU 3 Ukrainian soldiers take part in a sniper shooting exercise at a training facility outside Kyiv on Nov. 21, 2023. AFP via Getty Images Putin, who spoke first in a joint press conference held by the two world leaders, described the talks as a 'constructive atmosphere of mutual respect.' Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is scheduled to meet with Trump in Washington, DC, Monday. Zelensky said in a post on X that he and Trump will 'discuss all of the details regarding ending the killing and the war.'
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Trump runs into the difficulty of Putin diplomacy and ending a long war
NEW YORK (AP) — President Donald Trump walked into a summit with Russia's Vladimir Putin pressing for a ceasefire deal and threatening 'severe consequences' and tough new sanctions if the Kremlin leader failed to agree to halt the fighting in Ukraine. Instead, Trump was the one who stood down, dropping his demand for a ceasefire in favor of pursuing a full peace accord — a position that aligns with Putin's. After calls with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders, Trump wrote as he flew home from Friday's meeting in Alaska that it had been 'determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up.' It was a dramatic reversal that laid bare the challenges of dealing with Putin, a cunning adversary, as well as the complexities of a conflict that Trump had repeatedly boasted during his campaign that he could solve within 24 hours. Trump's position after the summit with Putin Few details have emerged about what the two leaders discussed or what constituted the progress they both touted. The White House did not respond to messages seeking comment Saturday. While European leaders were relieved that Trump did not agree to a deal that ceded territory or otherwise favored Moscow, the summit allowed Putin to reclaim his place on the world stage and may have bought Russia more time to push forward with its offensive in Ukraine. 'We're back to where we were before without him having gone to Alaska,' said Fiona Hill, who served as Trump's senior adviser on Russia at the National Security Council during his first term, including when he last met Putin in Helsinki in 2018. In an interview, Hill argued that Trump had emerged from the meeting in a weaker position on the world stage because of his reversal. Other leaders, she said, might now look at the U.S. president and think he's 'not the big guy that he thinks he is and certainly not the dealmaking genius.' 'All the way along, Trump was convinced he has incredible forces of persuasion,' she said, but he came out of the meeting without a ceasefire — the 'one thing' he had been pushing for, even after he gave the Russian leader the 'red carpet treatment.' Trump has 'run up against a rock in the form of Putin, who doesn't want anything from him apart from Ukraine,' she said. Democrats call for consequences for Putin At home, Democrats expressed alarm at what at times seemed like a day of deference, with Trump clapping for Putin as he walked down a red carpet during an elaborate ceremony welcoming him to U.S. soil for the first time in a decade. The two rode together in the presidential limousine and exchanged compliments. Trump seemed to revel in particular in Putin echoing his oft-repeated assertion that Russia never would have invaded Ukraine if Trump had been in office instead of Democrat Joe Biden at the time. Before news cameras, Trump did not use the opportunity to castigate Putin for launching the largest ground invasion in Europe since World War II or human rights abuses he's been accused of committing. Instead, Putin was the one who spoke first, and invited Trump to join him in Moscow next. 'President Trump appears to have been played yet again by Vladimir Putin,' said Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. 'The President rolled out a red carpet and warmly greeted a murderous dictator on American soil and reports indicate he got nothing concrete in return.' 'Enough is enough,' she went on. 'If President Trump won't act, Congress must do so decisively by passing crushing sanctions when we return in the coming weeks.' Sen. Jack Reed, a Rhode Island Democrat who is the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he supports diplomacy but 'peacemaking must be done responsibly.' 'Instead of caving to Putin, the U.S. should join our allies in levying tough, targeted new sanctions on Russia to intensify the economic pressure,' he said. Trump has touted himself as the president of peace Trump has tried to cast himself as a peacemaker, taking credit for helping deescalate conflicts between India and Pakistan as well as Thailand and Cambodia. He proudly mediated a peace agreement between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo and another between the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan to end decades of fighting. Trump has set his eye on the Nobel Peace Prize, with numerous allies offering nominations. But Trump has struggled to made headway on the world's two most vexing conflicts: the Russia-Ukraine war and Israel's offensive in Gaza against Hamas. Republicans and Trump allies offer little response so far In Washington, the summit was met by little response from Trump's allies. Republican lawmakers who spoke out were largely reserved and generally called for continued talks and constructive actions from the Trump administration. 'President Trump brought Rwanda and the DRC to terms, India and Pakistan to terms, Armenia and Azerbaijan to terms. I believe in our President, and believe he will do what he always does — rise to the challenge,' Rep. Brian Mast, a Florida Republican who chairs the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in a statement to The Associated Press. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, an Alaska Republican, wrote on social media after the summit that 'while the press conference offered few details about their meeting' she was 'cautiously optimistic about the signals that some level of progress was made.' Murkowski said it 'was also encouraging to hear both presidents reference future meetings' but that Ukraine 'must be part of any negotiated settlement and must freely agree to its terms.' Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican and close Trump ally, offered that he was 'very proud' of Trump for having had the face-to-face meeting and was 'cautiously optimistic' that the war might end 'well before Christmas' if a trilateral meeting between Trump, Zelenskyy and Putin transpires. 'I have all the confidence in the world that Donald Trump will make it clear to Putin this war will never start again. If it does, you're going to pay a heavy price,' he said on Fox News. For some Trump allies, the very act of him meeting with Putin was success enough: conservative activist and podcaster Charlie Kirk called it 'a great thing.' Some see a Putin win and a Trump loss But in Europe, the summit was seen as a major diplomatic coup for Putin, who has been eager to emerge from geopolitical isolation. Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, deputy head of Russia's Security Council, praised the summit as a breakthrough in restoring high-level dialogue between Moscow and Washington, describing the talks as 'calm, without ultimatums and threats.' Former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt said the summit was 'a distinct win for Putin. He didn't yield an inch' but was also 'a distinct setback for Trump. No ceasefire in sight.' 'What the world sees is a weak and wobbling America,' Bildt posted on X.
