News filtered out on Friday that Mike Niecestro, described on his website as a social and fiscal conservative, might enter the race as an Independent candidate in the US Senate race in Illinois against Mark Kirk and Alexi Giannoulias. 

Those that read my ramblings on a regular basis know my disdain for 3rd party candidates.  For those that aren't regular readers, the 3rd party plays a role in bringing issues to the forefront that might otherwise be ignored (sometimes purposely ignored) by the major party candidates.  However, in elections, 3rd party candidates do nothing more than play the spoiler.  For example, Woodrow Wilson would not have been elected President if Theodore Roosevelt hadn't split the GOP ticket.  Al Frankin would not be in the Senate right now if it hadn't been for the 3rd party candidate.  Bill Clinton won because of Ross Perot.  George W. Bush won because of Ralph Nader.  History is strewn with results of elections where the 3rd party effected the outcome.  Now, here in Illinois, we face history repeating itself. 

Traditionally, and according to The Weekly Standard, midterm elections have about a 20% drop off in voters versus Presidential year elections.  In fact, there is a noticeable pattern from 1960-2008 of lower turnout in midterm elections.  For instance, 2008 saw a 56.8% turnout versus 37.1% in 2006.   This is where Mark Kirk's problem with Mike Niecestro lies.  Why only Mark Kirk and not Alexi Giannoulias?  The answer is because of the perceived liberalness of Mark Kirk on social issues, and some questionable votes he cast in the House of Representatives (Cap and Trade).  There are grumblings within the Tea Parties about the two major party choices for the US Senate in Illinois.  There are also grumblings by conservative Republicans that are not happy with Mark Kirk for the same reasons.  Let's examine how I think the race could play out if Mark Kirk does not start wooing the conservatives in Illinois:

I believe that if the race was just between Mark Kirk and Alexi Giannoulias, then the vote split would be 53% Kirk, 47% Giannoulias.  However, there are other 3rd party candidates in the race besides (a possible) Mike Niecestro.  We have the usual Constitution party candidate in Russell Randy Stufflebeam, Mike Labno for the Libertarian Party, and LeAlan Jones for the Green Party.  If we use 2008 voter turnout as a basis to go by, then 5.3 million voted.  The last Senate election held in a midterm year was in 2002 which saw only 3.45 million voting which represented roughly 22% of registered voters .  Not good.  I'm going to use the 2008 numbers reduced by 20%, as discussed earlier and use that number to see how close Kirk could come to losing this election to Giannoulias.  Also, I think Niecestro will take votes exclusively from Kirk since I don't see many voters who consider themselves social AND fiscal conservatives voting for Giannoulias.  As a note, do not be fooled by percentages.  2002 saw Dick Durbin winning by 1 million votes which translated into a 60%-39% win, so in 2002, every 100,000 voters represented about 2% of the total vote.  We'll see a similar pattern develop as we develop my hypothesis.

5.3 million - 20% = 4.24 million.

Then, if we take the vote percentages from the Green, Libertarian and Constitution party candidates in the 2008 Senate race, we have about 5% of the vote (see 5.3 million link earlier).  If we use our projected voter turnout with projected votes based on the previous election, then we get this:

The winning margin for Kirk is 297,000 votes.  Furthermore, notice that 297,000 votes spread represents a 7% difference.  As a result, if Niecestro were to gain any traction and receive anything more than 7% of the vote, Kirk will lose - or we'd have months of court challenges a la Florida or Minnesota.  The margin for error is even greater if the turnout is less than 4.24 million as I projected. 

If you use the 2002 Illinois Senate election numbers (3,450,020 votes cast), a 7% Niecestro vote is also the magic number for Obama's protege Giannoulias to win.


All of this could turn out differently though.  First, voter turnout could be higher in different parts of the state than others that could favor one candidate or another.  Second, voters may reject anything Democrat and Obama by November no matter who is on the ballot.  Third, Kirk might start courting the conservative vote more than he already has, if he has at all.  Fourth, Giannoulias might not even be on the ballot by November.  Finally, the money from the National Republican Party and the National Democrat Party has yet to even start flowing into this state.  If anyone thinks that Kirk winning the Illinois Senate race is not going to be a referendum on Obama, Dick Durbin, and the Democrats as a whole, then they need to get their head examined.  It's only June, and this race has yet to even begin to heat up!  Strap in, it's a long time until November!