But endorsements for Obama from former Republican Secretary of State Colin Powell and independent New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a steady-as-she-goes jobs report Friday, a backlash in Ohio to Romney commercials portraying Obama as an enemy of the auto industry and the president's steady handling of the aftermath of superstorm Sandy have together stolen that mojo, at least at this writing.
Having been bombarded lately with their ridiculously ugly attack ads, I wish both Foster and Biggert could lose. But I think, based on little more than my internal disgust-o-meter, that voters in their district hate Foster just a bit more than Biggert.
I'm also sensing that the severe, tin-eared statements on rape as it relates to abortion will end up costing Akin and Mourdock seats they would have otherwise won in their red states and cost the Republican Party control of the U.S. Senate that it will need to have any chance of repealing Obamacare. The potential irony? Both men won their primaries against more moderate Republicans by promising to be staunch conservative warriors against such programs as Obamacare.
Note again that these are guesses, not taunts or promises. If I go 0 for 10, I'll eat humble pie, but not a bite of crow.
Here are the rules:
All entries must be posted in the comment thread at chicagotribune.com/zorn by 12:01 a.m. Monday. Employees of Tribune Co. and their relatives may participate because, what the heck, it's an imaginary prize. Guesses will be discarded in races that remain too close to call by Friday. Winner will be announced in the Nov. 11 Tribune.
And, as ever, please, no wagering.
The 411 about "232"
Cook County voters, if you don't think you can remember "I've had it up to the Brim," the semi-catchy slogan I introduced in Wednesday's column, then try this: "Punch 232."
Either one will help you vote against the retention of Cook County Circuit Judge Cynthia Brim, the inept jurist who has been deemed unqualified by nearly every local bar association each of the three times she has sought the OK from voters to keep her job and who was earlier this year charged with battery after a bizarre incident at the Daley Center in which she allegedly shoved a sheriff's deputy.
The local Democratic Party and a political alliance of her fellow judges and major local law firms want you to vote to give her six more erratic years on the bench because, well, that's what they do. Though the ballot-based retention process is designed for voters to reward good judges and punish bad judges, the insiders want you to reward all of them with "yes" votes and not to worry your little heads about which ones aren't qualified.
This election is offering the best test in years of their premise that, collectively, voters are so docile, ignorant or nonchalant that it simply doesn't matter who's on the judicial ballot; that, to borrow a cliche, if their palm card said so, they'd vote to retain a ham sandwich.
If you've had it up to the Brim with their disrespectful cronyism but have trouble with slogans, "Punch 232" tells you how to cast a "no" vote on Brim in an effort to deny her the 60 percent supermajority she and other judges must get to win.
The Tribune editorial board has identified five other judges from the 57 running for retention that do not deserve your support. Find them listed by name and number (234, 238, 244, 282 and 292) on the editorial page now through Tuesday.