.

Poll: Foster and Biggert Neck and Neck

A week before the election, poll shows less than a point difference between the 11th Congressional District rivals.

A new poll shows Democratic challenger Bill Foster leading incumbent Judy Biggert by less than 1 point in the candidates' battle to represent the new 11th District.

Professional polling firm We Ask America released the results of an automated Oct. 28 poll showing former 14th District Congressman Foster leading the seven-term Republican 50.4 percent to 49.6 percent.

According to the poll, which sampled more than 1,300 likely voters, the candidates were tied among women, while Foster showed a slight — as in 2-point — lead among male voters. 

The race between Biggert and Foster has been a contentious one, with the two accusing each other of negative campaigning and Foster taking aim at Biggert over a controversial ad released by the National Republican Congressional Committee.

The ad accused Foster of personally profiting from his two-year stint representing the 14th District, a claim he called an "outright lie."

The opponents' last go-round came last week during a live televised debate on WTTW's "Chicago Tonight," where Foster and Biggert sounded off on tax cuts and gay marriage.

This week, Foster, who supported the Dream Act, appeared at a forum aimed at at addressing issues of interest to the Will County Latino community. Biggert sent a representative to discuss her views on immigration and related topics.

READ: Candidates Share Positions at Forum For Immigrant Community

The poll results were as follows:

Judy Biggert (R)Bill Foster (D) ALL VOTERS 49.6% 50.4% Females 50% 50% Males 48% 50%

Poll type: Automated Date: Oct. 28 Participants: 1,303 likely voters Margin of error: ± 2.7%

Don Mueggenborg November 01, 2012 at 12:35 PM
What a dilemma? I liked Biggert but she is no longer in our district. If I wanted to vote out the incumbents and get some new blood, I could not because both Biggert and Foster have had the job before. The politicians have it fixed so a 3rd party cannot win. We keep electing them because we have no choice. Sorry I am being negative.
Ginger1397 November 01, 2012 at 02:19 PM
I agree with Don, this country needs a third candidate to come in and shake up both Dems & GOP. To do that, we need to put a cap on how much money can be spent on campaigns. That is one of the reasons why a third candidate doesn't have a chance. Between Romney & his money bag backers and Obama and his donations, this campaign has reached 1 billion dollars spent. What third candidate would be able to even compete with that? At one time we had regulation on campaign donations but then it went to the supreme court and Justice Scalia gave his decision and the candidates and their backers are able to spend freely. It should be noted he is a conservative judge. Speaking of new blood, we need to put a limit on Supreme Court justices length of service. I cannot believe that it is a lifetime term. Back to Biggert & Foster. Bye, Bye, Biggert, she is just an extention of the GOP long arm of money. The richer get richer, the middle classes suffers. She has had her chance to make a difference and she has for her party and her pocket book.
RLuds November 01, 2012 at 06:37 PM
I agree too Don, We need term limits, but what politician is going to vote themselves out of a job.
Victor Fischer November 02, 2012 at 12:26 AM
I could not agree with both Don and Ginger more. But like RLuds said, what politician is going to vote themselves out of a job. The primary election is set up to take care of those in office, but again, a constitutional amendment will never pass limiting the terms of politicians, or how we vote in the primary election. You are forced to vote for one party, not individuals. We also need to get Mr. Illinois (Madigan) our of office - fat chance of that.
Beytier Von Hugh November 04, 2012 at 08:23 PM
Term limits are actually a red herring, people. I'm not for career politicians - one reason I wouldn't vote for Biggert. But creating a system where there's too fast a turnoer creates a system where the flood new new people rely more heavily on lobbyists to help them get up to speed and make an impact. As in, lobbyists already swoop in and tell the new guy how they can provide the kind of info and expertise the new guy can't. Need to be an expert on international trade practices overnight? There's a lobbyist willing to be that guy! And that breeds conflicts of interest that the Congressman might not even realize - because they're already addicted to having that lobbyist's experience working for them. Remember, lobbyists aren't just schmoozing lawyers, they're ex-lawmakers themselves so they know Washington from the inside. That's why the GOP got comfy letting them write bills that the Congressman could them put their name on. That should scream inappropriate! Adding a provision to help the lobbyist's clients might not even phase the Congressman if they've already bought into the lobbyist's manipulations. If you want to make a real dent in Washington, lobbyists are the enemy you need to focus on.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »