What is your source?  I would like to know your source for this:

"laesch significantly underperformed the generic ballot democrat"

In the post of your analysis of the last election that you link here to as "we've hashed this out before" you refer to this speculative underperformance as well.  You say there that "the last generic ballot test in IL-14 showed the democratic candidate slightly behind the generic republican candidate 48% to 49% (62 respondents; no oversample; huge margin of error)."  I can believe that was a huge margin of error!!!  62 respondents?  62????  Who did this "poll?"  In addition to having a "huge margin of error" it is wildly inconsistent with the known leanings of the district and its past election performance.

I'll offer some sourced facts instead:

http://www.elections.il.gov/

In 2004 (when you point out in the post you link to here that Kerry took 45% of the vote) Hastert, a sitting speaker of the house, took 68.6% of the vote, in 2006, against Laesch, he took only 59.8%.

and this:

"he doesn't seem to understand all that is involved in a congressional campaign, an opinion that several in the dccc seem to share"

Who are these "several in the DCCC?"  Who/what is your source there?  The campaign was much in contact with the DCCC in 2006, and I can find you a myriad of sources (a simple google search would do so!) who will point out the DCCC strategy for 2006 Congressional elections was to put their resources behind "winnable" districts.  They are not exactly known to be on board with the 50 State Strategy.  Some supported the DCCC strategy, some opposed it, but there can be no dispute that IL-14 was identified as "unwinnable" by a myriad of "experts" before Laesch or anyone else even entered the primary!  After the groundwork in party-building done within the district - much of it by Laesch and his campaign - that is no longer the perception.
and this:

"there were democrats in the district who didn't vote for laesch, and those were democrats who had formed an impression of him"

No doubt there were Democrats who didn't vote for Laesch - no one can take 100% of the vote, even from their own party!  Laesch also took some significant independent and even some Republican votes.  Denny, by contrast, took 38% LESS total votes than he did in 2004.  And, thankfully, though we came up short we also had in place a more sophisticated ground game than has previously been employed by Dems in IL-14: we used the technology necessary to micro-target those areas where we need to improve those totals.  The statement that "those were Democrats who had formed an impression of him" is conjecture - they could have, as easily, been Democrats who were on vacation.

and this:

"you asked for my source, and that's easy: voters in IL-14"

I'll refer you again to the videos.  The people in that room are Dem activists and voters in IL-14...as I believe you are not?

and, most of all, this:

your lack of surprise that I am "unaware of that," (the supposed fact that IL-14 voters are supposedly "against") and "laesch obviously isn't tolerant of differing views."

It isn't "fact" so much as observation and experience, but as someone who has lived in this previously very Republican district for 40 years, and who spent more hours than I can count in public settings with him in 2006, I was continually astounded at the almost universally positive resident reaction to John on the campaign trail.   He can talk to almost anyone about almost anything - more importantly he can listen.  

Moreover, I can only say that, as the probably most persistent thorn in John's side concerning one or two issues on which he and I  disagreed in 2006, I can only find the suggestion that he is "intolerant of differing views" laughable: he spent more time than he should have not just debating those issues with me, but studying research I offered to back up my opinion and offering me counter-research. I even managed to change his mind on one position. I have seen this scenario play out with others - sometimes with John standing on the side of the road debating policy with a voter while an entire parade passes by and we are trying to get him back on the float.

The man does truly and sincerely listen.  Try him sometime.

In the meantime, I will ask once again:
Where are your sources?

Naperville is not in IL-14.  Aurora, Elgin, and DeKalb (home of Northern Illinois University) are however.

Lisa Bennett
Blog Coordinator
Laesch for Congress

getting married or not.  one presumes that laesch can actually read a calendar.  but, yes, i was aware he was getting married.  he's hardly the first to do so.

the issue with zamora isn't complicated at all.  progressives believe that candidates have a right to run -- and that illinois' standards are oppressive in this regard.  john laesch, otoh, employed machine tactics to try to knock another person off the ballot (someone who hardly constituted a credible threat).  there's no question about that.  so much for laesch being a progressive.

and i've met laesch.  which is why i have this opinion about him.  nice guy.  clueless as all get out.  john laesch has no chance of winning, for so many reasons.  it would be a shame it the netroots got invested in him again when there's nothing at stake here.  every other democratic candidate has a better chance of turning IL-14 blue than he does...