* Let’s circle back to yesterday’s Democratic gubernatorial candidate speeches and then look at the GOP react. Sun-Times…
Pritzker took digs at Rauner, saying he’s standing up for the Koch brothers, not the working people of the state: “He didn’t shake up Springfield. He instead tore it down.” And he also vowed to invest in the Democratic party’s infrastructure to try to combat the heavily funded Illinois Republican Party.
State Sen. Daniel Biss, D-Evanston, said he’d help to build up the party with a new surge of activism that is coming out of anti-President Trump efforts. […]
“Divide and rule is exactly what Bruce Rauner is doing. We’re entering our third year without a budget. And the way our governor makes it seem it’s like a game of chicken,” Pawar said. “Like he’s taking a principled stance against overspending and the only reason we somehow don’t have a budget is because the other side won’t flinch. But the truth is Bruce Rauner wants to lose this game of chicken. He has to lose this game of chicken in order to win re-election. He wants chaos. He does not want a budget.”
Pawar may be on the right track with that argument, but I think he needs to punch it up a bit.
* WTTW…
“This is going to be a campaign that’s about building the party. It’s going to be a campaign that’s about building new networks of activists and bring them into the party. And I’m not going to be able to write a $50 million check. I mean I can write it but it won’t’ help. He’s what I can do. I can bring a lot of new people in,” Biss said. “Those are people to make small and medium donations that ought to be the lifeblood of our party,” said state Sen. Daniel Biss, D-Evanston.
Chicago Ald. Ameya Pawar offered: “The only way forward is to require us to come together around a vision. Make sure that people who make more, pay more. That the rich pay their fair share, and be honest about our obligations to our retirees. While Bruce Rauner preaches austerity, our job is to be bold and push progressivism.”
While all of the other candidates were from the Chicago metropolitan area, Madison County Superintendent of Schools Bob Daiber said he is Democrats’ best bet because he can win downstate – the large swath of Illinois that backed Rauner over former Gov. Pat Quinn in 2014.
“Why can I win? I will tell you that Bruce Rauner is in office today because Pat Quinn only carried one other election authority other than Cook County, and that was East St. Louis, where I’m from. I can carry downstate Illinois. My challenge is to get a percentage of the vote out of Cook County, and I will carry the rest of the state,” Daiber said. “Honestly, I don’t intend to get Cook County’s endorsement. I don’t even know how you could endorse me. I’m here today to introduce myself to you so you know who I am.”
The honest admission prompted applause, and at least one official to say “I like him.”
* CBS 2…
Chicago City Treasurer Kurt Summers admitted all the potential candidates are similar on the issues, He said what is important is who’s discussing issues people care about and how authentic they are.
* WBEZ…
Ald. David Moore, who also serves as the committeeman of his 17th Ward, asked Pawar if he is running for governor to gain name recognition in anticipation of a campaign for Chicago mayor in 2019.
“This isn’t a game to me,” Pawar said. “If this isn’t it, I’m out.” […]
[Pritzker] also said that if Democrats want to be competitive against Rauner, they should be prepared to go up against Rauner’s powerful communications infrastructure, which Pritzker dismissed as “fake news.” […]
Biss last week launched his campaign in a Facebook Live video criticizing disconnected “billionaires and machine politicians,” but he didn’t pursue that line of criticism when he stood before the party leaders on Monday.
* Public Radio…
And former Merchandise Mart President Chris Kennedy said he thinks Rauner wants to run for president on a campaign of busting unions. In response, a GOP spokesman said that’s laughable and Rauner’s focused on Illinois.
* Sun-Times…
“Today’s audition exemplifies everything wrong with Mike Madigan’s political machine,” said Steven Yaffe, spokesman for the Illinois Republican Party. “Democratic candidates had a chance to stand up to the status quo, but chose to talk about tax increases without reform. Instead of seeking to fix Illinois, the Democratic candidates made clear they will continue the broken system run by the Speaker.”
* Tribune…
Asked about the governor’s race Monday at a separate event, Rauner labeled the Democratic candidates as “a continuation of the status quo.”
“They’re not proposing any new ideas to grow jobs. They’re not proposing any new ideas to protect taxpayers. But they’re proposing tax hikes, income tax hikes. And they’re proposing to continue to work for the political machine that’s dominated Illinois for decades,” he said. “That’s not going to make things better.”
With the Cook County Democratic organization scheduled to meet in August to consider an endorsement, Kennedy told reporters afterward that he didn’t think slate-making was as “meaningful as it was 50 or 60 years ago when people in the backroom could control the outcome of an election.”
Still, he stopped short of saying whether he would seek their endorsement.
Thoughts?
- A guy - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 8:44 am:
It’s going to be important to see someone break out of that pack fast.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 8:47 am:
Kennedy continues to demonstrate that the only things he has going for him as a candidate are his last name and money.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 8:58 am:
Just employ the Rauner strategy, blame everything on the Governor.
- Alexander Paterakis - Your friendly neighborhood Candidate - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 9:01 am:
No one talks about taxes because no one wants to focus on fundamental broken programs. We have a slate of people that want to talk about the system yet are the system. Bruce Rauner is a meanie, but no plan to combat the impasse
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 9:12 am:
I do not see Biss having much success given his support to cutting pensions of organized labor. Organized labor is a big part of the Democrat primary vote.
- Bridgeport Barb - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 9:17 am:
Props to Alderman Moore for seeing through Pawar’s charade.
- Lucky Pierre - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 9:20 am:
Daniel Biss campaign central theme is getting the billionaires to pay their fair share.
There are 17 in Illinois, one who was at the event yesterday.
Did he make a personal appeal?
Since there are only 16 left, many of whom are Democrats this should be very easy to accomplish.
Will it solve our problems? Nope but class warfare sure will get some people to believe they are entitled to a free college education, if it weren’t for the evil billionaires.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 9:24 am:
===given his support to cutting pensions of organized labor===
That bill also had support from Local 150, among other unions.
- AlfondoGonz - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 9:33 am:
It’s funny how the rich (or, in LP’S case, their riches’ henchmen) always seem so distressed by the idea of “class warfare.”
Best not to let the serfs get printed news, eh, LP? Could threaten the landed gentry.
- Grandson of Man - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 9:35 am:
Democratic Party leadership:
Moe: “Hey porcupine, where’s our jobs agenda? Rauner’s moidering us with PR?”
Larry: “I dunno, you never told me to make a jobs agenda.”
Moe: “Well don’t just stand around. Get busy and start making a jobs agenda! [slaps Larry in the face]
Moe: I guess we don’t have a tax plan either. What are ya layin’ around fer? Hey chucklehead, get busy making a tax plan.
Curly: “I’ll do it when I’m ready.”
Moe: “Are you ready?”
Curly: “I’m ready.”
Moe: “C’mon, get goin!” [slaps Curly in the head]
- LizPhairTax - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 9:42 am:
Bruce Rauner IS class warfare, ya doofus.
LP, you post here a lot. Be funny or be smart or rhyme or something.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 9:45 am:
I guess if there are only 17 billionaires in Illinois, that leaves 13 or so million to rally against the 17?
That’s the “Bernie Sanders”, it’s addition by subtracting “billionaires”.
I dunno if it will work, it could, but math tells me 17 is less than 13 million… that’s the play being used.
We’ll see.
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 10:25 am:
Here’s a Lucky-style rhyme:
I’m a boring rehash of disproven agitprop,
Who wastes everyone’s time when they read my flop.
I think I’m smart.
I think I’m insightful.
So I’ll keep posting my dreck,
Until I’m told to take a bite-full.
- Arsenal - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 10:39 am:
==I do not see Biss having much success given his support to cutting pensions of organized labor.==
I’ve heard Biss has spent the last couple of years trying to mend fences there, but I have no idea how it’s gone.
- Arsenal - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 10:41 am:
I think Biss and Pawar are on to something with trying to harness the Resistance/Indivisible energy. But Kennedy and especially Pritzker could certainly craft a message to appeal to the same crowd.
- illini - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 10:53 am:
@VanillaMan - you still have your remarkable gift of parody ( or truth, as the case might be ). Thanks.
And thanking @Liz as well for the suggestion.
Now that LP sees how this is done, does anyone think his posts will change?
- @MisterJayEm - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 11:02 am:
“Now that LP sees how this is done, does anyone think his posts will change?”
You can lead a horse to water — https://capitolfax.com/2017/03/22/todays-quotable-119/#comment-12706809 — but etc.
– MrJM
- Harry - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 11:19 am:
We’re doomed.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 11:48 am:
LP has a right to speak his mind. Disagree. Piling on is for weaklings.
- AlfondoGonz - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 11:57 am:
Anonymous
If more than one person disagrees with LP, it’s not piling on; it’s each of us, individually, disagreeing.
If you want to offer an original thought instead of defending your little buddy, perhaps we can disagree with you some, too.
- @MisterJayEm - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 12:25 pm:
“Piling on is for weaklings.”
Over a year ago, I resolved to try to ignore Anonymous commenters. My reasons were three-fold:
1) By and large, commenters too lazy to come up with a nickname are usually very lazy thinkers. In fact, they are rarely more than talking point regurgitaters. While I’m sure there are exceptions, I honestly can’t recall the last insightful post from an anonymous commenter.
2) In addition, anonymous comments are too time-consuming and tedious to engage. The discussion is relatively easy to follow when commenters use a nickname. There is the occasional atemporal cross-post, but it’s usually simply a matter of scrolling down to read comment, then reply, then rebuttal, etc.
But with anonymous comments it is always much more difficult. Which anonymous commenter are your replying to? Some try to use the Anonymous+timestamp method, but that falls apart once the Anonymous in question responds. Which Anonymous+timestamp are they to be identified with? The original? The response? Who knows? And is it even worth the effort to figure it out (see reason 1)? I don’t think it’s worth the bother.
3) Finally, the Anonymous handle allows commenters to make contradictory statements and claims without any accountability. They can claim that Politician Jones was brave and brilliant to do X in one comment and then claim that Politician Jones had no idea about X when that is convenient. Internal logical consistency is a very low standard for discussing the issues, but it is a standard to which Anonymous commenters cannot be held. And I am no longer interested in having a discussion without minimal logical standards.
There are plenty of commenters with whom I disagree who use consistent nicknames. I may think they’re wrong, simple, silly or dishonest, but I know that they care enough about the Cap Fax conversations and community to be minimally accountable, consistent and courteous. While I reserve the right to occasionally quote and dissect a particularly egregious anonymous comment, I intend to concentrate my attention on those who respect this forum enough to adopt a nickname.
This policy has worked well for me these last 14 months, and I would once again recommend that serious commenters consider doing likewise.
– MrJM
- ZC - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 12:30 pm:
It’s a not-bad field, overall. No Obamas in the mix, obviously, but you may need only an average challeger in 2018 to knock out a very vulnerable incumbent, especially if Republicans get demoralized by DC and stay home.
Say what you will about the IL Democratic party, they’re going to give Rauner a serious challenge. I was talking with a friend from Wisconsin the other day, and he told me Scott Walker’s definitely vulnerable, and even a lot of Republicans in the state don’t like him anymore, but the WI Dem bench is so thin, even most Democrats in the state think Walker will be reelected without a serious challenge. Now that’s a party in crisis, if true.
- Truthteller - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 1:07 pm:
To Rauner’s point about “a continuation of the status quo”, nothing would assure its continuance more than the reelection of Rauner.
Things were bad before and he has made them worse. Compared to Rauner, bad is good.
Anybody who thinks we are better off today than we were two years ago, please raise your hand
- Echo The Bunnyman - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 1:38 pm:
I have a friend that speaks very highly of Bob Daiber. That answer is why. Outside of cook, he’s correct that area is key he will win it. If people follow and learn. He may make some hay. Good on him.
- illini - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 2:24 pm:
@MrJM - I could not have made the point any better. Well stated.
I have commented on this before, and, like you, have made a policy of not responding to “Anonymous”, even if ,on some occasions, they may make a comment that I am inclined to agree with or would like to expand on.
For all we know there could be 20 or 30 individuals that are unique commenters, but how does anyone know?
Rich is good enough to provide all of us with this valuable forum. And it pains me to think that there are those “lazy” individuals who seem to have little respect for Rich and his very reasonable request that we all have a nickname.
- Lucky Pierre - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 4:37 pm:
Feel free to disagree with me, I don’t need a safe space. Roughly 1/2 of the residents of this blue state agree with me on many issues.
Governor Rauner won and both Republican leaders are more popular that Madigan and Cullerton.
Even the commenter that disagrees with me on almost every post believes Rauner will get reelected.
My point is there are no specifics from the Democratic party to right the ship here in Illinois. Taxing 17 billionaires? It is insulting if that can pass for a political platform. You won’t be able to beat someone with nothing and right now Democrats have nothing.
No answers on property taxes, manufacturing job loss, out migration, workers comp, redistricting,government consolidation, economic development, just lets keep the same policies that caused us to lose the Governor’s mansion.
No specifics other than a graduated income tax which could not pass in a supermajority legislature with a Democratic Governor.
Does anyone believe that is possible to pass a millionaires tax or a graduated income tax? The Speaker just uses it as a campaign issue.
It is a perfect mix of class warfare and cover for his expansion of government spending. Voters fall for that every year.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 4:54 pm:
===Feel free to disagree with me, I don’t need a safe space. Roughly 1/2 of the residents of this blue state agree with me on many issues===
No paying legislators, while “popular”, isn’t remotely constitutional or healthy for democracy.
Popularity is never an acceptable “single” measure of good policy
===Even the commenter that disagrees with me on almost every post believes Rauner will get reelected===
No. This is a lie. “Lie”?
We have discussed this. This is not true. You are literally fabricating my words for a narrative. Stop.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Mar 24, 17 @ 2:50 pm
===Seeing how Rod won, understanding the financial resources and the poor messaging by Dems, it would be, today, difficult to say Rauner would in fact, unequivocally, lose.===
Capiche?
- Lucky Pierre - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 4:55 pm:
@MrJayEm,
feel free to point out all of the ” bald faced falsehoods I have posted.”
I will point out a few from the Speaker
“I pledge to work cooperatively and professionally with the Governor on solving the #1 issue in the State of Illinois- the budget deficit.”
He then passed a budget with a bigger deficit than the previous year that contained no input from Republicans or the Governor.
The Governor is trying to pass a personal agenda (a Rhode Island Democratic Governor strangely advocated for many of the same personal items on her budget)
Much easier to smear than debate. Who was the last Governor who was able to work with Speaker Madigan on solving Illinois problems and not pushing them off on future generations?
Every previous Governor has just gone along to get along and look at where that has led us.
You sound happy about it and don’t urge any change from the Speaker.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 4:59 pm:
==right now Democrats have nothing.==
Neither does the Governor. Two years and hasn’t accomplished a thing. So I guess the playing field is even.
==Governor Rauner won ==
And the Democrats maintained control of the General Assembly. What’s your point?
==both Republican leaders are more popular that Madigan and Cullerton==
And that matters why? Again, what’s your point?
==No answers on property taxes, manufacturing job loss, out migration, workers comp, redistricting,government consolidation, economic development==
See the Senate Grand Bargain . . . you know, the one the Governor killed.
==, just lets keep the same policies==
Ugh. More victimhood. It’s all or nothing with you. Disagree with anything and you must be for the status quo. Enough with that argument because it’s juvenile
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 4:59 pm:
===He then passed a budget with a bigger deficit than the previous year that contained no input from Republicans or the Governor.===
Enough. Seriously.
Rauner signed a stopgap with a larger deficit because Rauner’s own budget then, and the next budgets, continued with Rauner’s own status quo, phony, grossly unbalanced budgets.
Do you even trade in honest discourse?
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 5:02 pm:
You must be for the status quo OW. /s/
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Mar 28, 17 @ 5:08 pm:
- Demoralized -
I’m sure I’ve been called worse, lol.
Now I guess it’s a badge of honor(?)