Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Credit Union (noun) – volunteer led, locally owned, democratically controlled cooperatives
Next Post: About today’s endorsements
Posted in:
* It’s only gonna go up from here…
Wealthy venture capitalist Bruce Rauner has set a new record for personal funding in a campaign for Illinois governor, his out-of-pocket total hitting $6 million after he put another $1 million into his bid Monday. […]
Rauner, a Winnetka businessman who is perhaps the wealthiest candidate ever to run for public office in Illinois, has now raised $14 million ahead of the March 18 primary election — far and away eclipsing the combined money-raising efforts of Republican rivals state Sens. Bill Brady of Bloomington and Kirk Dillard of Hinsdale and state Treasurer Dan Rutherford of Chenoa.
The previous record for personal money in an Illinois governor race came in 2006, when Chicago businessman Ron Gidwitz and his wife donated $5.3 million only to lose the primary election. Still, Rauner has a ways to go to top the U.S. Senate bids of Blair Hull, who spent $28.6 million of his own money to lose the 2004 Democratic primary to Barack Obama, and Peter Fitzgerald, who spent nearly $12 million from his own pocket to win in 1998.
* If he wins the primary, he’ll easily break Hull’s record. NBC 5 looks at other states…
Self-funded political campaigns have taken off in recent years, with the number of such candidates rising from 78 in 1990 to 223 in 2010 and 193 in 2012, according to an analysis by The Washington Times. The Times also found that of 1,752 self-funded candidates in federal elections since 1990, only 42 have been elected—a success rate of just 2.4 percent.
That was certainly the case for pro wrestling executive Linda McMahon, who suffered two straight defeats in her bid for a Connecticut Senate seat, despite dropping $97 million of her own money.
Jeff Greene, a Florida investor who made billions on credit default swaps, lost a Democratic primary for U.S. Senate in 2010 despite contributing $23 million to his own campaign.
In 2002, Texas banker Tony Sanchez spent $60 million of his own money on his Democratic campaign for governor, while billionaire businessman Thomas Golisano spent more than $50 million from his personal fortune in New York’s gubernatorial race. Neither won.
* Sun-Times…
A Rauner campaign aide said the massive infusion of new money is designed to counter the push by unions and other Democratic interests to knock him out of the primary.
“Liberal special interest groups and government union bosses have spent $4 million attempting to hijack the Republican primary and are trying to stop Bruce from spreading his plan to pass term limits, cut spending, and reverse the Quinn 67 percent tax hike,” Rauner spokesman Mike Schrimpf said.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 9:59 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Credit Union (noun) – volunteer led, locally owned, democratically controlled cooperatives
Next Post: About today’s endorsements
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I think it is only right that the wealthiest of man govern the masses.
They didn’t get to be that wealthy by being like the rest of us.
Only makes sense….right?
Comment by PERPLEXED Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:07 am
Rauner is also the head of a special interest group, as he is the chairman of the PAC for term limits and legislative reform.
Comment by Snucka Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:10 am
Wouldn’t this money be better spent to help people who need a ‘hand up’ instead of for self-serving to buy the election?
Comment by Anon Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:11 am
Guess by the time it is over we’ll know both the size and cost of Rauner’s ego.
The real question is what does he hope to achieve for his investment?
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:11 am
===“Liberal special interest groups and government union bosses have spent $4 million attempting to hijack the Republican primary and are trying to stop Bruce from spreading his plan to pass term limits, cut spending, and reverse the Quinn 67 percent tax hike,” Rauner spokesman Mike Schrimpf said.===
“Raunerite special interest groups and Bruce Rauner himself have spent $12 million attempting to hijack the Republican primary and are trying to stop Illinois voters from having a choice this March 18th,” Rauner spokesman Mike Schrimpf said.
Better.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:14 am
If Rauner is going to drop lots of money, better to drop lots-and-lots and win than lots and lose.
Mazel tov to the consultants riding the gravy train.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:16 am
Man, if I had $14 million to waste on my ego, you’d never see me again. I can think of lots of better ways to spend that kind of dough and none involve being in the public eye.
Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:16 am
You could very easily say that about ever campaign dollar raised (or spent) by anyone, couldn’t you?
Comment by OneMan Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:16 am
OW,
I think that a guy and DuPage Rep are the same person. I’m sure one of them will rise up to defend Rauner. Just make sure you don’t defame the Baron…
Comment by Cincinnatus Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:17 am
Election Day is now two weeks long. I wonder if any of the four have a strong GOTEV (Get Out the Early Vote) operation.
Comment by Snucka Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:19 am
In one sense Rahmner is hijacking the primary. But I’m not sure Quinn vs. Rahmner is less of a choice than Quinn vs. Dillard. Not to be a broken record (kids, back when vinyl was the main format for music, the records would scratch and…oh, never mind) but remember how much the GOP loathed Peter Fitzgerald when he made pro-reform moves? He was another rich guy whose money made him independent of the party. And one could argue the special interest groups backing Rahmner are more “Republican” than the IEA and the Labor groups running anti-Rahmner adds on behalf of the allegedly “true Republican” candidates.
Comment by lake county democrat Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:22 am
Glad to see Bruce is shaking-up Springfield by proving that everything in the state is for sale and what’s best for the people of Illinois usually goes by the boards in favor of what’s best for the highest bidder. Oh, wait . . .
Comment by Jeeves the Cat Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:26 am
“The real question is what does he hope to achieve for his investment?”
He’ll tell us later, just like with other policies.
It looks like he wants to do an anti-union version of what Scott Walker, Mitch Daniels and Rick Snyder did in their states. That’s huge, in Republican gubernatorial circles. Union heads are huge game trophies on their walls.
Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:28 am
I’m with you, 47th. The glass office gets blamed for everything in the state. When you have enough money to do anything why buy your way into that?
Comment by Out Here In The Middle Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:31 am
Rauner is living the dream,as a business man his only product has been dreams.Dream of parlaying pension funds,great care at the nursing home. Has he ever sold a product you can hold in your hands like benne babies?Quit living the dream and wake-up,it`s a nightmare.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:35 am
I don’t even understand what Rauner has to gain by being governor. If I had his kind of money, right now I’d be in Nice.
Comment by Chavez-respecting Obamist Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:38 am
Say what one will about Rauner, he certainly is putting his money where his mouth is.
And if that $4 million figure is roughly accurate, Schrimpf’s point actually makes some sense. The Democratic apparatus is so much stronger than the Republican one in Illinois that you must somehow come up with the resources necessary to counter that imbalance. If you have the money to spend, that is one way to close the gap.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:42 am
=“Raunerite special interest groups and Bruce Rauner himself have spent $12 million attempting to hijack the Republican primary and are trying to stop Illinois voters from having a choice this March 18th,” Rauner spokesman Mike Schrimpf said.
Better.=
So now your against candidates putting their own money in campaigns, while labor and unions millions. Please!
Your as bad at the tea party folks. Just against someone, but not for anyone.
Comment by Downstater Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:43 am
The clearest difference of course (I’m pretty sure) is those other candidates faced well-financed opponents, who could get on the airwaves themselves.
What’s most distinctive about Rauner, in other words, is not how much he’s self-funding but how effective he’s been at hoovering the campaign cash in Illinois away from his Republican rivals.
In the general of course Rauner won’t have that luxury. But 2014 is not looking like a great year for Democrats. More and more, it’s looking to me like Rauner’s model for 2014 is Rick Scott down in FL in 2010.
Comment by ZC Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:44 am
“If I had his kind of money, right now I’d be in Nice.”
I hear you. If I had that kind of money, I would be in Crete. But that’s you and me. We don’t have those kind of axes to grind.
Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:46 am
Why the interest in term limits by Rauner? He probably thinks eight years as governor and then the White House. Why not
Comment by roscoe tom Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:49 am
I guess we should rejoice at this voluntary attempt at asset redistribution…
Comment by Soccermom Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:49 am
- Cincinnatus -,
Your Crew and the Brady Crew have to get it done in the precincts and on the streets.
Two weeks. The GOTV can at least make the opportunity to win approachable. But, gotta do it, not talk about it, and in reality, these 2 weeks are about execution, so execute Brady and Dillard.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:49 am
Sorry Cincinnati, I’m my own “guy”. Just me, not a duet. This story is what it is. No defending. Just read it. Heard it all before. A few years from now we’ll be hearing of the next person who breaks the record ala A-Rod, LeBron, et al.
Comment by A guy... Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:50 am
I would thank him for his economic stimulus with his campaign spending. His ad buys are great for the local economy. Too bad it won’t get him the shiny new toy he wants.
Comment by Pensioner Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:52 am
@Grandson of Man - respectfully, you forgot to include Governor Quinn on the list of candidates who have not yet told us their plans. Plus, the list of governors who have damaged the unions in their state.
That does not mean to say Rauner is any stronger than Quinn in those areas. It just means that Quinn is terrible in his own right when it comes to unions and laying out a plan for the state.
Plus, based in history, even when Quinn lays out his plan there is no way to tell if it is truth. A 1% “education funding surcharge” somehow doubled and became an “everything funding surcharge”.
The choices here are both bad.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:52 am
Why would he want to be governor?
Interesting question, based off the comments in part it would appear that the reason most people want to be governor is for the paycheck? Why else would Pat Quinn want to be governor and not a rich guy?
Using Jack Ryan as an example (rich but not Bruce Rich) did anyone think a ax to grind or some sort of power thing drove him? How about Blair Hull?
Really, I get it, lots of folks here really, really, really don’t like Rauner. I mean he is up there with Rod at the end in terms of CapFax commenter love. But I am curious, what makes him so much worse than the previous rich guys? Is it how he made his money, is it his views on unions? Is it the amount of his own money he is spending, is it the amount he has raised over everyone else in the primary?
Comment by OneMan Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:55 am
$14,000,000 campaign, thousands of tv spots, a lead in the polls. yet we dont have a clue as to what he would really do, or how he would try to do it in this political landscape.
“pass term limits, cut spending, and reverse the Quinn 67 percent tax hike”, are slogans. the last two in particular would have dire consequences all across society.
crains endorsed him because they like the idea of a businessman cheerleader. even though “He has not been fully transparent about his investment firm’s work with state pension funds. His position on the minimum wage is foggy, his stumping for term limits comes off as a gimmick and he shrugs off the transition costs of his proposal to move public employees from a defined-benefit pension system to 401(k)-style plans.” oh well, just details.
Comment by langhorne Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:57 am
=== I would be in Crete===
You’d live in the south suburbs?
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:58 am
–The real question is what does he hope to achieve for his investment?–
The future, Mr. Gits, the future!
Like others have mentioned, with that kind of coin, the only ice I would have seen this nasty winter would have been in my Cuba Libres, as I gazed through the haze of sweet, sticky smoke at Montego Bay.
I wouldn’t be making the Decatur-Marion-Rockford run to feed my ego.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:01 am
==“Liberal special interest groups and government union bosses have spent $4 million attempting to hijack the Republican primary==
Little scary how you could spend so much money and know so little about IL politics. The unions don’t care about hijacking the republican primary. AFSMCE and the IEA control about 250k voters not including spouses. The unions have more than enough votes to pick the republican with their members alone which they can do for the cost of newsletters and emails.
In every election in the past 12 years the unions make a show in the primary so they can turn around in the general and say they would support a republican, just not this one and then dump millions behind the democrat. The unions will never support a republican in the general in this state.
There is no dispute that if the unions wanted to control the outcome of the primary they have the power to do so. There is no dispute that they will again CHOOSE not to do that and re-elect Quinn.
I support the working members of the IEA and AFSCME 100%, but when you get 4 more years of Quinn it is your own fault.
Comment by the Patriot Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:02 am
one man — what makes rauner so unappealing is his combative, name calling, derision of his perceived bad guys. you know, union bosses, corrupt politicians etc etc. this is not harry truman, give ‘em hell stuff. it is cynical political posturing to create an us versus them poisonous atmosphere, while dodging the real details. you think we have gridlock now, just wait if the baron gets elected. he is blago 14.0, w more to come. (remember blagos soviet style bureaucracy at the isbe, legislators spending like drunken sailors, etc. sound familiar? how did that work out?)
Comment by langhorne Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:04 am
- langhorne - Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 10:57 am:
Crains is ignoring the legality of moving all existing pension system members from defined benefits to a 401K plan. Based on previous court statements about time of hiring, it would be an uphill fight to try such a shift.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:05 am
It’s bad ROI. You’d think a shrewd bidnessman like Bruce would understand that.
Comment by IbendahlLuvsJBT Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:06 am
The ego of Rauner seems to take a big hit here. I point out that had Brady, Dillard, and Rutherford put their ego’s aside and put 2 of them on the same ticket Ruaner’s money would not beat them. Ultimately it is the ego of all the republicans that is most responsible for democrats controlling this state.
We look at him spending money from our perspective like it matters. If I had 15 million I would not spend it on an election. But if I had 2 billion so what. I can spend 50 million because I think it would be fun to be governor. If I win I get to be governor. If I lose, I still have 2 billion and what did I lose…about 25% of my investment income that I have to pay taxes on.
Comment by the Patriot Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:08 am
- OneMan -,
I consider you a top tier commenter and I learn much from your takes, but Rauner and even your buddy “Jack!”, you seem to miss the forest through the trees.
Is “Jack!” still teaching at that inner-city school?
My point? Both “Bruce Rauner” and “Jack!” are phonies, playing off perceived polling positives, while living life in a second life, seemingly against a public persona they demand to be seen as true.
I will say this;
Had Bruce Rauner, the insider, the Democratic donor to Ed Rendell, Rahm, Rich Daley, and Clouter through Arne Duncan ran as a Dem, I would at least respect Bruce Rauner.
“Bruce Rauner”, the term limit, union buster, who despises the political and governmental process, blaming both parties, and building a PAC designed to have “Raunerites” in the GA is a also at my intelligence by. “Selling” a man who does not exist because of how Bruce Rauner lives, works, earns, and mocks the way people live, breathe, and vote.
Bruce Rauner is everything that is wrong, while claiming he, and only he, is right.
And he and others want My Party to be the instrument of Blagojevichian rule, and gridlock, and shutdown.
It’s not the idea of change, it is the reality that the change is for “Raunerites” and the Raunerbots who are clueless to the path “Bruce Rauner” wants for Illinois, while hoping Wisconsin or Indiana may emerge.
I won’t be a party to the birth of the ILGOP’s Blago.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:11 am
=If I had that kind of money, I would be in Crete.=
Ahh the draw of those exquisite wineries in scenic Monee!LOL
Comment by Arizona Bob Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:13 am
“…’Raunerites’ in the GA is a also slap at my intelligence by “Selling” a man…”
Apologies. Dumb phone
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:15 am
==The real question is what does he hope to achieve for his investment?==
It’s not an investment, it’s an outright purchase, some kind of trophy to put in his career cabinet.
Comment by Wensicia Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:15 am
Wordslinger elevates the debate with a “Chinatown” reference. Well done.
Comment by And I Approved This Message Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:16 am
Question here about the downside of Dems voting in a GOP primary. I know you can’t sign both GOP and Dem candidate petitions in an election cycle. Does anyone know if there could be any invalidation of Dem circulator or signator petitions going forward if they sign petitions as a Democrat but vote in Republican primaries? Of course, the time for petition challenge has long passed, but could signing a Dem candidate petition then voting in the GOP primary restrict the “crossover” voters activites prior to the general in November? The only problem I could see is if no one filed as a Dem for seat in the primary, but got petitions circulated to place someone on the ballot in November after the primary.
Anyone clear on this?
Comment by Arizona Bob Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:22 am
=My point? Both “Bruce Rauner” and “Jack!” are phonies, playing off perceived polling positives, while living life in a second life, seemingly against a public persona they demand to be seen as true.=
OW, its clear from this statement that you don’t know “Jack” (Roesser or $ hit). The guy may be wacky and dysfunctional, but I’ve known him long enough to know he’s sincere in what he says.
He’s got an ego,and in the last election he showed me that he’s my enemy because I lived in Southwest Cook, but I’ve got to respect his opinion. He’s wealthy enough that he doesn’t need to care about what people think.
Comment by Arizona Bob Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:28 am
“Rauner, a Winnetka businessman who is perhaps the wealthiest candidate ever to run for public office in Illinois, ….Still, Rauner has a ways to go to top the U.S. Senate bids of Blair Hull, who spent $28.6 million of his own money.”
So - uh, he isn’t then.
Way to crank up the crap.
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:33 am
- Arizona Bob -,
Check out Rich’s “Crain” article of February 28, then get back to me about the “whats” of Roeser and Rauner.
Learning is fun….
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:37 am
So, about when did anyone around here think it would be time for a wealthy candidate to spend all their own money to run for public office?
I mean, so many previous candidates have done everything they can to take everyone else’s money to run for office - eventually we’d run out of money, leaving only the personally wealthy to be candidates, right?
This argument over the personal wealth of a candidate is foolish. A candidate needs to either spend a lifetime building up a personal fortune to run, or spend a lifetime building up a network of a fortune to run.
Either way it is a fortune, right?
What would you rather have - a candidate wasting their own money, yours, or everyone else’s?
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:38 am
“Jack!” - refers to Jack Ryan.
Reading comprehension is fun too.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:38 am
@ the Patriot:
Like your name, enjoy your comments.
However to believe that the unions could control the outcome of any Primary, if only they wanted to, is way overstated.
They’re a player, and can move some edges, but not the monster truck you seem to envision. They could throw the kitchen sink at Rauner this cycle, and still not stop him.
Comment by Walker Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:42 am
Imagine spending $6 million of your own money to “make things “better”. The logical question then, is, “better for whom?
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:42 am
“The choices here are both bad.”
I can’t say I fully disagree with you–see union court cases and grievances against Quinn.
“You’d live in the south suburbs?”
That’s funny. I thought about that after I posted. I lived in Monee for a very short time, which is near Crete, IL. I would be on the island of Crete (no offense Crete, IL), as well as other Mediterranean places.
Speaking of Mediterranean, I was saddened to learn this morning that the great Spanish flamenco guitarist Paco de Lucia passed away. I saw him back in the day with Al Di Meola and John McLaughlin, at the Auditoreum Theater in Chicago.
Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:43 am
===So - uh, he isn’t then.
Way to crank up the crap.===
I’m not sure whose crap you were responding to VM, but the record Rich and the rest of us are talking about is in the race for governor. As in, Rauner now holds the record for self-financing as a candidate for Illinois governor.
Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:46 am
– OW –
Well lets take a few of these…
Is “Jack!” still teaching at that inner-city school?
Well I suspect returning to teach at a Catholic school would be a bit hard after the stuff came out from his divorce.
But if you are going to call them both out as phonies, I would suggest you would find a nice long list of ‘phonies’ by your definition in Springfield.
Has Dillard really become that much more conservative in 4 years or is it a move of convenience?
Was his vote against the pension changes (which Bruce said he was against btw) driven just by his feelings on the bill? Did the chance to pick up some endorsements and money have nothing to do with it.
But lets look at two of the things you complain about… Union busting and term limits. It would seem that there are people around the US (and even the Midwest) who kind of like these ideas (not a fan of the union busting, kind of ok with the term limits).
Union busting worked for Walker in WI (heck he even survived a recall) and heck MI became a right to work state (that still blows my mind, not a fan of that either. But being anti public employee union isn’t exactly coming from left field.
Many states (including California) have legislative term limits and many states including Indiana have term limits on executive offices.
So I can see why you disagree with these positions, but at this point they are not exactly radical.
Again, with the whole ‘he has no plan thing’, hell we have a governor who is going to wait until after his uncontested primary to tell us his budget plan.
In general candidates are vague, because it works. Just like people run negative ads, because they work.
Comment by OneMan Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 11:47 am
Bruce Rauner has spent $6 million for a job he will only make back about $1.5 million after 8 years. The orest is for what? I can’t wait to find out.
Comment by Makandadawg Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 12:01 pm
===he will only make back about $1.5 million after 8 years===
He’s pledged not to take a salary.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 12:01 pm
===Has Dillard really become that much more conservative in 4 years or is it a move of convenience?===
Nope, and I have called Dillard out standing in the rotunda and also wish openly for the 1990s Dillard. Guess I am not blinded by that…
===Was his vote against the pension changes (which Bruce said he was against btw) driven just by his feelings on the bill? Did the chance to pick up some endorsements and money have nothing to do with it.===
I have said the pension situation for me was to get a bill to the Supremes. I leave it up to - RNUG -, and - AA -, and many others to help me once I know what is constitutional.
===Union busting worked for Walker in WI (heck he even survived a recall) and heck MI became a right to work state (that still blows my mind, not a fan of that either. But being anti public employee union isn’t exactly coming from left field.===
Nope. But a Democratic-controlled GA and the pesky Illinois Constitution make the idea of the parameters of WI untenable. The only course in Illinois for a governor faced with the Illinois parameters is gridlock, shutdown, legal remedies, and Blago stunts. All. Bad.
===Many states (including California) have legislative term limits and many states including Indiana have term limits on executive offices.===
While I disagree with Term Limits, the realities by which Rauner portrays the “ease” of it happening by Rauner, and “solution” that all is better because of it rings terribly hollow. It goes back to the CEO mentality to a Co-Equal partner … reality.
The “plan” thing of shutting down the state, or not having a plan or whatever is not my point of either Rauners.
Hope that helped, - OneMan -
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 12:17 pm
There’s no mystery or anything sinister as to why rich guys want public office.
It’s power and the spotlight. Always has been.
Bloomberg had $27 billion in the bank. But if he wasn’t mayor of NYC, only investor geeks would have known his name.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 12:21 pm
There are things about the psychology of the .01 percent that are only fully understood if you are one of them.
But it could legitimately not -just- be power, or status, though it’s all interrelated. According to Chrystia Freeland, who was more access to and has written better about the .01 percent than just about anyone, in certain circles if you’re not running or heavily funding your own public-policy “cause,” you’re not keeping up with the Joneses in the elite world the .01 percent swim in.
Running directly for office is only an extension of that trend. And in fairness to Rauner, the idea of doing public service and giving back to society after having made a bundle in the private sector is not -inherently- such a weird or even threatening notion.
Comment by ZC Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 12:52 pm
I think the thing about Rauner, which is not so common, is that unlike a lot of other .01 percenters who self fund, the guy is a legitimate “political animal.” He’s got the politics bug. It comes naturally to him. Most GOP business types only enjoy selling the soup, but Rauner enjoys being the soup. From a Democratic perspective in IL, that makes him very politically dangerous.
Comment by ZC Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 12:55 pm
“doing public service and giving back to society after having made a bundle in the private sector”
I’m not so sure that’s what he wants to accomplish as governor.
Comment by Chavez-respecting Obamist Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 12:59 pm
If not in the primary, certainly in the general BR will suffer from buyers remorse. Could of had a few more homes or a watch for everyone in the USA, Canada, and Mexico.
Comment by Mr. T Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 1:11 pm
I’m not worried about that record more than I am over the record number of Illinois governors convicted of felonies.
Now we got Quinn losing $50,000,000?
Honestly, we can’t do worse than what we’ve had.
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 1:33 pm
VM, unless I’m mistaken, you accused our host of cranking up “crap” about Rauner. Now you’re not worried about it?
The polite thing to do in this situation is apologize and admit you were wrong. the gutless thing to do is blow it off and change the subject.
Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 1:41 pm
Bite me.
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 6:47 pm
Gutless it is. Stay classy VM.
Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 6:55 pm
This guy’s unbelievable in his sheer LUST for Power, and, apparently, will stop at nothing to try to get it. Good luck, though. When all is said and done, he might just have to think about buying up some more of those Nursing Homes to make-up for all those GaZILLion$ he’s spending…!
On 2ND thought–NO! HEAVENS No, Bruce! DON’T do that, and just TRY to maybe spare all ‘o those innocent Senior Citizens’ happiness, and even LIVES, in their last few days on Earth, would ya…?!
Comment by Just The Way It Is One Tuesday, Mar 4, 14 @ 7:52 pm