69 Comments - VanillaMan - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 9:47 am: Madigan. He is the only one that seems to be thinking beyond this week. - Fan of the Game - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 9:49 am: NOA–None of them seem to have the state’s best interests at heart. However, if I had to pick one, it would be Madigan for the same reason VanillaMan states. Madigan at least has a clue about how government should run. - Bill - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 10:03 am: Yeah, He thinks it should be run by him and most of the time it is. - cermak_rd - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 10:08 am: Emil, He’s the only one that seems to have a higher purpose in politics than just amassing power. - Squideshi - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 10:12 am: My initial inclination is to say none of the above, but Blagojevich has me pretty ticked off with his flagarant violations of law and media manipulation. - SpfldPolitico - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 10:13 am: I think Madigan will come out on top here - he always does - and now there are no Repubs to keep him in line at all - hopefully the Dems will run into he same problems as the GOP did - anytime one party controls it all - they in the end get blamed for it all too! - Citizen A - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 10:16 am: House Speaker Michael Madigan is my pick, he hasn’t forgotten he is an elected official. Gov. Rod Blagojevich thinks and acts like being governor of Illinois is some delusional divine right. - Bluefish - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 10:21 am: Madigan. Without any sort of checks and balances, Blago and Jones could bleed the suburbs dry. - Who's on First? - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 10:21 am: How about rooting for Illinois Supreme Court Chief Justice Robert Thomas? WHEN this thing blows up, he’ll be needed to enforce the writ of mandamus, which means “we command” in Latin, is the name of one of the prerogative writs in the common law, and is issued by a superior court to compel a lower court or a government officer to perform mandatory or purely ministerial duties correctly.[1] - fedup dem - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 10:22 am: Definately None of the Above! - Eric Rudolph's Victims - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 10:30 am: Another vote for Madigan. The gov. is worthless, and the esteemed state senator sold out to ComEd. Madigan can be a political monster [the Treasurer’s race was a low point], but ultimately he does a pretty good job in running the state and the Democratic Party. - Jaded - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 10:34 am: Could it be like the end of “Reservoir Dogs” where they all take each other out? If not I would have to say Madigan just because I like rooting for the winner. - Kid Vegas - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 10:47 am: I am rooting for ADJOURNING by ‘08 - Cassandra - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 10:48 am: Madigan. If he can get Lisa into the guv chair in 2010 we might have a chance. The Republicans have given up, Emil never saw a tax or an (Chicago) earmark he didn’t like, and Blago, well, the list is endless. - a Republican - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 10:51 am: It is Madigan in a walk! Smart, capable, issue oriented, savvy politician, strong leader, and all of the other things his rivals are not. - Bridget Dooley - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 10:52 am: I don’t know that I’ll be rooting for anyone, just that these three can manage to find a way to work together and get things done. - bored now - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 10:54 am: abm… - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 10:57 am: Kid Vegas… hilarious. - Caffeine Free - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 11:07 am: Investigations Madiagan - 0 Jones - 0 Blagojevich - I’ve lost count! My vote: Madigan = Integrity, Honesty & Common Sense - Ihatedoubledee - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 11:09 am: Did you even need to ask this question….MADIGAN he will certainly be the winner at the end of the day! Mostly becuase he’s the only who realizes we are in dire financial times and has publicly stated so. He may be a liberal but someone has to see expanding government right now is just not fiscally possible. - yinn - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 11:14 am: As a person who feels uneasy with one-party government no matter which party is in power, I suspect that the rest of us will be better off with them squabbling rather than marching in lockstep. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 11:17 am: “Caffeine Free” we have no word yet on whether that federal probe of Jones’ office is over. It could be, but nobody has said anything. - Sage - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 11:19 am: As a lifelong Republican activist it’s Madigan all the way. Republicans were impressed a couple years ago when he spoke of the future of the state’s fiscal mess seeming like he cared for the future and Blago did not. But that was followed by an abomination when Madigan went along with the pension holiday and in addition to the recklessness of that, blew $800 million to bribe legislators with projects to vote for such a vile budget. Never-the-less, Madigan does care long term and he is the Sears Tower in IQ next to a mud hut IQ that Blago has. I respect Madigan. Profoundly disrespect Blago. Sad to see Jones on such a power trip to avenge his bruised ego. Jones did sell out to utilities but he does truly care about education in this state. Blago is merely a conglomeration of ambition and cares nothing about how he leaves the state. Sell the lottery, help him finance education for four years is all that matters. Years later when lottery money totally runs out for education, he doesn’t care becuase he won’t be there. Dispicable. Contemptible. Madigan probably is truly in the realm of a real statesman in any regard but especially so compared to Jones and Blago. - Tom - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 11:26 am: Typing Madigan with shaky fingers. Yinn makes a good point. These three battling is the next best thing to two-party rule. - Scoot - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 11:32 am: Madigan - Snidely Whiplash - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 11:32 am: Another vote for Madigan. Blago is an amateur along with all his other faults, and Jones plays racially-tinted politics geared solely for the benefit of Chicago. While Madigan is certainly dictatorial and uncompromising in his approach, he does seem to have a basic commitment to keeping government running smoothly, and he generally knows how to get the job done. - Bill Baar - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 11:33 am: Madigan for the reasons cited by caffine free noting Miller’s qualification on Jones. - Judy, Judy, Judy - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 11:49 am: Well, I’m right there with the rest of you. Madigan gets my vote. I wonder if Blago’s or Jone’s people read this blog, if not, they should. Seems most of us here agree most of the time and the state would be wasting a lot less tax money if they’d read what we have to say. - Just for Fun - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 12:02 pm: In Horse Race Jargon Madigan - By a furlong Jones - Off The Pace Blagojevich - Blown Up - Swami - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 12:10 pm: Madigan - I believe he is the most honest and truly cares for Illinois. - Gus Frerotte's Clipboard - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 12:10 pm: I would only note that while it’s certainly fun to discuss this, the vast majority of Illinoisians won’t actually care who among these men “won” the session (and you know they’ll all declare victory at the end, one way or the other). They’ll care about issues — and all three men have made some very valid points about what issues are critical this year. Eventually, because there’s literally no other way, they’ll have to work together to bring resolution on critical issues, and hopefully, after all the saber-rattling, that process will lead to good public policy. History suggests that it can but doesn’t always. The other key question is how does the infighting among these men affect Tom Cross. Can he hold his caucus together and become part of a budget deal? Or will splinter groups from the HReps make their own deals with Madigan to strengthen Madigan’s hand in negotiations? Ultimately no one leader can do it — it takes at least two. If the Senate President and the Governor stick together, Madigan will eventually have to meet them somewhere in the middle. If the Senate President, Madigan, and enough breakaway House Republicans come together, they can do it without the Governor, but they’d better then be prepared to do it without the Governor for another three years, because that bridge won’t be rebuilt easily. Madigan is a skilled navigator and is capable of building coalitions, but on the other hand, looking at these three, you’d have to say that for now, to the extent it’s two against one, he’s the one. How he changes that dynamic (trying to peel Jones off from Blagojevich, working with Cross, making peace with Blagojevich) will be the political story of the session, whoever you’re rooting for. Personally, I’ll be rooting for a set of issues and hoping they survive the process. - Skeeter - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 12:30 pm: Madigan. This one isn’t even close. Madigan is the only one of the three who cares at all about the state and not just about politics (although he sure does care about that). The interesting thing here is that the ILGOP is so weak that if Madigan and Jones were to have a major split, the Madigan forces would win majorities, the Jones forces would come in second, and the Republicans third. - anon - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 12:34 pm: Madigan - Beowulf - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 12:48 pm: As a Republican, I would have to throw my support behind Madigan since he appears to have a shred of financial sense. Also, I believe that Lisa is a decent individual who cares about Illinois state government and it’s people more than she cares about furthering her own personal interests. I may be naive regarding that last statement but if I am, so are many others based on how many votes she got in the last election. Emil is probably a good guy who is trying to look out for the people in his own election district. However, there are far more lives at stake here than those that are just his constituents. When it comes to the state’s financial health, Emil is clueless. Also, Emil possibly means well but he is an intellectual lightweight compared to Mike Madigan. And as far as Rod Blagojevich is concerned, Rod will trample over anybody who stands in the way of his chances for future higher national political office. Rod is looking out for Rod & Patti. No one else. One small but subtle insight into this was his and Patti’s 2002 federal income tax return. When Rod and his wife, Patti made a combined adjusted gross income of over $302,000 and yet only declared charitable contributions of less than $500, what does that tell you? I rest my case. Rod is looking out for Rod (and Patti) and that is not about to change. I would have to go with Mike Madigan among the three choices. - Wumpus - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 12:50 pm: The people/interests of the state and “fairness”, truth, etc. - Number 8 - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 12:55 pm: Its amazing to me that nobody cares to point out how the Speaker rules the House. He is a true dictator who allows very little input from his members, decides which of their bills get introduced, and chooses not to include them in end of session budget negotiations. House Dems are terrified of him and are hesitant to cross him for fear that he will make their lives miserable. As for who will be the winner here, hopefully it will be the people of Illinois. The Democratic Party has been the party of the people for some time, and the Governor and the President are the real Democrats here. I agree that the Speaker is politically savvy, but to say that he always puts the interest of the state over politics is a laugh. He showed his true colors when, as the State Democratic Party Chairman, he refused to endorse the Treasurer candidate of his own party. He even went so far as to allege mob connections. And dont forget his referring to Senator Obama as the “Messiah.” I believe that his tight grip may be loosening a bit. The “moving the primary” stunt looked desperate. Remember that the Governor was reelected by 10% and the President won a veto proof majority. The Speaker didnt have the same success. The momentum is moving away from him and towards the leadership of Rod and Emil. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 1:00 pm: One quibble, Number 8. Madigan brought several of his members into the actual budget negotiations last year, somewhat to the consternation of the other two bigs. - values matter - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 1:05 pm: Speaker Madigan — but that doesn’t mean he should put a brick on the much-needed capital bill. If he stops that from passing, he’ll have a difficult time explaining himself. - Commonsense in Illinois - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 1:17 pm: I would have to add my name to those saying Speaker Madigan, but for a different reason. The Speaker has been in the minority on two occasions, once in 1983 and the other in 1995. In 1995, Republicans ruled over all five constitutional offices and both chambers of the General Assembly. He well remembers that Republicans had this same frenzy of fighting for control that the Democrats are now into. Madigan has always been astutely aware of the long-term…meaning if he can hold his caucus together and make the fewest mistakes, he’ll remain Speaker for the long-term. That helps Democrats in the house, Lisa, and his personal power over others. - Ali Bin Haddin - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 1:17 pm: This one is so easy. See which person has the best seats at the Superbowl in Miami. 1. Luxury box with team owners, the winner 2. Field level seat with drunken fans, second 3. Stuck in frozen noisy sports bar at home, third This is the real test of power and influence for the next three weeks. - swede - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 1:30 pm: Madigan. For some of his faults, he does seem to actually care about the state. - i d - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 1:37 pm: Madigan for all the above reasons. - Citizen A - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 2:32 pm: Madagin - he has the wisdom not to run for governor. - Madigan, easily - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 2:47 pm: If I can make the same basic point in a slightly different way… They all bring political posturing and grandstanding to embarassing levels. But Madigan seems to know the difference between politics and policy, and at least once in the while acknowledges that on fiscal issues, they’re often at odds. And that policy sometimes is more important. I don’t think Blago has ever believed that, and Emil just doesn’t know good policy b/c he’s too liberal. - Squideshi - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 2:50 pm: “Madigan can be a political monster [the Treasurer’s race was a low point], but ultimately he does a pretty good job in running the state and the Democratic Party.” That depends on how you define good. Do the ends justify the means? I agree with the national platform of the Green Party of the United States where it says, “We should remember that the process that determines our decisions and actions is just as important as achieving the outcome we want.” “Definately None of the Above!” If only we really had this option. I agree with the platform of the Illinois Green Party where it says, “Due to the lack of political choices that exist in the American system at times, the Illinois Green Party supports a choice of ‘none of the above’ on the ballot.” “I am rooting for ADJOURNING by ‘08″ You are aware that to adjourn usually only ends a meeting–not the session of which that meeting may be only a small part, right? “Its amazing to me that nobody cares to point out how the Speaker rules the House. He is a true dictator who allows very little input from his members, decides which of their bills get introduced, and chooses not to include them in end of session budget negotiations. House Dems are terrified of him and are hesitant to cross him for fear that he will make their lives miserable.” Excellent points. Greens are always saying that its not rank and file Democrats that are the problem but, rather, the Democratic leadership. Mike Madigan needs a few lessons in Democracy–it’s shameful that we allow one person to have so much power over the Illinois House. - Skeeter - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 2:56 pm: Squid, Stop blaming the parties for that fact that people don’t vote for you. Welcome to democracy. Get the votes and make the rules. Don’t want Speaker Madigan to have power? Try running a decent campaign. Moreoever, stop whining. The Greens will have no chance as long as all they have to offer is “LIFE ISN’T FAIR TO US POOR OUTSIDERS.” You can try stopping the complaining, along with not running a former leftist dingbat for governor. You had a golden opportunity in 2006 with two weak mainstream candidates, and instead of running a credible candidate chose a nitwit. You blew that opportunity. Blame yourself and not some biased system. - Squideshi - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 4:10 pm: “Stop blaming the parties for that fact that people don’t vote for you.” Actually, people vote for Greens all over the world. There are hundreds of elected Greens in local office throughout the United States; and maybe you missed it, but more than 10% of Illinois voters voted for Rich Whitney in 2006. “Welcome to democracy. Get the votes and make the rules. Don’t want Speaker Madigan to have power? Try running a decent campaign.” That’s exactly what we plan to do, but we’re going to do it while staying true to our values–something that means it’s going to take a little longer to get done; but ultimately, it will get done in the right way. “You had a golden opportunity in 2006 with two weak mainstream candidates, and instead of running a credible candidate chose a nitwit.” I think that Rich Whitney was a very credible candidate; and apparently, so did many others. In fact, I argue that Rich Whitney was more of a credible candidate than either Rod or Judy; and the only reason that more people didn’t vote for Whitney was because they were afraid to split the vote or didn’t know enough about him (Thanks to Blagojevich for manipulating the media into excluding Whitney from the debates. Blagojevich said he wouldn’t participate if Whitney was invited–he knew that he would loose the debate.) “Blame yourself and not some biased system.” Perhaps you haven’t noticed, but just about anyone who’s actually familiar with our electoral system agrees that it’s completely biased and unfair. - Get it straight - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 4:31 pm: All three of them are doing the state a diservice by not getting things accomplished. - zatoichi - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 4:32 pm: Madigan - he at least looks at the bigger picture about 3-4 years down the road. Is he a dictator? Ok but a fairly large group allowed it to happen. Seems like the Hulk Hogan of the group. Wouldn’t bet against him. Jones - capable of being a monster, but he stays focused on here today and maybe tomorrow. Too much influenced peddled his way. The Junk Yard Dog. Blago - look at me. Look what I stepped into. I talk a good game, but never really get there without blaming someone else. Minor league that dropped into a major league spot. Val Venis. - Skeeter - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 4:56 pm: To our squishy friend: All over the world? Fine. Maybe they run credible candidates “all over the world.” They sure don’t here. Here, they run former socialists. You are bragging about 10%? The “real” Skeeter is a three year old German Shepherd. If he was on the ballot for gov. in 2006 against Blago and JBT, he would have gotten 25%. People would say “I am reluctant to vote for a GSD since they can be ornery and difficult to understand, and the lack of opposable thumbs will make signing legislation an issue, but he sure beats those two.” That was as weak a field as you possibly could get and you got 10% as a protest vote. That is nothing to brag about. People were afraid to split the vote? Get real. People didn’t split the vote in Illinois only because the GOP is pathetically weak. People all over the country split the vote. Look at Montana, which has two Dems in the Senate, a Dem. gov. and went for Bush by about 30 in 2004. Look at Louisiana. Look at Maine. Where people see different values, they are happy to split the ballot. But they do it when people run credible candidates and not former socialists like Whitney. You really think you lost because people DIDN’T know about him? How many socialists do you think there are in Illinois. If that would have been more widely publicized, he would have got 10 votes, rather than 10%. You blew it. Stand up and take the blame and stop blaming others. As long as you are the “the world is not fair to us” party, nobody will take you seriously and they sure don’t take you seriously now. The bottom line is that you have no power because people don’t vote for you. You need to do what Rahm did and attract solid candidates and present a real platform. And, or course, stop that pathetic whining. - just wondering - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 4:57 pm: madigan for sure. jones wants to raise taxes to pay for chicagos mismanagment of every program. Blago is prison bound in 07 - Citizen A - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 5:26 pm: “…Blago is prison bound in 07…” Oh be still, my heart, be still. Spock Make It So. Where the hell is Fitz anyway - wasting his time with Scooter maybe? Comeon Fitz the winter is long and boring - bring us some sunshine and entertainment. - 312 - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 5:28 pm: Madigan, by a mile. He knows how all of this will play out in the long term - Rod’s only concern is the latest press op. HB4050’s intent was noble, but the implementation was awful - and who hired the hacks at IDFPR to run this? Hmmmm… - Disgusted - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 5:50 pm: “cermak_rd - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 10:08 am: Emil, He’s the only one that seems to have a higher purpose in politics than just amassing power.” You’re right, Cermak - he does have a higher purpose - lineing his pockets with as much ComEd cash as he can. Other than that, we can’t tell what his ideas, throughts and purposes are because 75% of the time, you can’t understand a thing he says. That being said, if I really had to choose one of three, I guess Madigan gets it. What you see is what you get with him. - MIDSTATE - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 6:12 pm: House Speaker Michael Madigan - anon #1 - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 6:13 pm: Madigan, Madigan, Madigan - Scott Lukas - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 6:45 pm: Madigan, Madigan, Madigan, Madigan - Squideshi - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 7:41 pm: “All over the world?” Yes, all over the world. “Fine. Maybe they run credible candidates ‘all over the world.’ They sure don’t here. Here, they run former socialists.” Having formerly been a Socialist, more than a decade ago I might add, doesn’t make a candidate any less credible; and the sheer number of people who voted Whitney in Illinois prooves that point. People knew this and basically said “so what?” “You are bragging about 10%?” Yes. 10% is a remarkable achievement for a new political party in Illinois. Can you provide me with an example of another new political party that has been able to do this in recent memory? 10% is impressive when you consider that new party candidates don’t compete on a level playing field–five times the signature requirements, less access to voter data, election boards composed of Republicrats, etc. 10% is even more impressive when you consider that Whitney only spent about $0.08 for each of these votes, while Topinka had to spend more than $5.00 a vote; and Blagojevich had to spend more than $10.00 a vote! It seems to me that on a level playing field, without the fear of splitting the vote, a Green could easily win an election over a Demopublican. In fact, Greens already win something like 25% of all races in which they participate nationwide; and that’s without all the corporate funding. “That was as weak a field as you possibly could get and you got 10% as a protest vote.” Nope. Sorry, but I don’t buy that. The Illinois Green Party ran a full slate of statewide candidates, thanks to an election law requirement that applies to new parties only, and Rich Whitney was the only one ran a real, agressive campaign. His vote totals were more than double that of the other Green candidates on the ballot, so the campaigning made a difference. You might be able to argue that 5% was a protest vote; however, that still leaves 6%, and that’s still enough to legally establish the party–a remarkable feat in Illinois history. “People were afraid to split the vote?” That’s correct. Spoiler is the refrain of just about every whining Democrat that I know. “You really think you lost because people DIDN’T know about him? How many socialists do you think there are in Illinois.” It doesn’t really matter because Rich Whitney made it clear that he was no longer a Socialist. In other words, it’s a moot point, like it or not. “You blew it. Stand up and take the blame and stop blaming others.” I consider 2006 to be a tremendous success for the Illinois Green Party. We got more than double what we needed in order to legally establish the party statewide, and that give us an incredible number of advantages for the next election. “The bottom line is that you have no power because people don’t vote for you.” That statement is incorrect in at least two ways. First, people obviously do vote for Greens; or there wouldn’t be hundreds of Greens in elected office throughout the United States (and many more internationally). Second, Greens have power–if you don’t believe me, just ask any whining Democrat if they’re afraid that Greens will spoil an election. In fact, Greens have certain kinds of power that limited national parties, like the Democrats and Republicans, simply can not have. We can create pressure from the outside. - Steel Wheels - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 9:44 pm: That Whitney is no longer a socialist is moot? Wow. It’s not like the guy admitted he once smoked pot or tried coke, things that are forgiveable as long as you’re still not doing it. The guy believed so much in this ideology that he chose to identify himself by it. That’s not something that mainstream Illinois will just disregard or consider “moot.” This country spent half a century on the brink of a nuclear war with socialists. There are still some fallout shelters to prove it. That’s an awfully hard label to run from once you’ve embraced it. People do vote for Greens, but as best I can tell it’s predominantly in school board races and small city councils. Your zeal for your party is admirable, but call a spade a spade. The people of this state have a remarkable distrust and dislike for the governor and this election showed that. Judy’s non-existent campaign delivered the final blow…for the people of Illinois. Blago getting under 50% had nothing to do with the prowess of Rich Whitney and everything to do with Blago. - Steel Wheels - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 9:56 pm: Oh, and to the actual topic at hand: Madigan, of course. And remember, Number 8, the governor failed to even get 50%. But hey, according to him that’s good enough for a “mandate.” And I’ll give credit when due, but Jones was in part the beneficiary of good fortune. Four of the five seats Jones picked up were open seats, and the other was occupied by an appointee, in a boom year for Democrats. Madigan knocked off a 22-year incumbent…and he’s in no hurry to go back a supermajority given the headaches he had in 1991-92, as reported by Rich Miller on more than one occasion. - Justice - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 10:30 pm: Madigan. He is for whats right and fights hard to win for the people. He also has great skills at getting the job done…a politicians politician if you will. A back room specialist with honor. Not many left. - Anon - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 10:34 pm: Jones. He has long been an advocate for education and a more level playing field for the citizens of Illinois. He is also right on when he says we need a transportation and school construction dollars, we should not leave federal dollars on the table and we need to fix our schools. In addition, I feel that many of the comments made against Jones are totally off base. And I find it funny that some of the things folks are saying about Emil are the same things people use to say about Madigan, examples: He wants to raise taxes, or he wants to give all the money to Chicago, or that he is a junk yard dog(or velvet hammer), or that he has been investigated, or that he is in the pocket of the special intersts, or he doesn’t care about the fiscal health of the state. Wow, how the world changes. Don’t get me wrong, the Speaker has always been a talented, hard working legislator and the State is the better for having his service. I don’t think he is the greedy, cold, power driven person he is made out to be, but Emil isn’t a stupid, backward monster either. So, I am with Jones, but I have a feeling that these old pros will work things out and this will be a historic session with lots of great legislation that will change Illinois for the better and numerous veto overrides. - Concerned - Wednesday, Jan 24, 07 @ 11:07 pm: My vote is with the Gov. Not because he is the best, most believable, the most politically savvy or has the best plan and best wishes for the state. He is none of the above. But, in order for anything to get done, in the end, WE NEED HIM TO SIGN THE BILLS!!!! Emil can override if he twist enough arms of his own caucus but the Gov still needs the House Dems and if can just stop picking the fights with Madigan then things can happen. I’m not saying I agree with Blago but I’m rooting for him to smarten up and get things done. Jones tells it like it is and has my support but that actually puts him at a disadvantage with Madigan and Blago. The gov never lets you know exactly where he is and still grandstands (and I thought a lot of that would end with Tusk gone). Madigan has his pet interests ahead of all else: Re-election of House members and the future of Lisa. These guys need to lock themselves into private chambers early in the session instead of waiting for May. - Skeeter - Thursday, Jan 25, 07 @ 5:49 am: Squid, You don’t believe that being a former socialist matters? Either you are in complete denial or you have no political sense at all. If you want to have relevance, run some decent candidates. And, as I said, quit the whining. - Squideshi - Thursday, Jan 25, 07 @ 12:37 pm: “That Whitney is no longer a socialist is moot?” That’s correct. It’s a moot point. “This country spent half a century on the brink of a nuclear war with socialists. There are still some fallout shelters to prove it.” This country spent half a century on the brink of a nuclear war with the Soviet Union, but even George W. Bush seems to get along just fine with Tony Blair, Britian’s Prime Minister and leader of the British Labour Party. Clause IV of the Labour Party’s constitution provides, “The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party.” “People do vote for Greens, but as best I can tell it’s predominantly in school board races and small city councils.” In the United States, that’s true. A new political party has to start somewhere; and because one of our Ten Key Values is Grassroots Democracy, that means at the local level (Republicans understand the value of spending time getting lots of people into local office.) It’s too bad that Democrats and Republicans have written state election law in such a way that it literally forces us to start at the top and run candidates for Governor if we want to play on a level playing field for lower offices. In any case, the trend is more important than the snapshot. The question is not where are we now, but where are we going? The answer to that question is growth–more members, more candidates, and more elected officials (That’s what the election results show.) In other countries, where we’ve had more time to organize, we have eventually elected people like Joschka Fischer, the former Foreign Minister of Germany. - PalosParkBob - Thursday, Jan 25, 07 @ 12:58 pm: Having met all three, I’d have to say the Blago is the smartest, but seems to have no moral center or core values, just a “Clintonesque” knack for sensing political winds and blowing in that direction. IMHO, Jones is a pure, “Where’ Mine?” pol who would sell out this state and its people in a minute if the price was right. Madigan has that political savvy, intelligence, core values, pragmatism, and caring for this state that sets him apart from the other two. He’ll win because he’s going to outlast the other two through grit, determination, and a rep for doing what’s right for the state and his constituents as much as he can. I really look forward to a Madigan “first family” in Illinois after the next guv election! - Steel Wheels - Thursday, Jan 25, 07 @ 8:58 pm: Squid, I think Skeeter may be on to something. You are either in denial or have no political sense. Keep telling yourself that it’s a moot point. You’re welcome back to political reality whenever you’re ready. Soviet Union. Socialists. Six of one… Being a socialist may fly with European voters, but not in the USA. - Squideshi - Thursday, Jan 25, 07 @ 9:24 pm: “Soviet Union. Socialists. Six of one… Being a socialist may fly with European voters, but not in the USA.” Now you’ve just prooven yourself wrong. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont is a self-described Democratic Socialist, and he served in the United States House for 15 years! If a current Socialist can become a Congressman and Senator, certainly someone who was a Socialist more than a decade ago can become a Governor. - Walter Bambrough - Thursday, Jan 25, 07 @ 10:33 pm: None of the above Let’s have a unicameral legislature like Nebraska and term limits Illinois is a den of crooks and becoming like New Jersey or Louisiana or Rhode Island Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.