55 Comments - Collar Observer - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 4:57 pm: Gov. Quinn - strongly approve based on the fact that he is telling us the truth about the state’s economy and the fact that the income tax must be raised - and also the tax fairness measures proposed. - North of I-80 - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 4:58 pm: Hey, I would vote for Roland to keep him there for all to admire. He epitomizes the Dems in IL: the IL Dems should have called for a vote but failed to do so; IL Dems never thought that Rod would appoint anyone and Roland was willing to say and do anything to get it. Did & done by [another] corrupt IL elected official. The sample of what IL govt has come to. - VanillaMan - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 5:05 pm: All this talk today about how stupid voters are, and here these polls demonstrate that voters are not as ridiculous as had been portrayed. We ain’t dumb. Burris is out for all practical purposes, and that will help Giannoulais. Anyone out there who thinks they can beat Obama’s basketball team mate should get their act together to compete. Giannoulais is beatable. I’m sorry that the polls doesn’t help Jesse Jackson Junior, however, it isn’t a surprise. The challege that Jackson always faced was what to do if an event resurrected all the Jackson myths and negatives. JJJ had an excellent record after a decade in Washington, but his involvement with Blagojevich - even if peripheral - seems to be the perfect storm for his career, and it is beating him up right now. Finally, voters are right. Special elections should replace US Senators, not governors. Even without the Blagojevich-Burris-Jackson fiasco, the time has come for direct democracy. Just as there are special elections for the House, there should be special elections for the Senate. The Illinois Democrats, especially Quinn, screwed up on this issue when they played politics with it, instead of doing the right, and populist, thing to do. - Pot calling kettle - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 5:08 pm: In the final analysis, if you are unethical, it is your fault. The system may encourage bad behavior, the voters may ignore it, but that doesn’t mean it’s OK. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 5:09 pm: ===these polls demonstrate that voters are not as ridiculous as had been portrayed…The Illinois Democrats, especially Quinn, screwed up on this issue when they played politics with it=== Quinn approval: 61 percent. - Six Degrees of Separation - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 5:09 pm: The bloom is still on the rose for the newlyweds, especially in a less than ideal surrounding environment. Durbin still hangs tough after a long relationship, but is getting a little long in the tooth. Maybe he will try to beat Strom Thurmond’s tenure record in the US Senate - only 35 years to go. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 5:24 pm: Regarding this question…. ===Whom do you blame for the corruption in Illinois—politicians, the media, voters or the system?==== And this answer: 9% Voters Proposed headline: VOTERS REFUSE TO ACCEPT BLAME lol Whaddya think? - Anonymous - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 5:33 pm: VanillaMan said: “All this talk today about how stupid voters are, and here these polls demonstrate that voters are not as ridiculous as had been portrayed. We ain’t dumb.” 64% said politicians are to blame and 19% said the system was to blame. The voters may blame the politicians and system, but I’ll bet your dollars to donuts JJJ gets re-elected along with all the state reps and state senators. Quinn will lose to someone named Madigan and not one thing will change. Daley will still be Mayor (unless Fitz gets him) and Stroger will win against Claypool or Preckwinkle ’cause Illinois still ain’t ready for reform. Yeah, we are ridiculous. We KNOW they are corrupt and yet we continue to elect them. - sal-says - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 5:39 pm: “Sixty-one percent (61%) approve of former Lieutenant Governor Pat Quinn’s job performance as Blagojevich’s replacement. Thirty-seven percent (37%) disapprove.” Hmmm; the way he’s going, it’ll be interesting to see the poll in another month or so? Any Blago holdovers gone yet? - Rich Miller - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 5:40 pm: ===Stroger will win against Claypool or Preckwinkle === Wanna bet? - scoot - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 6:03 pm: 74% liked the special election idea…and 64% blame politicians for corruption in Illionis. These are not good numbers for the Chicago Dems…I mean the incumbents. Quinn’s numbers are no surprise, he’s still enjoying the honeymoon period. BUT, after he raises taxes, after voters get a glimpse of his relationship as Blago’s running mate, those numbers will drop. But, all this being said he sits good for the primary..just needs the campaign $$$$. - Levois - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 6:06 pm: Oh let’s just repeal the 17th amendment and be done with it. - The 'Broken Heart' of Rogers Park - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 6:29 pm: ===2% Media=== They must be polling the Stroger and Daley family? - wordslinger - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 6:32 pm: –Proposed headline: VOTERS REFUSE TO ACCEPT BLAME– No question. I’m Illinois born, bred, raised and educated. So is everyone I know. And it’s not my fault? Whose fault is it? As far as Roland goes, I hope there’s someone in the South Side community — pastors, politicians, businessmen — who can step up and do the right thing here. The man is pushing 73 — and it’s quite clear he should not have been put in this position. Whatever you thought about Roland in the past, let’s do the right thing now. - Six Degrees of Separation - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 7:03 pm: But, all this being said he (Quinn) sits good for the primary..just needs the campaign $$$$. Does he have more than $845 yet? - Land of Silos and Cows ... - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 7:23 pm: Lemme put this in perspective; my niece … raised $900 in girl scout cookies. Is my niece more qualified to be a member of the worlds most elite club? Is Burris? - Lazy Intern - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 7:59 pm: I was a candidate for my local school board and I raised more money in the first quarter that Senator Burris. - Macbeth - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 8:57 pm: Enough with Burris. The guy is a slow, dense fool. Resign already. Illinois doesn’t need Burris, doesn’t want Burris, and won’t re-elect Burris. Go away. And stay away. - Concerned Observer - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 9:23 pm: Silos and Cows, I’ll do you one better. Amy Blagojevich - by virtue of that “birthday gift” - is a better fundraiser than Roland Burris. - colby - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 10:08 pm: “74% liked the special election idea…and 64% blame politicians for corruption in Illionis. These are not good numbers for the Chicago Dems…I mean the incumbents.” Dunno. Agreeing with a position isn’t the same as voting on it. In fact, in this very poll, people strongly approve of special elections AND a guy who pretty spectacularly turned his back on them. - Hon. Cranial Lamb (formerly carbon deforestation, formerly . . .) - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 10:55 pm: Rich - your headline is perfect, and true. Voters refuse to accept blame. It’s like the GOP argument about the so-called welfare state times 10, the voters don’t even want to accept responsibility for making good choices! I heard someone I know who is rather intelligent admit the other day that they voted for Blago the second time - I was really close to jumping all over them for it. Stroger wins wanna bet? Your next joint venture should be an off-shore online political betting site, you can be the Sam “Ace” Rothstein of the operation. Todd Stroger is a gone man walking. He has no chance. Roland Burris raised $845. That is clearly going to scare Giannoulias into backing off. Bobby Rush and the race-baiting crowd can claim support in the black community all they want, but that report sure doesn’t show it. - Hon. Cranial Lamb (formerly carbon deforestation, formerly . . .) - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 10:56 pm: Lazy Intern - yeah but did you win? - Gregor - Thursday, Apr 16, 09 @ 11:34 pm: As far as the number that thought 3-J was aware of a deal for the senate seat… innocent until proven and all that, however, there is a ton of circumstantial evidence to my way of thinking, in all the early campaigning hijinks threejay was doing to promote himself for the seat. I’m including the blatant push-polls, rigged percentage polls, and the phone calls and/or mail he did out of the senate office, which Rich pointed out a long time back, (to very little hubbub, as I recall). To me, it lays a lot of groundwork to show just how hungry Jackson was, and that he already was crossing ethical boundaries from the beginning. With that as the foundation, you can’t sell me that the deal brokering talks with Rod were off threejay’s radar and done by underlings acting without his authority. More like his people were clumsy as Rod himself in the use of intermediaries and buffers to keep up appearances. I will be much more shocked if Jackson escapes an indictment himself, before this is all done. - Leroy - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 6:11 am: I wouldn’t count Todd Stroger out yet. There is a nice division of spoils between Cook County and Chicago. If that balance gets upset because someone from the northwest side or the suburbs gets control of the Cook County patronage machine, look out. If that happens, Daley is probably going to be the biggest loser. Besides, Strogers get re-elected despite taxes, naming hospitals after themselves, Bobbi Steele feeding at the tough, raising taxes, etc etc etc. I’ll concede if he is going to lose, 2010 is probably the best year to do it. But if he does lose, it will be in the primary, and to someone from the south or west sides. - Louis Howe - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 6:43 am: Quinn’s Favorable numbers reflect the voter’s relief that Quinn’s not Blago…Pat’s skating on thin ice unless he begins making real changes in state government operations…. - Vote Quimby! - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 8:18 am: I just about lost my Diet Pepsi when I read $845. I know a township trustee who raised more than that! - Louis G. Atsaves - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 8:33 am: Going door to door last election voters who were mentioning Blagojevich and admitting that they voted for him claimed they were “fooled.” So I guess they really do not want to accept blame for supporting the guy. That really doesn’t surprise me. Then again, there are a ton of office holders in Illinois doing the same thing right now. If Rassmussen were to poll all of them, 0% would accept any blame. - Hair today, gone.... - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 9:01 am: =four percent (4%) say they will definitely vote for him,(Burris)= I didn’t know the Burris family was that large. - Wumpus - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 9:06 am: Keep at it Burris. You were legally appointed by the sitting governor using the system in place. Yes, the system was flawed, but it was Blago’s decision as he was re-elected by the voters and supported by the current president, Chicago Mayor, Cook COunty Board current president, Speaker of the IL house and the Chicago cabinet. The only dem who opposed him was Edwin Eisendrath. - Ken - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 9:08 am: “six points lower than Obama” Rich you continue to show your bias. Real clear politics shows Obama with an average approval rating of 60.9%. Stop cherry picking the poll to suit your desire. - Six Degrees of Separation - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 9:18 am: Ken- Don’t be a doofus. Rich is comparing apples to apples, from the SAME poll of ILLINOIS voters. - dupage dan - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 9:19 am: Here we go again. I want to agree w/VM that the voters are not as dumb as accused but Rich pointed out that Quinn’s approval rating is high even tho he was steeped in the RodB administration and promoted him during his re-election campaign even tho there was good info/evidence of RodB’s corruption. That is a problem. Also, the problems in this state won’t go away unless and until the voters confront their willingness to follow the “music man” and stop electing these thieves. - Hank - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 9:54 am: I support a special election but after all this is Illinois and the only difference between a SE and an appointment is that some voters choose to vote. The “annointed” candidate is usually given a clear shot to victory against some mope(s)put up to make it look legit. In the end, not much difference between an appointment and a SE - VanillaMan - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 10:06 am: When voters enter the voting booth, if they are lucky and live in a politically competitive community, they will face two political party nominees. For many parts of Illinois, voters are not even given a choice, because the only person on the ballot is the incumbant. So blaming voters is stupid. Do you want people to self govern? Do you want people to be active in elections? You say you do. Then why can’t you accept their decisions? Why do you blame everyone, preventing any kind of governmental accountability? When critics blame voters, they are actually blaming no one, and they know this. Since we cannot single out every voter who made the “wrong” choice, these critics are actually playing a game where no one is to be singled out, and the entire disaster continues. So, how do we get better government? We get it by pressuring the political party structures that are private organizations deciding who to nominate. In Illinois we have to declare a political party before we can even choose which candidate to support on Election Day. Each political party decides how much power voters have. In Chicago, it is all about the Democratic primary, since the city has been a single party goverment since 1929. It is right and proper to dump on the political party who, with eyes wide open, nominated a do-nothing state representative, who was the in-law to a long-serving Chicago alderman, who was a do-nothing US Congressman who seemingly couldn’t hold a private meeting without making illegal deals, all the while running a campaign based on reform. And not only did they blow it the first time, the Illinois Democrats re-nominated him! Illinois voters dumped on the Illinois GOP after George Ryan, and turned to the other political party after watching two previous Democratic governors end up in jail. Now you can make it three Illinois Democratic governors in a row, ending up in jail! So, what do you expect voters to do? Not only are they cynical, angry, and fed up, they have watched two Illinois Democrats, Burris and Jackson, get caught up in the current US Senate scandal. It just never stops! But it is the voter’s fault? Get real! Quinn’s poll numbers are based on hope and with fewer than 100 days in office, they are also based on a mild honeymoon. These numbers do not reflect how Quinn dallied and stumbled regarding direct elections for future Illinois US Senators. It reflects an exhaustion over the disasters we have watched Illinois Democrats serve up over the past seven years. If you want to improve Illinois government, you don’t belittle self-government. You don’t lay the blame on the voters who really had no choice, depended on a corrupted political party, and watched these people rob us blind. - nervousGOP'r - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 10:07 am: Hey Lisa, It will be tough to run in a primary against a “Popular” sitting Gov of your own party! The question will be why? But we know pat Quinn put him in front of a camera and he will say something stupid sonner or later. What to do? Run now and it looks like a power grab by your old man. A 61% approval? Great job Leader Cross and Rodonano and Andy. Maybe people like to be taxed to death? The media will not do your jobs for you because they think taxes need to be raised. - Rich Miller - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 10:15 am: Ken, Obama appears to bring out the worst in you, eh? Can’t read? - Captain Flume - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 10:26 am: After the finger-pointing at the Teabaggers yesterday for being ignorant of the taxing laws (GRT, income tax, proposals, etc.), is it surprising to find that “Voters Refuse to Accept Blame?” Of course voters are ignorant. It has been stated on this blog on several occasions that the candidates (or the parties) pick the voters, not vice versa. How much time does an ordinary citizen have to devote to thoroughly researching any candidate or policy issue, when those candidates and policies are being promoted by peole whose fulltime jobs and careers are getting candidates elected and policies in place that are favorable to keeping those fulltime jobs? Most voters simply do not have the time or energy, even if they have the interest, to take on another fulltime job of being their own government watchdogs. It’s a shame voters need to be watchdogs, but taking on another fulltime job of keeping up-to-date on the activities of government and government officials is exhausting. - wordslinger - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 10:28 am: – In Illinois we have to declare a political party before we can even choose which candidate to support on Election Day.– No, we don’t. You’re confusing Election Day with partisan primaries. Gerrymandering for legislative races has to a large extent effectively disenfranchised voters, as the district maps allow for incumbents to choose voters, not the other way around. But for statewide races? What winning candidates did not have the most votes? - Hair today, gone.... - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 10:37 am: I was really expecting a “bite me Ken.” In a good mood today Rich? - Rich Miller - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 10:38 am: Ken appears to be a rabid hater. Don’t want rabies. - Rich Miller - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 10:40 am: ===Most voters simply do not have the time or energy, even if they have the interest, to take on another fulltime job of being their own government watchdogs=== You’ve said some silly things here, but that’s one of the silliest. Full time job? Please. How about just ignoring TV ads and reading the papers and checking a blog every now and then? - 47th Ward - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 10:45 am: Let me see if I can summarize VM in four words: Voters innocent, Democrats guilty. You really don’t need 1,000 words to make that point. Especially since it is the same point you make almost daily here. We get it, it’s all the fault of the Democrats. - Concerned Observer - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 10:47 am: I can’t get over the $845. I remembered today a community college trustee race in southern Illinois, in which one of the candidates spent somewhere over $30K (and still lost, but that’s not the point). And this is for the US Senate! $845 is absolutely astounding. - 47th Ward - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 10:49 am: $845? I’ve seen brides do better on the dollar dance! - Ken - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 10:57 am: interesting Rich must resort to name calling in trying to defend his bias. The numbers in the real clear politics polls don’t lie. Rich tries to present himself as a journalist, while actually being a partisan columnist. - Rich Miller - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 11:04 am: Ken, you’re a total freaking moron. Read the Rasmussen poll. The number I referred to was the Obama job approval number for Illinois voters in the SAME POLL which produced the Quinn results. This has already been pointed out to you once, and you still didn’t bother to click the link. As I commented somewhere yesterday, the last refuge of scoundrels isn’t patriotism, it’s accusing someone else of partisan bias. Idiot. - wordslinger - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 11:10 am: Voters had better be the watchdogs — who else is going to do it? Make time, daddio. It’s one of the great blessings bestowed by those who came before us. - Captain Flume - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 12:06 pm: The bloggers here, silly as it may seem, are not typical voters. You can read papers, but how many times have the papers been criticized on this blog for the type of coverage they give a candidate or issue? Do you think voters believe most of what they read about candidates or the altruistic motives behind policy decisions? You can watch the TV ads for the candidates, but will you find some truth in them of what the candidate actually stands for, or how active or effective he/she will be in promoting a given issue? Usually the ads either dis the opponent or give the same maudlin pap to make the candidate look good, all flash no substance. Yes, I say silly things, but if my assessment about the voters is wrong, then please correct my silliness and tell exactly where I am wrong. - Rich Miller - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 12:12 pm: Flume, you excused voter inattention by claiming they shouldn’t have to work full time to monitor campaigns. That’s just silly. But, perhaps I shouldn’t have been so mean. Sorry for that. Ken got me a bit riled up this morning is about all I can say, and I did get up on the wrong side of the bed - literally, and late. No excuse, but whatever. Again, sorry. - VanillaMan - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 12:32 pm: – In Illinois we have to declare a political party before we can even choose which candidate to support on Election Day.– No, we don’t. You’re confusing Election Day with partisan primaries. ….and which comes before? My statement is correct. - Concerned Observer - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 12:48 pm: Vanman, it might be correct, but it’s incredibly disingenuous, because you don’t have to vote in a primary to be allowed to vote in a general election. So we don’t “have” to do anything. It’s like saying I “have” to go to church on Easter in order to exchange presents over the Winter holidays. - VanillaMan - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 2:46 pm: it’s incredibly disingenuous It is a calculating statement only if you wish to read it that way. Within the context of the paragraph from which this sentence was excerpted, I was discussing primaries. During primaries, we have to declare a political party before we can even choose which candidate to support on Election Day. Each political party decides how much power voters have. Taken in context, the sentence is not disingenuous, but stating the power political parties have over whom appears on the ballots Election Day. To blame the voters for the decisions made by the political parties is far more disingenuous. - Concerned Observer - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 3:04 pm: I don’t get from the paragraph that you were *certainly* referring to primaries, but if you were, then I guess you’re on the button. But if you were certainly referring to that, then why would you have gone after word by questioning chronology? You should have just said, “I was referring to primary elections”, and that would have been that. Hell, you could have just said to me “I was referring to primary elections in the original text” instead of giving me three paragraphs Although next time, maybe we could diagram the sentence like it’s latin class… - VanillaMan - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 3:27 pm: Because I was trying to follow Wordslinger’s thinking. You know what happens when you start following someone who is lost - you get lost too! And he keeps editing every posting I make, nitpicking. I ought to just ignor him. And I hate Latin. So what if I learned a lot! Three years! UGH! I was the dumbest guy in the room, but on the other hand, the only one that ever got any chicks. - Captain Flume - Friday, Apr 17, 09 @ 3:41 pm: Of course voters ought to be concerned and pay attention to the political landscape; but realistically when you are fortunate enough to be working full time and perhaps raising a family, the time it takes to study the minutiae of political activity so that you don’t get screwed by some amendment that has rules waived for a hearing and is passed in a committee stacked in favor of the sponsor is more than most people can do. And in Illinois political culture unfortunately, that kind of time is necessary to be intelligently aware of your stake in the process. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.