I’d choose Rutherford as he sets a tone at least of reaching out to all citizens.
It definitely would not be Rauner. Everything about his campaign is phony. The ultimate insider running as an outsider. The guy who made a fortune off public pensions looking to wack pensioneers. A guy who ducks every tough question.
I’ll probably end up pulling a GOP ballot to vote against Rauner.
Rutherford is the only Republican I’ll vote for. If he doesn’t win the primary, I’ll vote for a Democrat.
- FoxValleyPride1 - Thursday, Aug 15, 13 @ 11:28 am:
Off the list… anybody who spouts the “government should be run more like a business” line. Pretty sure that’s Rauner’s primary talking point… but the others will start spouting that stuff soon enough. The government is not a business. It’s responsibilities and objectives are different.
i really want to be for kirk. my hesitation runs thusly: implying pay raise veto ok tactic, strike one; punting to a referendum on gay marriage a political dodge, foul ball.
i still prefer him to rutherford, but i would vote for rutherford over any dem. brady is a self delusional conservative in an empty suit.
rauner is entertaining, as long as he doesnt get over 10% of the vote. he is ill prepared, even moreso than the usual rich guy candidate. he seems unwilling to do the due diligence required to govern, and i doubt he listens. he will commit a gaffe or two along the way that people will pounce on. if he avoids that by never stating a position, that will also wear thin.
I won’t be voting in that primary, but if I did it would be for Dillard. He’s a direct descendant of the Thompson-Edgar winning wing of the GOP and I would argue has the right blend of experience and skill to govern Illinois well. His lurch to the right in recent years is a negative for me, but in a divided government his worst instincts will be checked.
Rauner would never get my vote. Either Brady or Rutherford would be better governors.
I’m still hoping Joe Walsh gets in though. That would be awesome!
Dan Rutherford who is the most socially moderate of the candidates. Dillard’s been around a long time, but would be my second choice. Rauner and Bradley will never get my vote. If either of those get the nod, then I leave that slot on the ballet blank.
I would choose Rutherford, because he is more of a moderate and seems to be reaching out in a way independents could support. I would not vote for Bill Brady, because he is neither of the above, and he has already proven he can’win.
Dillard, because he would be the best at Governing from day 1. There are other reasons as well, but that’s the ability to actually do the job is reason number 1. I still believe he needs to change his position on gay marriage and support it.
I’m very unimpressed with the rest of the field, Rauner doesn’t seem to know anything about Government, Rutherford is just a political gadfly and Brady lost to Pat Quinn already and hasn’t seem to learn from his mistakes. I”m not sure he could beat him if they faced each other again despite his talking points about “almost beating him last time.”
I am not going to burden Brady, Dillard, or Rutherford (note: alphabetical order!) with any mention, but will say I will support the Nominee, as I did Brady, even if that support is a very harsh light, in hopes of HELPING to focus the Nominee’s General Election win. Period.
Dan Rutherford. He has the skills to lead the State. He is a statesman who can work with both parties in the General Assembly to get something done.
Toss up between Brady and Rauner–definitely not interested in either one of them being the Republican nominee. Brady had his shot, though he shouldn’t have–he is too conservative for my tastes and I just don’t think he has what it takes to get us out of this mess. Rauner is trying to buy the nomination and that annoys me–as someone else said, the ultimate insider trying to play like an outsider.
As a Moderate, Dillard because while he’s a Conservative (from a variety of perspectives, which I can certainly appreciate), he has his priorities set and the focus is jobs, the economy, and our State. I also like his “business” background (I’ll admit I’m partial to attorneys and their ethics, especially in today’s world), I believe he has the ability to unite Moderates and Conservatives to the greatest extent possible and practicable, and most importantly, I trust him. And from an imagie perspective, he’s a true statesman per my definition.
Surprisingly enough, I will not be voting for Mr. Rutherford. His latest strategy seems divisive and extremely reactionary to me.
I supported Dillard last time and think he would make a good governor. I think he has had his chance and failed to pursue with gusto. Maybe he does this time. I would be comfortable with Rutherford - I think he has more desire and connection to voters than Dillard. Time will tell.
I’m teetering between Dillard and Rutherford. Both were better senators than Brady. Rauner is a non-starter for me. I think Dillard and Rutherford would have the best chance of winning a general. Still deciding.
- Ravenswood Right Winger - Thursday, Aug 15, 13 @ 12:07 pm:
Rutherford, by voting for civil unions he doesn’t come across as a total RW which is anathema to critical voters (women in the burbs).
Kirk Dillard is the only one of that bunch that I would vote for. And I would vote for him enthusiastically, he’s smart, experienced and likeable. Those are the three things I look for in most candidates.
Rutherford seems okay I guess, but he also comes across as very superficial and cardboard-ish.
Rauner is completely unlikeable and his TV ads are awful. Bill Brady is the Democrats dream opponent, again.
- Ready To Get Out - Thursday, Aug 15, 13 @ 12:08 pm:
Rauner: Not in my lifetime!
Rutherford. I’m in the conservative wing of the party, but his ability to win statewide and his big tent philosophy of social issues not determining good and bad Republicans is definitely what others in the party need to learn. The other candidates are jokes:
1. Brady - lost to Quinn last time
2. Dilard - lost to Brady in the primary
3. Rauner - Never been elected to a public office
Having known the candidates for only 4 years, for me it would be Rutherford in a landslide. People speak of Dillard’s moderation and ability to govern, but I’m convinced that quality is a thing of the past, as I haven’t seen it since knowing him.
- Joe Bidenopolous - Thursday, Aug 15, 13 @ 12:39 pm:
As a dyed-in-the-wool D, I might normally say Brady (most beatable), but I’m going with Rutherford. He’s relatively moderate on social issues (and if he won, I personally think he would moderate more with the power of incumbency), he’s likable and really, i think he’s geniune.
Dillard is way too freakin’ shifty in the last decade, shamelessly opportunistic (witness the Obama ad when BHO was popular here and the ALEC State Charimanship when extreme right wing Republicanism came back in vogue), and I simply don’t trust him. And I’ll never forgive Edgar for closing down all of the fair beer tents, even if there’s been somewhat of a revival.
Brady - ummm, if I want Jim DeMint-style representation, I’ll move to South Carolina, thank you.
Rauner - kidding, right? But please, spend the money. And if you win the primary, at least it will be an entertaining general.
If it weren’t colossally unwise for me to do so, like Word, I’d pull an R ballot in a second and vote for Rutherford. I really don’t like my D choices.
Well team Rutherford is clearly doing their job on here. I’m not averse to him, but some of the inside baseball stuff is a bit much to swallow. For example the entourage with which he travels, the often demeaning way he treats staff in public & the arrogance his other staff carries themselves with. That’s the downside to this business. You get to know people sometimes to intimately, because on paper Rutherford should be the best.
Dillard is too conservative for me but he has a record of sometimes voting for gaming bills. Rutherford isn’t as conservative but had a record of voting against the gaming bill. I hate being a single issue person but just for this reason Dillard would get my vote if I wasn’t pulling Dem ballot.
- PublicServant - Thursday, Aug 15, 13 @ 12:52 pm:
I gotta go with Norseman on this and write in Oswego Willy.
Dan Rutherford would be a refreshing change for Illinois. Takes questions on issues and answers them, thoughtfuly, even if his staff tries to yank him out of the way.
Bill Brady proved that an ineffective legislator and businessman can do the impossible, lose to a Governor who supported and ran with Rod Blagojevich while that was fresh in voters’ minds. What has he done since to prove that could win any better the second (third primary) time around?
It seems today’s Republicans are all about negativity and obstruction. The candidate who offers innovation and positivity will attract quite a bit of attention….and could get some Dems to pay attention. But I don’t think that candidate can win GOP primary. The rabid, foaming-at-the-mouth base wants an Obama-bashing, shut-down-the-government, get-rid-of-healthcare champion.
I would rule out the other three. Brady is too far to the right. Dillard and Rauner stand for nothing.
If Rutherford gets the nod, it will likely be the first time I vote GOP for Gov (although I did undervote the second time Blago was on the ballot). Only way I vote Dem this time is if Kwame is the nominee. If Kwame gets the nod I’m undecided.
At present, Dillard. Overall, the tested and prepared bit doesn’t sound all that bad. Definitely not any of the rest. Dillard seems to have a moderate backbone with enough political sense that presentation has to cater to primary voters in order to get a run in the general. Thoughts might change, they might not but I’d rather support a genuine moderate that flexes conservative in the primary than a hard righty that tries to feign moderation.
Rutherford is probably the best option with D-Lard the next best. Brady is a solid Meh. As for Rauner there is only one person who could make me vote for Rauner. Unfortunatley that person is Pat Quinn.
To be honest with you as far as i am concerned everyone announced (and most not announced) would make better Governors than PQ. So the bar is REALLY low.
I just like Rutherford and Dillard. They both seem like reasonable people with experience. Brady - dull boring with virtually no ideas I agree with. Rauner - the rich kid showing off his new expensive bat at a sandlot game. It’s just a bat.
Senator Dillard — because when he wins he’ll be able to do what governors are supposed to do: govern.
- BehindTheScenes - Thursday, Aug 15, 13 @ 2:11 pm:
I like Dillard, but think his time is past.
I like and voted for Brady last time but he couldn’t close the deal. Don’t know what is different this time around.
I don’t know Rauner.
Favoring Rutherford at the present. He has legislative and leadership experience, and is the only one of four who has won statewide. In fact, while he didn’t run against Quinn in ‘10, his numbers were better than Quinn’s in many parts of the state.
It’s pretty clear to me that Rutherford is the best of the Republican candidates.
That said, his threat to go to the rating agencies over the borrowing proposal to pay off bills is my biggest turn off about him. If the Fahner/Civic Committee thing went anywhere or if another candidate could inform the public about Illinois’ credit rating being lower than it should be, then I think Rutherford has a serious problem.
- Endangered Moderate Species - Thursday, Aug 15, 13 @ 2:30 pm:
Rutherford - yes
Dillard - maybe
Brady - no
Rauner - no
Dillard is easily the most “electable”- state wide, and he would be my first pick. I would be a tad more concerned with Rutherford- but not unhappy with his candidacy. If Brady or Rauner get elected as the result of another in fractured primary- which could happen- I will write off another loss to Quinn….and cry.
Rutherford gets a maybe even though when I was in high school and he was running for re-election to the IL house, he made a stop met some people. He asked a buddy of mine how old he was (18) and chatted him up for about 5 minutes. Then he came over to me and asked my age (17). That’s was the end of our talk.
Rutherford. The others have already locked themselves into a no tax increase or no extension of the 5% tax no matter what. Rutherford is not for an increase or continuing the 5% tax, but hasn’t totally shut the door on those things.
Would have said Dillard last week until he shut the door on an increases.
I would support Rutherford, in part because as many have already pointed out, he is the closest to a moderate in the field. But, also, I met him several times when he was my state senator, and I like him as a person. Would never support Raumer.
I imagine that it will be Rutherford. I am afraid that what happened to Shock with all those ‘independent’ adds will start happening to Rutherford. I believe we will find out why his mouth was really wired shut and other things like that.
Dan Rutherford A due to less extreme than the F candidate - Brady who has proven himself to be a loser. Rauner maybe just for the entertainment value if he can beat the D candidate. Dillard = dullard. No thank you.
OK, you asked….some of my favorites venues….(the heck with media markets)
Norway, Illinois (want to be inclusive, your electoral victory may hinge on the turnout of Norwegians and Campaign Manager Norseman’s kin-folk.
Industry, Illinois (always need more industry)
Bulpitt, Illinois (tavern - yer gonna need a stiff drink)
Burnt Prarie, Illinois (appeal to the environmentalist)
Vienna Fraternal Cemetary - rally and sceance at grave site of Hon. Paul Powell to see if he has any campaign cash tucked away. Expensive race.
- Small Town Taxpayer - Thursday, Aug 15, 13 @ 4:27 pm:
As of today ‘None of the Above’ is my first choice. Back in second place for me is Rutherford as he is more of a social moderate and a fiscally conservative.
Mason born’s comment warmed by Democratic heart. So I hope fervently that Mr. Rauner is the grand old party’s standard bearer. Given the incompetence that Governor Quinn has often exhibited as an executive, but his populist leanings Rauner seems the best Republican to declare class war on.
If Daley should win I would much rather have another Republican opponent because Daley really can’t stack up to Rauner as a pro-business and pro-growth candidate.
It is really stunning how little support Rauner has among Republicans who read this blog.
I am generally a Democrat but have been known to vote GOP when the candidate is far better (EXP: JBT vs Blago).
I’ll go with Dillard as the more moderate candidate and closer to be able to represent me since I don’t have billions…not even millions.
I just cannot get past Rutherford’s disgraceful political behavior as State Treasurer. He will never get my vote for anything.
Dillard is smarter, better informed, and better to deal with than Brady. No contest there.
I’m not writing off Rauner yet, because I (naively?) believe that he cannot really be as stupid and extreme as he has sounded so far, and still have been such a success in business. I am waiting for his intelligence and problem-solving skills to emerge, as he starts talking some reality.
I’m sure all are likable, nice guys, intelligent, in favor of Jesus, and patriotic. Some are quite adept at extracting wealth from the economy. Same with all the democrats.
None are supporting the preservation of the middle class, and they all support reneging on pensions.
Unless you are in the 5% wealth and income group, why on earth would you consider these candidates, even in a hypothetical opinion survey??
- Not a country bumpkin - Thursday, Aug 15, 13 @ 8:02 pm:
Funny watching all the Dem respondents say what’s wrong with Brady. He lost because the burbs sat on their $%*^ and didn’t get out and vote. Brady is conservative; but after 10 years of liberals , how’s that been workin’ for ya? Brady can win. He has retooled his organization. Rutherford has been using his office to campaign and he still is not getting support except from liberal Dems. Did you know Dillard used to be Jim Edgar’s chief of staff? No traction for him. Rauner or is it Rahmer? But I will glady take any of them over Quinn or Daley.
- Arthur Andersen - Thursday, Aug 15, 13 @ 9:35 pm:
Normally the choice for Lt. Gov. wouldn’t be a big deal.In a 4 way primary, the Lt. Gov. choice could make a huge difference. I voted for Dillard last time, but I’m waiting to see who Rutherford will be adding to his ticket. Brady, who I voted for in 2006,just because he was from downstate, like me, is too conservative for my liking, Rauner is joke. Being fairly an independent voter these days, I still have the option of voting in the Democratic Primary, depending upon how that race develops. Time will tell. Should be an interesting primary night for both parties.
Surprisingly enough, I will not be voting for Mr. Rutherford. His latest strategy seems divisive and extremely reactionary to me.
I’d love to know what this is about.
I’m leaning Rutherford, but Brady would be my second choice by process of elimination. Rauner is in over his head, and Dillard is a petulant brat with an entitlement complex who thinks he just didn’t name-drop Jim Edgar enough last time.
I’d be careful letting my comment warm your heart. To be honest i don’t think there is truly a dimes worth of difference between Daley and Rauner. I look at it this way. Rauner isn’t genuine because he is trying to play himself off as this everyman. If he would own up to being a rich succesful businessman who now wants to attempt to “fix” IL and drop the i’m just like you ploy then he’d beat Daley.
As for Daley he is a spoiled rich man who has been handed his fortune due to his families political ties. The only reason Daley beats Rauner is that Daley seems more genuine so far. As soon as Daley in the General starts saying he is just like us little folks it becomes literally flipping a coin on the way to the booth.