Some riveting TV
Wednesday, Oct 15, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* For me, anyway, the best part of last night’s debate was near the end, when the two candidates were allowed to ask each other questions…
“On the 27th of February of 2001, Mr. Rauner, you fired a woman executive at your firm for not laying off enough workers, and you threatened her. You said you would bury her. You said you would bankrupt her and her family. You said you would hurt her and her family,” as Quinn asked the question, Rauner shook his head, smiling.
“Why did you say that Mr. Rauner? It’s never right to threaten anyone.”
The crowd laughed a bit in reaction to Quinn’s last comment, teeing up Rauner to unleash a visceral attack at Quinn.
“Gov. Quinn, this is more of the baloney you throw out continuously. I can’t keep up with the lies that you spin.
“Let me be clear, you are running an ad about a false accusation, a frivolous lawsuit that was thrown out in court by a judge who dismissed it on summary judgment,” Rauner retorted.
“You are taking an accusation and spinning it into an ad because you can’t run on the truth. The truth is, you’re the worst governor in America. You are failing the people of Illinois … You can’t run on your record, you’ve got to make up lies about me in order to win.”
Rauner shouldn’t have laughed when Quinn asked the question, but he sure as heck did fire back with both barrels.
* A “body language expert” opined to Fox 32 that Quinn “looked like a beaten dog”…
WFLD, Chicago’s Fox affiliate, spoke with a body language expert who said Quinn’s appearance, especially in the last two minutes, was “pretty bad.”
“It was as bad as I’ve ever seen anyone get beaten up in a debate,” said Perry Myers, president of MSI Detective Services. […]
“You’ve failed in every regard,” Rauner said in the final minutes of the debate. “You can’t run on your record-you have to make up lies about me.”
Myers noted the Rauner was “much more confident” than Quinn, who could not look the Republican candidate in the eye. “[Quinn] was shaking with every word,” Myers added.
Watch…
It’s my own view that Quinn really doesn’t like direct, face-to-face conflict, so that may be why he seemed so timid about asking the question. There have been times in the past when he’s been so angry at me over something that he wouldn’t even look at me when I asked him questions during press conferences. He’s just that way.
- Wordslinger - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 10:45 am:
“Body language expert?” Whatever.
Rauner better hope the other shoe doesn’t drop from players in that lawsuit.
- William j Kelly - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 10:47 am:
Rauner for govenors: he will look you in the eye and threaten to destroy you AND your family!! No thanks.
- Ron Burgundy - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 10:48 am:
Oof. Good response by Rauner there, and Quinn looks like he is holding on to the podium for dear life. If he’s that timid in a public debate, imagine how timid he is behind closed doors with leadership.
- Levi - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 10:49 am:
Not that it matters to anyone except lawyers, but a lawsuit is not “frivolous” because summary judgment has been granted. Frivolous lawsuits are thrown out on 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Rauner’s company won on summary judgment on some claims, but it settled on others. You don’t settle frivolous claims.
Like I said, I’m sure it won’t matter to voters, but the indignation on Rauner’s part here isn’t righteous, but dishonest.
- Illinoise - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 10:51 am:
Rich, you made a comment about the last debate, and even somewhat about last night’s, that it only matters that the press reports, since most voters aren’t tuning in to watch a gubernatorial debate. I wonder how much their body language will actually play overall. The problem for both candidates could be what photo media outlets choose to publish. Rauner with his weird smirk and Quinn looking annoyed. Otherwise, I don’t see what impact this would have.
- Cassiopeia - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 10:53 am:
I think this was a “there you go again…” moment and Rauner nailed the essential argument against Quinn’s re-election.
- Sir Reel - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 10:54 am:
I agree with you Rich about Quinn’s dislike of confrontation. I’m sure his handlers told him to ask the question.
Rauner, in true corporate raider mode, overwhelms his opponents.
For me these debates are virtually useless. Just repeats of ads and talking points. I’m still waiting for some details from both on how they’ll grow the economy.
- Aldyth - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 10:54 am:
I daresay Rauner came on at least that strong when he was talking about the female executive. He seems to be good at intimidation.
- Ron Burgundy - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 10:55 am:
Correct, Levi. Big difference between lawsuit being thrown out and allegations being frivolous. At the same time, the allegations weren’t proven, either, so Quinn’s ad running the allegations as facts is just as misleading as Rauner saying they were found to be frivolous.
- CircularFiringSquad - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 10:57 am:
Guess we really need Mitt to share the “settlement” so we can seen how the sworn depositions were fully debunked…Just unseal the file Mitt…..maybe get Jeri Ryan to a endorsement ad
- Dirty Red - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 10:59 am:
= “Let me be clear, you are running an ad about a false accusation, a frivolous lawsuit that was thrown out in court by a judge who dismissed it on summary judgment,” Rauner retorted.
“You are taking an accusation and spinning it into an ad because you can’t run on the truth. The truth is, you’re the worst governor in America. You are failing the people of Illinois … You can’t run on your record, you’ve got to make up lies about me in order to win.” =
Why isn’t THAT the ad Rauner camp runs instead of the candidate’s wife talking on script into a camera?
- downstate hack - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:06 am:
Dirty Red,
Absolutely correct. Quinn’s major weakness is the Illinois economy and his failure as Governor. The Rauner retort in this debate should be featured soon and often in Rauner ads. IMHO
- Stones - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:08 am:
PQ has never been particularly good at direct confrontation. He’s been a guy in the past that prefers to throw stones from a distance.
I didn’t see the entire debate but based on the clips I saw Rauner appeared to be much more effective.
- Louis G. Atsaves - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:08 am:
Fatal mistake on Quinn’s part asking that question about that lawsuit. Opened up a whole can of worms. He wanted to go ugly and vicious and he did. Now he and the Yellow Journalists that ran with this Democrat planted story have to explain their actions. Rauner’s response to Quinn’s question was by far the highlight of this debate.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:09 am:
- a “there you go again…” moment -
Stick with that, it worked great for Gov. Brady in 2010.
- Keyser Soze - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:09 am:
Will one or the other please tell the voters what they intend to do (specifically) to improve the Illinois economy. The other stuff makes for great theater but it is hardly instructive.
- anon - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:10 am:
No mention made about the question that Rauner asked Quinn. Can you fill me in????
- Lunchbox - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:10 am:
The Rauner response was awesome, it reminded me of the “You’re no Jack Kennedy” destruction of Dan Quayle. Quinn looked awful up there, haha.
- Team Sleep - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:10 am:
Rich - I too have heard that from legislative caucus leaders and federal officials. It is unfortunate. He is the Governor and he is our chief executive. Confrontation is an unfortunate-yet-necessary part of governing (especially in a state like Illinois).
That is one thing I wish people did not hold against Mr. Rauner. Businesspersons and people who run companies have to make decisions and cannot always worry about whether the decision will be popular within the company or within the business world. They have to do what is best for their own interests and the interests of those around them. Elected officials - sans lame ducks - do not have that “luxury”. They are accountable to a much wider audience/group than a corporate CEO or investment partner.
Does that mean that Mr. Rauner should threaten people? No. But it does mean that “flipping” a company does not come with the same worry as being a governor or senator.
- Jaded - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:11 am:
Not sure why Quinn asked that question. Quinn’s ad is beating the crap out of Rauner on that issue (whether the quote is true or false doesn’t matter). Asking the question just gave Rauner a chance to rebut the allegation on television (who cares if nobody was watching). They might even be able to make another ad based on the question and answer. I would say asking the question was a mistake by a campaign that really hasn’t made many, and if you don’t think it was a mistake, then maybe you need to lay off the cool-aid a little.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:12 am:
@Levi
==Frivolous lawsuits are thrown out on 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim.==
Under the Federal Rules a 12(b)(6) is treated like a motion for summary judgment. Summary judgment says as a matter of law no set of facts of the Plaintiff’s entitle the case to go forward, which is a lot like a 12(b)(6). Ask Judge Shadur
- Rockford's Finest - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:13 am:
Does anyone have a link to last night’s debate? The video on CBS 2’s website will not work for me. I’ve tried two different browsers too.
- Geronimo - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:15 am:
I’m sure there are those who’d like a pitbull governor Rauner when the double barrels are pointed on certain people. But those same people should be careful as he can quickly turn and aim at them. Rauner is an attack dog. Seemingly a very angry, pumped up one too.
- Leprechaun - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:15 am:
Quinn looked like a deer in headlights. Not at all relaxed or comfortable. I talked with someone who was their and said Quinn never looked at ease. He said it was if he didn’t want to be there at all.
He also mentioned that the protesters were anti Quinn so figure next time the unions will show up.
- walker - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:16 am:
I’ve never heard Rauner say anywhere that he didn’t say what his own partner testified under oath that he said. He always just refers to the judge.
I don’t doubt that he even bragged about it to his business associates.
The judge, while accepting all testimony and other evidence as true, did not find it sufficient to make the case at hand. That’s called a summary judgment.
Face it. He said it.
The question is: does it matter?
- D.P.Gumby - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:18 am:
Typical violation of the rule “never ask one question too many”. Of course Rauner never answered the question, but that was a horrible opening by Quinn.
- Cassandra - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:18 am:
The media are making a lot out of the fact that the executive in question was a female. Exec-u-tive. Sometimes they yell at each other. Would the media care if he yelled at a male exec. Probably not. Should he treat her gently because she’s a woman. C’mon. This is the 21st century.
People shouldn’t talk like this to anybody in any workplace, but they do. Mangers lose their tempers when they shouldn’t and so do their subordinates. Productivity suffers, especially when lawsuits are filed and so on. We know all this, but it goes on. I bet quite a few US execs are having nasty temper tantrums right now.
And I bet Quinn has had a few temper tantrums of his own.
- Team Sleep - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:25 am:
Cassandra - to your last point…
Wouldn’t it be interesting in Rauner had a former Quinn official or agency director/secretary waiting to tell his or her story about that very thing?!
Yeah, I’m sure the Governor has never yelled at anyone or lost his temper. I’m sure he always talks nicely and calmly when negotiating or disagreeing with others.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:26 am:
- Sometimes they yell at each other. -
Can you not read, or hear, or are you just deliberately ignoring what he said?
Yelling is one thing, threatening is another. The fact that it was a woman is worse politically, but it would still have been grossly inappropriate if it were a man.
- A guy... - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:27 am:
And yet more people remember the response than the question, don’t they?
- Mighty M. Mouse - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:29 am:
I didn’t see any shaking, Quinn looked pretty impassive. I think looking straight ahead was appropriate.
I think the expert is full of “baloney.”
- Carhart Representative - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:30 am:
I don’t think the debate really matters because I think voters have already decided that they hate both of these candidates. When you’re already despised, it’s pretty hard to score points. I found myself groaning at the stupidity of Quinn’s responses only to get angry at Rauner when he spoke. It just becomes preaching to the choir. I’m sure that I’m one of the few people in Illinois who actually watched this thing and I found myself no more informed on either candidate. The only points Rauner has made in this campaign is that he’s not Quinn and conversely Quinn’s biggest appeal is that he’s not Rauner. Quinn really doesn’t have a record to run on and neither does Rauner as the one area where he has had any success, he has had to claim he was completely hands off because of allegations of wrongdoing and litigation.
- Norseman - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:30 am:
To Quinn’s statement that it’s never good to threaten anyone, I have a one word response: PAYCHECKS.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:30 am:
===Just unseal the file Mitt…..maybe get Jeri Ryan to a endorsement ad===
The next step in this “Baloney”…
The deposed saying its true, “I stand by my sworn statement, all of it”
- MrJM - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:31 am:
“I’ve never heard Rauner say anywhere that he didn’t say what his own partner testified under oath that he said. He always just refers to the judge.”
If Rauner has denied that he said that, can someone please provide a link?
Anyone?
– MrJM
- Percival - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:32 am:
The end of the debate shows why it is preferable to let candidates mix it up a bit rather than give canned answers to expected media questions. Rauner needed a strong close and he got it, or rather Quinn gave it to him.
- Mighty M. Mouse - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:34 am:
===I’m still waiting for some details from both on how they’ll grow the economy. ===
Economists generally all agree that neither one of them will have any material effect on the economy.
Candidates talk about the economy because that’s what people want to hear, not because they can really make any significant difference.
The economy is affected by factors much bigger than anything that any governor can really do.
- Mighty M. Mouse - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:37 am:
===To Quinn’s statement that it’s never good to threaten anyone, I have a one word response: PAYCHECKS. ===
He didn’t threaten to do it, he just went and did it.
There weren’t any threats.
- Not OW - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:38 am:
Levi at 10:49
You’re right that it wasn’t a frivolous lawsuit in the legalistic sense of the word, but to a layperson it does look pretty weak. And Quinn didn’t do himself any favors by saying it’s never OK to threaten people. Sometimes, actually, it is OK to threaten someone if that’s what it takes to get something accomplished. And the more this lawsuit gets picked apart, the more people are going to say to themselves, “Hey, the guy got sued by someone who didn’t have much of a case. I’d be angry, too, if I was him.” Quinn risks overreaching by hammering on Rauner’s business style because his style is, by all appearances, successful, whether you like it or not. Yes, he may have done and said some smarmy things, but at the end of the day, Rauner was successful in reaching his goals. Quinn has done some smarmy things (IDOT, NRI) and failed to accomplish anything. Whether it is true or not, Rauner comes off as a strong leader who knows what he wants and how to get there. Quinn just looks listless.
- Levi - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:38 am:
===Lunchbox - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:10 am:
The Rauner response was awesome, it reminded me of the “You’re no Jack Kennedy” destruction of Dan Quayle. Quinn looked awful up there, haha.===
That was Vice President Lloyd Bentsen who said that, right? Oh, wait…
- low level - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:40 am:
“You can’t run on your record”.
Well, neither can you, Bruce.
- Obamas Puppy - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:40 am:
Fox News need I say more?
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:44 am:
===Sometimes, actually, it is OK to threaten someone if that’s what it takes to get something accomplished.===
“I will bury her”
Yep. Acceptable that that is the Dopiest idea of a pivot since forever.
===And the more this lawsuit gets picked apart, the more people are going to say to themselves…===
“Wonder if the person will say the sworn deposition is a lie? Let’s ask!”
===Yes, he may have done and said some smarmy things, but at the end of the day, Rauner…=
…threatened to bury a woman executive, and threatened her family too.
=== Rauner comes off as a …===
Tom Hagen bully, threatening, attacking families…
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:45 am:
Staff couldn’t slip Pat a note this time to straighten up.
- William j Kelly - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:46 am:
Louis g asstevas, the fatal mistake was when rauner put his petition challenge operation in your hands! Lol!
- Levi - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:46 am:
To ===- Not OW - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:38 am:===
Fastest unemployment decline in three decades. Ended capital punishment. Legalized civil unions then equal marriage. Passed a much-needed tax increase. Implemented the ACA expansion in Illinois. Stabilized the bond rating. Got the State much closer to paying its bills on time. I’d say he’s accomplished a heck of a lot.
- Skeptic - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:54 am:
“I have a one word response: PAYCHECKS” Except Quinn didn’t go after their families.
- Soccermom - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:56 am:
William J. Kelly, what grade are you in?
- too obvious - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:57 am:
Rauner lied when he said the LeapSource lawsuit was thrown out on summary judgment. The truth is some counts were dismissed, but two others were allowed to go forward.
More importantly, it is ridiculous for Rauner to say the charges were “baloney” when he neglects to mention he had to settle the case with his female executive for a HALF MILLION.
- Carl Nyberg - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 11:58 am:
I found it amusing that Rauner had trouble with his question when he realized it pre-supposed Pat Quinn was going to win the election.
- Not OW - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 12:04 pm:
Levi at 11:46
Unemployment is declining everywhere, not just in Illinois.
Capital punishment was all but over by the time Quinn took office. Ask George Ryan
Legalized civil unions, then equal marriage. Hmm. Last I checked, the General Assembly did that. Are you suggesting that Quinn controls, or even works well with, the legislature?
Passed a tax increase. That will play well. (heavy sarcasm).
Implemented ACA in Illinois. If Rauner had been governor when ACA passed, he could say the same thing, just as 49 other governors can.
Stabilized the bond rating. Until the state Supreme Court all but threw out so-called pension reform. Put a different way, failed to improve the state’s bottom-of-the-barrel bond rating.
Got the state much closer to paying its bills on time. Thanks to a tax increase. While it’s better than it was, it ain’t fixed yet. Not even close.
If this is all he’s got to run on, Quinn’s in trouble, which helps explain why his key message is, “Vote for me because I’m not Bruce Rauner.”
OW is, of course, entitled to his opinion, and no doubt some voters are going to see it his way. But people tend to want strong leaders, for good or for ill. Personality wise, I don’t think there’s any question that Rauner comes off as the stronger candidate.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 12:08 pm:
===But people tend to want strong leaders, for good or for ill.===
Does…ill… include burying female subordinates already fired, bad threaten her family too.
Wonder if women love that trait.
===Personality wise, I don’t think there’s any question that Rauner comes off as the stronger candidate.===
Twist arms
Hammer
Shake
Bury
Bankrupt
Bullies do well with voters, look how many candidates rub as “the bully candidate”
- vole - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 12:10 pm:
OK, getting past the body language — frat house president vs. John Belusi — please nominate which current governor in the US is worse than Quinn. Seriously, there has to be at least one which would exempt Quinn from this status. And remember, governors like Rick Perry have gained much of their status via their chances of being elected in states with huge windfalls from oil wealth and federal spending largesse.
- Very Fed Up - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 12:12 pm:
Indeed Quinn is not and would not dare run on his record. Every last commercial he does is on something else. Illinois ranks last or near the bottom in just about every category that matters.
- Not OW - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 12:18 pm:
OW,
I’m not making value judgments here. Twist arms, bankrupt, and bury sound stronger than let’s-have-a-conversation-with-stakeholders–that’s the point. Let’s be clear here. “Bury” and the like are, to an extent, figures of speech. When a football coach says “Let’s go out in the second half and kill those guys,” does anyone seriously think he wants the team to commit homicide?
Your bully is another man’s determined business leader. And the more the Quinn campaign harps on what Rauner said about bankrupting and burying the subordinate, the more desperate it sounds.
- VM - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 12:18 pm:
@Not OW:
== Implemented ACA in Illinois. If Rauner had been governor when ACA passed, he could say the same thing, just as 49 other governors can. ==
Umm, Rauner already said he would not have expanded Medicaid. (More precisely, not expanded it like Quinn did, which is kind of meaningless.)
Moreover, a bunch of Governors in a bunch of states did not implement ACA. They did not set up a state web site. They did not expand Medicaid. They sued to overturn the law. So, yes, Quinn gets credit for ACA in Illinois.
- Not OW - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 12:20 pm:
Very fed up at 12:12,
==Every last commercial he does is on something else==
Actually, that’s not true. There is that spot on the Ford plant where Quinn says that he’s driving.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 12:20 pm:
===the more desperate it sounds.===
Pretty much every professional I’ve talked to in both parties agree that it’s the best negative ad of the year, and maybe ever in this state. But, if that comment of yours helps you sleep at night, keep thinking it.
- Judgment Day - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 12:20 pm:
Rauner is a ‘closer’ - it’s right there. He’s very good at it - Very, Very Good. He instantly read the situation and pounced. There’s a reason he’s very successful.
If he brings that same capability to government as governor, the four tops are going to find they are each going to get to make a strategic choice - have Rauner as a very worthy adversary, or as very capable partner. Their choice.
We haven’t seen anybody like Bruce Rauner in government for a long time. The debate showcased that.
I find it extremely interesting that all Pat Quinn seems to bring to the debate is what we call FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt).
One other thing to consider - Bruce Rauner seems to be very focused on what is known in the business world as “unrecognized value/surplus value”, and it looks like he’s trying to bring the concept into the political world. In this case, the African American community.
He’s seeing long term opportunity there. We’ll see if he’s right.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 12:23 pm:
===Your bully is another man’s determined business leader.===
You have to be a peach to work for, and HR must love seeing you around.
=== Let’s be clear here. “Bury” and the like are, to an extent, figures of speech.===
If you’re explaining, you’re losing. It was a threat of an “if/then” action…
===When a football coach says “Let’s go out in the second half and kill those guys,” does anyone seriously think he wants the team to commit homicide?===
Lemme guess, “this is a slippery slope”?
In a sworn deposition, Rauner wasn’t a football coach encouraging a team..,
Bruce Rauner wanted a message sent;
Do it, this happens.
That ain’t no football coach jazzing up the team.
- Not OW - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 12:23 pm:
VM at 12:18
==Moreover, a bunch of Governors in a bunch of states did not implement ACA==
You are right about that. The federal government implemented ACA, which remains the law of the land. Illinois, IIRC, didn’t create its own health exchange, instead, we’re using the fed’s. If what you mean is, Quinn expanded Medicaid, then say that. “Implement” is a weak-kneed term that can mean just about anything you want it to mean.
- Not OW - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 12:25 pm:
==Bruce Rauner wanted a message sent; Do it, this happens.==
Exactly right. Thanks for proving my point about Rauner coming off as strong while Quinn just keeps going along to get along.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 12:33 pm:
===Thanks for proving my point about Rauner coming off as strong while Quinn just keeps going along to get along.===
“Dear - Not OW -
The only way I prove your point…
…is if you think the Quinn Ad is a positive for Rauner, and if that is the case, you think the Quinn Ad is positive for Rauber…you are a Dope.
Signed,
Sane People”
- VM - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 1:00 pm:
@Not OW
Oh, please —
First, Illinois is one of the states with a state-federal partnership. As such, it is not one of the states that did nothing to implement ACA.
Second, the Medicaid expansion is an important part of ACA. Fine, if you want to quibble about “expand Medicaid under ACA” versus “implement ACA,” OK. Either way, if we take Rauner at his word (which I can’t and, if you read Rich’s column, neither does he on taxes), Rauner would have taken different actions to deal with ACA. As such, yes, Quinn deserves credit for how it turned out in Illinois.
On a slightly different note:
@Cassandra: compliments on the correct phrasing of “media are” in your post at 11:18AM. Some of us notice the little things!
- my two cents - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 1:13 pm:
On the day before the story broke, Rauner was running around telling people that he would govern by “twisting arms and maybe even breaking them”. Does anyone doubt that this is the way he gets things done, by threats and intimidation? The abused employee testified under oath - shame on Rauner for another lie of omission.
- DuPage - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 1:16 pm:
@too obvious11:57=it is ridiculous for Rauner to say the charges were “baloney” when he neglects to mention that he had to settle the case with his female executive for a half million.
Rauner would think half a million=pocket change. So insignificant (to Rauner) that he might have forgotten about it.
- Peoria guy - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 1:18 pm:
Most people in the state WANT a bully to tear down the state pension system. They conclude that those that are a member of the pension system are ripping off the taxpayer.
My wife draws a TRS pension and we have these discussion with friends and acquaintances all the time. Most think the state is bankrupt because of these pensions and that they are unwarranted and excessive.
That is just the way it is.
- Wumpus - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 1:49 pm:
Quinn always looks like that or sounds like that. He still hs won elections. That is who he is.
- A Jack - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 2:09 pm:
CNBC yesterday had an article about successful entrepreneurs and how they were excellent risk takiers, but bad at relationship building. I seriously doubt that you can be a successful governor without building relationships.
- Skeptic - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 2:22 pm:
“have Rauner as a very worthy adversary, or as very capable partner. Their choice.” (Assuming he wins of course). I offer a third choice “A common enemy.” And we’ve seen how that plays out.
- Amalia - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 2:53 pm:
Fox and body language, what is it about that network?!?
- Skeptic - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 3:31 pm:
“Fox and body language, what is it about that network?!?” Angry white men have body image issues?
- Judgment Day - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 4:03 pm:
” I offer a third choice “A common enemy.” And we’ve seen how that plays out.”
————-
You mean like how Pat Quinn currently works with the legislature?
- low level - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 4:14 pm:
“Your bully is another man’s determined business leader.”
To the amazingly large and pivotal Ross Perot type voting block. Yeah, go with that.
- Skeptic - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 4:14 pm:
Judgement Day: Actually I was referring to his predecessor. You know the guy who said it was “encouraging” that his idea got voted down 106-1? Quinn would have to work long and hard to achieve that level of disdain.
- Judgment Day - Wednesday, Oct 15, 14 @ 4:30 pm:
“Actually I was referring to his predecessor. You know the guy who said it was “encouraging” that his idea got voted down 106-1? Quinn would have to work long and hard to achieve that level of disdain.”
—————–
Not to worry. Remember, Quinn works both “tirelessly” and “night and day” (or is it “day and night”), so I wouldn’t count him out.
Remember how much Quinn endeared himself to the legislature when he withheld their paychecks…..
Yeah, that worked out well for making friends with the legislature…..
I think Pat Quinn has case of “Concept Dyslexia” - The concept is to “Work smarter, not harder”. Quinn seems to think it’s “Work Harder, Not Smarter”.
He’s obviously not into conceptualizing the work that has to be accomplished.