Solid “B”. Comes off likeable, added some humor, she spoke, her son was funny, and Munger introduced herself.
Anytime you tout ignoring your oath and the constitution you swore to uphold. It’s an “F”
Everyone in state government is getting paid, and last I checked, there’s no constitutional provision allowing the Conptroller of Illinois to dictate or override the meaning of statue or the constitution in the pay of another branch (or branches) until that Comptroller is satisfied.
It’s pathetic pandering that makes Pat Quinn look sane in governing.
So… to recap…
“B, solid B” in “Bread and Circuses”
“F” as in truly understanding the office she is running for, what she swore to uphold, and Pat Quinn-like pandering with a responsibility of why pay is dropped it can be gained back… without a shred of constitutional authority.
Only the unwashed masses depend on paychecks. Real patriots like Rauner and his wingman Munger don’t need paychecks. Throw in her connection to Lincolnshire and its RTW ordinance and you got yourself a candidate who has shown quite an easy indifference to the value of a paycheck.
I’d give it a B+. Corny, but catchy. I wouldn’t have had my kids dressed in sports coats while hanging out on the couch petting the dog though…that was very Thurston Howellish. The messaging was good. The no budget, no pay message clearly resonates with almost everyone.
I do find it amusing to see people on here whining about her violating the state constitution by not paying incompetent politicians…who have continually violated the state constitution by passing unbalanced budgets.
My reaction was ho-hum. Nothing really stands out about it to me.
It is true that the “no budget, no pay” mantra will have an appeal. But, anyone who understands the constitution (and I know that is a high bar) will realized she is ignoring the constitution and the duties of her office.
While she appears “likeable enough” I strongly believe that withholding pay from legislators is part of a strategy to ensure that working class and middle class people are unable to serve in that capacity. A better ad would focus on what she did, rather than what she failed to do.
I like it other than thinking the crowd at the end looked a little stoic.
To those complaining her idea is unconstitutional, I would point out that the Constitution also requires a balanced budget and the Speaker went on television and admitted they passed an unconstitutional budget. I would also point out that Munger is TALKING about a “no budget - no pay” idea, but Quinn actually did it.
In the last 8 years or so the “conservative party” has completely thrown legalism out of the window and turned standard mechanisms of governing into an opportunity for tit-for-tat demands using things that should just be automatic aspects of good governance.
Like issuing pay warrants when your job is issuing pay warrants.
I think, to the Ad, the populist ideals that Munger usurped to probably deflect other political things Munger doesn’t want highlighted is probably part of the reason Munger has decided to do an Ad that highlights an unconstitutional decision.
The ad works. It’s a solid “B”
It’s also a clear indication that Munger sees the Illinois Constituion as a “guideline”.
It’s not bad. It really isn’t. But I can’t wait to see the Mendoza ad of Munger failing her times tables airing right after this one. So it’s a good start. But she will need a whole lot more than this to have a chance in a Trump year.
This ad does its job well. Good intro ad. It’s catchy. Popular anti-politician message. It’s not supposed to win the election by itself. Don’t worry, I’m sure Rauner will provide plenty of cash for plenty more spots.
Score it an “A”. Nice to have a candidate speaking directly to voters in ads. I really expected dire music, dire shadows to emphasize a dire financial situation, with a dire voice-over, making the humor instead so refreshing. The “No Budget No Pay” slogan really resonates here.
You make a really good point, in that, leveraging the constitutional required duties, or not following the Constituion at all is used, and the “give”, as incredibly warped as it is, is to then actually follow the constitution, as we all should be “thankful” that fulfilling your oath is in question.
If Munger wants to have her first Ad be one with her thumbing her nose at her oath, the Illinois Constitution, and mock the duties of Comptroller… for a “Solid B” Ad… Munger accomplished that goal.
It’s good, blue sport coats notwithstanding. It’s catchy and the No Budget, No Pay issue really resonates with voters. Think she’s succeeded in finding a way to get noticed in a race that will struggle for sustained attention.
- Trapped in the 'burbs - Thursday, Sep 29, 16 @ 9:31 am:
Ruined an otherwise positive ad by vowing to violate the constitution to curry favor from voters. Also, hard to claim that you’re an outsider when the governor APPOINTED you to your spot.
Good ad, with a nice visual repetition of the message and the candidate speaking.
Clearly there are three pieces of her record she is running away from: “Republican, incumbent, Rauner”
The outsider, no pay thing is good for her base voters and good for this year. But I am not sure it gets her a win when she has to carry the weight of Rauner’s negatives with her.
I saw the governor on TV in his reform ads the other day. He’s clearly spending some money trying to bring his own numbers up at the same time. His ad appears to use the same production company - it was very stiff and generic, appropriate.
Perhaps the Democrats could point out that the Comptroller office pays almost twice as much as a typical GA member. Yet the Comptroller had chosen to pay herself just as often as the GA members. Perhaps since her pay is double, she should have let her paycheck lapse a bit longer. Seems like a rather hollow gesture when put in a pay amount context.
I would give it a D b/c I think pieces of the ad itself could be used against Munger…”I am an outsider” (voice over, Leslie Munger appointed by Governor Bruce Rauner says she is “an outsider”), “No Budget, No Pay” (voice over, Leslie Munger runs on platform to violate the law).
@Willy, thanks for the cheap shot. I am an officer of the court. Understand the law here and the nuances involved. Clearly you don’t.
The “they have to stand in line to get paid like everyone else they are inconveniencing through their own actions” attitude surely is a walk off grand slam homer in anyone’s eyes. It is different from the Quinn attempt. I see no legislators challenging this in court.
I grew up in the 95th House District and am actively helping Rep. Jimenez in the 99th. I have spoken to quite a few people who are voting for Mike Mathis and Tony D. but support Comptroller Munger’s actions. Granted that is a small sample size but it is an interesting dynamic that may play out in other competitive House districts.
===I see no legislators challenging this in court.===
But as an Officer of the Court, and the Constitution and the attributed statutes pertaining to pay, it’s clear, it’s a violation of Statute and Munger violating her oath to uphold the Constitution too…
The focus on the lack of balanced budgets is a winner.
Now all she has to do is couple this with her opponent saying the budgets she voted to approve during her time in the GA were balanced -except for missing the pension payments which are now 30% of the budget
Sling, I believe we’re rating an “ad”. You don’t like the policy. I wasn’t confused as to where you might be on this. I even referred to it as a “populist” theme, because that’s what it is. We’re not giving out Emmy’s here. We’re rating ads and how they appeal to voters.
It’s a good ad.
JSM, you’re an educator with witty comments like that?
Hey, I’m just trying to keep up with you guys. I’m aware of what a 2.9 GPA in Catholic schools can get a guy. They’re suited for marketing and ad because of their incredible average-ness.
And this average guy sees a good and effective ad.
That’s a little creepy R Kane. I watched it again. Where’s your head dude?
- Robert the Bruce - Thursday, Sep 29, 16 @ 1:14 pm:
Did a wonderful job of repeating the popular “No budget. No pay” message.
Can’t give a full “A” because the Billionaire Boys Club with dogs was a tad awkward.
- Robert the Bruce - Thursday, Sep 29, 16 @ 1:21 pm:
On the other hand, the “No budget. No pay.” isn’t really Munger’s policy (since legislators are getting paid; they just have to wait).
Mendoza could out-populist Munger. Run an ad pointing out Munger’s false claim, and then promise that if elected, no state electeds would be paid until a budget is passed. (Yes, this would be even more shameless and would ignore the Constitution more).
“Good idea, Leslie…now why haven’t you done it? I will.”
=JSM, you’re an educator with witty comments like that?=
I wasn’t trying to be “witty.”
As an educator, I often have playground duty and thus, I have become and expert at identifying “playground” arguments and attacks like your “intellect” remark and was only trying to speak to you at your level.
Additionally, your retorts to my posts have a recurring theme.
I would think that even in your self described “averageness” you could do better than that.