It gives Rauner’s old/new Crew a dry run, like a “cupcake” win for a larger college school versus a small, less talented team and see where deficiencies are, what fundamentals needs work, and it allows Rauner to hone a message to secure GOP voters that may be wavering, “but compared to Ives… “
Ives running, unless she has $5+ million, is a huge, huge mistake..
… it helps Rauner.
- Give Me A Break - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 8:21 am:
What, did they use an address in Alabama and think no one would notice? Next thing you know she will not be playing Dixie at her campaign rallies.
Errors happen, especially clerical errors. Humans, smh. /s
This has no effect on my confidence in the Ives/Morthland ticket as the obvious successor to Rauner.
(I went to a real estate closing one time and the selling address on every single document was the address of a third party’s current residence. It wasn’t discovered until after all the docs were signed.)
I’ve never been a fan of Ives but I do think that here campaign will hurt Rauner more than it will help. She will have some impact in painting Rauner as ineffective. More importantly she will create some level of division in a Republican party that up until this summer has been fairly unwavering in their support of Rauner. Do you attach yourself to Rauner and his “failures” as Ives casts them, or do you back a candidate who faces a very uphill climb with no apparent resources?
Rauner needs to move on from the failure to obtain a budget, the bungled education bill and HB40. Ives won’t make that easy. And if she can get her act together she’ll force Rauner to defend his own record instead of using his “go to” Madigan narrative. I can’t see how that helps Rauner.
Of course this all assumes that Ives is capable of running a competent campaign and gets meaningful financial support. That remains to be seen and this certainly isn’t a good start. We should know in the next 2-3 weeks if this candidacy is a credible one.
It also gives him significant press exposure and the opportunity to really advance whatever message/narrative/fair tale falsehood he’s going to frame on his campaign. He’s running in the primary again as a moderate with little risk of losing.
When it comes to the ballot box in November, one must ask themselves how many of the folks that traditionally vote for the Republican candidate for Governor are really going to look at the other options and decide to not vote, or vote for them.
So long as the bulk of journalism coverage repeats Rauner’s lies about his record or false claims without immediately addressing them having a primary opponent that very likely won’t win is a good thing.
Everyone should take pause for a second and look at the folks that are now supporting Ives and their relationship with Rauner and Rauner’s money just a few months ago and maybe ask some questions about motive.
Supporting not Rauner in a primary also gives the house candidates (that don’t need Chicago votes) to win some cover to hide behind in their home districts after spending ~3 years betraying their constituents.
This dude is still lying about his grandfather. One should really question if anything he’s involved in is sincere at this point.
===Yeah, if looking moderate includes being embarrassed by a fringe candidate, then okay sure big win.===
Depends how much coverage Ives gets and how much Rauber can use the dry run for next November.
Perspective?
I think the number is 37.5% when it’s all said and done.
If Ives goes “under”, like way under, like 25%, that’s 3 of every for GOP voters voting Rauner, and Rauner will get raw data knowledge where the hard core votes against are located when running against the Dem Nominee.
I can see, if Ives gets a FOX News kinda media following and has $5+ million to push conservatives and doesn’t herself get marginalized, Ives could go “over”, even at 40%, which I think is her absolute ceiling.
That’s a 20-point loss.
That’s a shellacking, and, again, Rauner will get raw data knowledge where the hard core votes against are located when running against the Dem Nominee, and when tries to use his liberal social agenda (HB40, sanctuary stare, justice reform) Rauner can figure out a worst case scenario.
Further, like a college football “cupcake”, Rauber will have from December to March testing all kinds of stuff against Ives, and against the Dems, with another “team” to react and hone that offense.
This run is a colossal mistake.
It helps Rauner.
Why give Rauner that dry run, a possible 60-40 “embarrassing” loss that Rauner will parlay to find a path to victory?
Giving Rauner a dry run and seeing where weaknesses are in raw ballot totals against a conservative opponent helps Rauner figure out where he stands in his bought party, and no guessing if Rauner has no opponent.
That’s not Pro-Rauner, that’s a campaign reality.
Rauber will beat her, and see what his basement is against the Dem Nomimee.
Anyone writing off Ives’ chances too quickly because she’s an extremist, has a thin record, and may not be qualified for the job … has either not been watching GOP politics of late, or is a bit in denial. In my opinion. Obviously Rauner is favored, but if you’re Rauner, you don’t want this challenge.
===Why give Rauner that dry run, a possible 60-40 “embarrassing” loss that Rauner will parlay to find a path to victory?===
This whole thing has a Jimmy Carter/Ted Kennedy feeling to it. Ted’s candidacy never helped Jimmy Carter… ever. So my thinking is that even though Rauner will win, the damage Ives can do to him in a primary is a way bigger than any benefit to Rauner’s “dry run.” 60/40 would be an unbelievably embarrassing win for an extremely well-funded incumbent.
I’ve been thinking that in the Pritzker-money dominated primary there is potentially a small effect from the notion, “my enemy’s enemy is my friend.”
The more Pritzker spends, in the primary, to damage Rauner, the more non-progressives will be conditioned for the Ives alternative. Pritzker softens the ground for Ives.
Then, in the general assuming Pritzker wins the nomination, his money works against him as just another billionaire trying to buy public office. Ives also benefits from that growing sentiment.
===So my thinking is that even though Rauner will win, the damage Ives can do to him in a primary is a way bigger than any benefit to Rauner’s “dry run.” 60/40 would be an unbelievably embarrassing win for an extremely well-funded incumbent===
Rauner is already under water with his positives/negatives.
Any chance, in a state, one state, a beleaguered incumbent can see where they need to be better, it can only help.
You lose by 1,000 votes or 500,000 votes… you still lost.
Rauner running unopposed has Rauner “blind” to the angst that Rauner may face in November by rubbing towards the middle or left “even more”
Rauner sees the raw ballots and pluralities, Rauner can run as far left or back with his 10s of millions as the returns tell him he needs to or can.
Pritzker is filthy rich.
It’s not his fault, but no way can this guy relate to the reality of everyday life. He’s never lived it. He can buy his bubble life. We can’t. What he thinks works, only works in his bubble, not ours.
I’d prefer someone else as governor than Bubble Boy. Except Rauner.
- People Over Parties - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 9:43 am:
===This whole thing has a Jimmy Carter/Ted Kennedy feeling to it===
OW
Please stop helping Rauner with your Anti-Ives postings. You are either against him, or you are not. Your way nominates him unopposed. Our way doesn’t. He doesn’t deserve a coronation. He doesn’t deserve the nomination.
Ives may be crazy, but she’s not Rauner and the battle is drawn. Either join up or be quiet. Find something positive about this positive development.
People the petitions need to be filed, before the game begins. I read on here yesterday Ives was also circulating petitions to hold her spot in the GA. Wait till the decision is finalized, then have at it. Right now you are arguing apples and sledge hammers. No point to the early animosity, let the game plsy out until filing time.
Ives: That’s a really good question. But I’ll tell you what: I’ll put up my experience and the team that I am assembling, including my lieutenant governor, and our principles, against anybody else who’s running right now, their experience and their lack of principles.
But you know this is not just a Jeanne Ives campaign. We have a whole team of thinkers behind me that re to make sure the we have great policy formation and that we run an ethical office.
==But you know this is not just a Jeanne Ives campaign. We have a whole team of thinkers behind me that re to make sure the we have great policy formation and that we run an ethical office.==
Perhaps an entire institute. A “Policy Institute,” if you will…
==Perhaps an entire institute. A “Policy Institute,” if you will…==
Then she’s doomed.
- Grandson of Man - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 11:02 am:
I’m with VM. Rauner is unelectable. What he did to the state can’t be rewarded with reelection. I certainly don’t absolve Ives for her contribution to the damage, and don’t remotely support her, but I want to see prolonged damage to Rauner from the right.
Plus, if Rauner the super rich union busting corporate CEO can shamelessly shape shift to try to appear as a regular working class guy, why not Ives or anyone else, if they change to become more cooperative and help the state pass critical legislation? Ives is not phony in the Rauner kind of way, to my knowledge, so it should be okay.
If there’s one thing we’ve learned from the past few election cycles, it’s that VM knows winning election strategy, and predicts accordingly. /s
- ste_with_a_v_en - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 11:32 am:
VanillaMan
You really think Ives, the poster child for right wing lunacy is a better option? Her biggest backer is an anti-LGBT hate group, and she said “gays are trying to weasel their into society”
You don’t have to be pro-Rauner to think Ives is the wrong direction.
Everyone needs to take a deep breath and focus on being more respectful to each other.
The nation just elected a President who was recorded sharing his feelings about women.
Together, we can learn from our past mistakes and learn from each other.
We live in a time like no other. But it took us millions of years for the troglodyte behavior to finally shake out.
There will be blips along the way.
Let us continue to strive to avoid offensive behavior to one another.
Thanks Rich Miller for responding. I just want to say I’m a thinker and I think I’m not going to vote for Jeannie Ives.
Now I get what OW is alluding to I think. Maybe and it’s quite possible that the Illinois policy Institute, Jeanne Ives and other far right-wing extremists are challenging Governor Rauner to make him look like a moderate. In the end they are going to support him when he wins the Republican nomination for governor.
- ste_with_a_v_en - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 12:41 pm:
—-Compared to Rauner lunacy?—
I see you can’t answer my question. I guess you’re cool with that. Her first order will be to ban transgender students from schools and repeal gay marriage. Glad you’re okay with that.
===Her biggest backer is an anti-LGBT hate group, and she said “gays are trying to weasel their into society”
You don’t have to be pro-Rauner to… ===
(Sigh)
Sen. Oberweis, a strong Rauner backer and phony conservative wanted Pat Brady removed for supporting SSM as opposing SSM was a Republican “thing”
- ste_with_a_v_en -,
I’ll look forward to you asking Gov. Rauner to call out Sen. Oberweis as wrong
- ste_with_a_v_en - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 12:52 pm:
–I’ll look forward to you asking Gov. Rauner to call out Sen. Oberweis as wrong–
I’ll call him out. It was wrong. And that was in 2013, before Rauner was governor. And since we elected a pro-choice, pro gay rights governor, I show you that it’s still wrong. I testified in favor of the changes to the platform at the convention in 2016 to be more inclusive of gay marriage. I don’t know why you won’t admit to supporting a candidate affiliated with a hate group.
- ste_with_a_v_en - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 12:53 pm:
OW, my bad, I thought you VM, but I stand by my earlier points.
I’m assuming if Ives runs she will make Rauner’s position on abortion a major part of her campaign platform.
Is that really the fight Rauner wants during his primary? Yes, he can re-establish his “moderate” credentials by taking a more pro-abortion position than Ives, but how many crossover voters are there really in IL on that topic, when / if JB is the alternative? And in the meantime Rauner really needs the pro-life base in IL to stick with him. Some of these voters will sink the top of the ticket on principle, this issue is so incredibly important to them.
I do not see Rauner’s angle in having Ives challenge him and remind his base how much he’s angered them this past year.
=I’m assuming if Ives runs she will make Rauner’s position on abortion a major part of her campaign platform.=
I saw Ives last night on Chicago Tonight. While abortion will be a part of her platform if Ives runs, I don’t get the sense that it will be a “major” part. She seems cognizant enough to recognize that running on a single issue doesn’t accomplish much particularly if it costs her the seat she has. She seems more fixated on branding Rauner as a liar. She rattled off a number of those lies last night and abortion was just a small part of the narrative.
I agree that a rabid Ives may make Rauner look more reasonable. But if she maintains a steady narrative around Rauner’s deceptions and lies I do think it will leave a mark. In that regard she seems more focused than the press and even the Democrats and it’s hard to see how that helps Rauner. And if Republicans are forced to align themselves with Ives or Rauner on that basis it could get interesting.
- union thug gramma - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 1:43 am:
Well, she’s far from a bright bulb to begin with.
- Blue dog dem - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 3:07 am:
Whatever…it takes.
- We'll See - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 4:07 am:
Sounds like an episode of Better Call Saul
- Lunchbox - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 4:12 am:
Yikes…amateur hour.
- Retired Educator - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 4:30 am:
Not an impressive start.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 4:54 am:
Ah, the old ‘roll out, roll back, roll out again’ routine. Keeps you in the news.
- PublicServant - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 6:28 am:
Madigan and the Petition Printers he controls…
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 6:39 am:
It’s a sign.
Walk away, Rep. Ives…
- We'll See - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 7:12 am:
Someone please buy Ms. Rickert a new computer so this “transposition of numbers” does not happen again.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 7:24 am:
Based on times of comments, your early start has a waiting audience, Rich..
- IvesInvestor - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 7:41 am:
Ives’ legal representation is the best in the business, how could she have missed such a thing. (No snark here)
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 8:10 am:
Anti-Ives comments = Pro-Rauner comments.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 8:14 am:
This election is about Rauner. Not Madigan, not whoever the Democrats nominate, or Ives. Rauner.
So when you insult someone other than Rauner, you are helping reelect him right?
Quiet. We’ve got an incumbent to defeat in order to save our state.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 8:16 am:
===Anti-Ives comments = Pro-Rauner comments.===
Nope.
Ives running is a colossal mistake.
It gives Rauner’s old/new Crew a dry run, like a “cupcake” win for a larger college school versus a small, less talented team and see where deficiencies are, what fundamentals needs work, and it allows Rauner to hone a message to secure GOP voters that may be wavering, “but compared to Ives… “
Ives running, unless she has $5+ million, is a huge, huge mistake..
… it helps Rauner.
- Give Me A Break - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 8:21 am:
What, did they use an address in Alabama and think no one would notice? Next thing you know she will not be playing Dixie at her campaign rallies.
- cdog - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 8:23 am:
Errors happen, especially clerical errors. Humans, smh. /s
This has no effect on my confidence in the Ives/Morthland ticket as the obvious successor to Rauner.
(I went to a real estate closing one time and the selling address on every single document was the address of a third party’s current residence. It wasn’t discovered until after all the docs were signed.)
- Sgt. Slaughter - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 8:26 am:
Rich when are you finally going to allow Facebook style emoji reactions on your posts? I’m dying over here.
- Ducky LaMoore - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 8:28 am:
I know it took her decades to figure out how the state budget works, but she needs to figure out how these petitions work right now.
- Pundent - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 8:30 am:
I’ve never been a fan of Ives but I do think that here campaign will hurt Rauner more than it will help. She will have some impact in painting Rauner as ineffective. More importantly she will create some level of division in a Republican party that up until this summer has been fairly unwavering in their support of Rauner. Do you attach yourself to Rauner and his “failures” as Ives casts them, or do you back a candidate who faces a very uphill climb with no apparent resources?
Rauner needs to move on from the failure to obtain a budget, the bungled education bill and HB40. Ives won’t make that easy. And if she can get her act together she’ll force Rauner to defend his own record instead of using his “go to” Madigan narrative. I can’t see how that helps Rauner.
Of course this all assumes that Ives is capable of running a competent campaign and gets meaningful financial support. That remains to be seen and this certainly isn’t a good start. We should know in the next 2-3 weeks if this candidacy is a credible one.
- OneMan - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 8:40 am:
Ives gives Rauner a chance to look more like a moderate.
A big win for Rauner.
- Anon - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 8:47 am:
===It gives Rauner’s old/new Crew a dry run===
Ding ding ding! We have a winner!
It also gives him significant press exposure and the opportunity to really advance whatever message/narrative/fair tale falsehood he’s going to frame on his campaign. He’s running in the primary again as a moderate with little risk of losing.
When it comes to the ballot box in November, one must ask themselves how many of the folks that traditionally vote for the Republican candidate for Governor are really going to look at the other options and decide to not vote, or vote for them.
So long as the bulk of journalism coverage repeats Rauner’s lies about his record or false claims without immediately addressing them having a primary opponent that very likely won’t win is a good thing.
Everyone should take pause for a second and look at the folks that are now supporting Ives and their relationship with Rauner and Rauner’s money just a few months ago and maybe ask some questions about motive.
Supporting not Rauner in a primary also gives the house candidates (that don’t need Chicago votes) to win some cover to hide behind in their home districts after spending ~3 years betraying their constituents.
This dude is still lying about his grandfather. One should really question if anything he’s involved in is sincere at this point.
- Ducky LaMoore - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 8:47 am:
@OneMan
Yeah, if looking moderate includes being embarrassed by a fringe candidate, then okay sure big win.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 8:51 am:
You’re not in charge OW.
Your opinion is just that. You are getting a bit full of yourself when you do this.
She is running. You either wish her all the best, or you help Rauner by not wishing her all the best. Your “insight” has been ignored. She is running.
If you are negatively commenting on Rauner’s opponent, you are helping Rauner be reelected.
Anti-Ives = Pro-Rauner
Anti-Democrat after nomination = Pro-Rauner
Anti-Madigan = Pro-Rauner
Anti-GA = Pro-Rauner
Rauner can only win on an Anti platform.
Don’t give it to him.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 8:58 am:
===Yeah, if looking moderate includes being embarrassed by a fringe candidate, then okay sure big win.===
Depends how much coverage Ives gets and how much Rauber can use the dry run for next November.
Perspective?
I think the number is 37.5% when it’s all said and done.
If Ives goes “under”, like way under, like 25%, that’s 3 of every for GOP voters voting Rauner, and Rauner will get raw data knowledge where the hard core votes against are located when running against the Dem Nominee.
I can see, if Ives gets a FOX News kinda media following and has $5+ million to push conservatives and doesn’t herself get marginalized, Ives could go “over”, even at 40%, which I think is her absolute ceiling.
That’s a 20-point loss.
That’s a shellacking, and, again, Rauner will get raw data knowledge where the hard core votes against are located when running against the Dem Nominee, and when tries to use his liberal social agenda (HB40, sanctuary stare, justice reform) Rauner can figure out a worst case scenario.
Further, like a college football “cupcake”, Rauber will have from December to March testing all kinds of stuff against Ives, and against the Dems, with another “team” to react and hone that offense.
This run is a colossal mistake.
It helps Rauner.
Why give Rauner that dry run, a possible 60-40 “embarrassing” loss that Rauner will parlay to find a path to victory?
- A guy - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 9:03 am:
It’s embarrassing. A lot. Morthland should have quietly and quickly moved to the address listed. lol
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 9:04 am:
===You’re not in charge…===
I’m not.
And if you recall, my belief is always “run then all”
Always been.
Ives wants to run, I’m not stopping her.
It’s a huge mistake that helps Rauner, but if she wants to run, I’ve always been, “run em all”
===Your “insight” has been ignored. She is running.===
It’s 97.8% ignored, daily. The other 1.2% is for you or others to “riff” off the thoughts.
===If you are negatively commenting on Rauner’s opponent, you are helping Rauner be reelected===
Ives hasn’t even filed yet.
Heck, this post, Ives can’t even get the right petitions out there.
I’ll comment as I see it, thanks.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 9:05 am:
==Ives gives Rauner a chance to look more like a moderate==
Doesn’t matter. She’s running.
You guys are Pro-Rauner guys when you write that stuff. You helping Rauner?
She defines herself, not you.
It’s best to be quiet than kneecap her with your personal opinions.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 9:08 am:
===She defines herself, not you.===
Very well.
Let’s start with the Confederate army quote…
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 9:11 am:
Look at all the Pro-Rauner “Anons” since Ives announced. Every one of these no-names supports Governor no-good.
They want to make this campaign an “Anti” campaign because they can’t come up with any Pro-Rauner comments other than tell us that Ives helps Rauner.
She doesn’t.
- illini97 - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 9:15 am:
I’d support Ives primarily as an easier path for the Dem nominee.
Assuming she can understand the budget in less than a decade or the petitions in less than months, that is.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 9:18 am:
Pro-Rauner commenters or not that are “new”…
Giving Rauner a dry run and seeing where weaknesses are in raw ballot totals against a conservative opponent helps Rauner figure out where he stands in his bought party, and no guessing if Rauner has no opponent.
That’s not Pro-Rauner, that’s a campaign reality.
Rauber will beat her, and see what his basement is against the Dem Nomimee.
- ZC - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 9:19 am:
Anyone writing off Ives’ chances too quickly because she’s an extremist, has a thin record, and may not be qualified for the job … has either not been watching GOP politics of late, or is a bit in denial. In my opinion. Obviously Rauner is favored, but if you’re Rauner, you don’t want this challenge.
- Ducky LaMoore - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 9:27 am:
===Why give Rauner that dry run, a possible 60-40 “embarrassing” loss that Rauner will parlay to find a path to victory?===
This whole thing has a Jimmy Carter/Ted Kennedy feeling to it. Ted’s candidacy never helped Jimmy Carter… ever. So my thinking is that even though Rauner will win, the damage Ives can do to him in a primary is a way bigger than any benefit to Rauner’s “dry run.” 60/40 would be an unbelievably embarrassing win for an extremely well-funded incumbent.
- cdog - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 9:28 am:
Vanilla Man, good job making excellent points.
I’ve been thinking that in the Pritzker-money dominated primary there is potentially a small effect from the notion, “my enemy’s enemy is my friend.”
The more Pritzker spends, in the primary, to damage Rauner, the more non-progressives will be conditioned for the Ives alternative. Pritzker softens the ground for Ives.
Then, in the general assuming Pritzker wins the nomination, his money works against him as just another billionaire trying to buy public office. Ives also benefits from that growing sentiment.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 9:42 am:
===So my thinking is that even though Rauner will win, the damage Ives can do to him in a primary is a way bigger than any benefit to Rauner’s “dry run.” 60/40 would be an unbelievably embarrassing win for an extremely well-funded incumbent===
Rauner is already under water with his positives/negatives.
Any chance, in a state, one state, a beleaguered incumbent can see where they need to be better, it can only help.
You lose by 1,000 votes or 500,000 votes… you still lost.
Rauner running unopposed has Rauner “blind” to the angst that Rauner may face in November by rubbing towards the middle or left “even more”
Rauner sees the raw ballots and pluralities, Rauner can run as far left or back with his 10s of millions as the returns tell him he needs to or can.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 9:43 am:
Pritzker is filthy rich.
It’s not his fault, but no way can this guy relate to the reality of everyday life. He’s never lived it. He can buy his bubble life. We can’t. What he thinks works, only works in his bubble, not ours.
I’d prefer someone else as governor than Bubble Boy. Except Rauner.
- People Over Parties - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 9:43 am:
===This whole thing has a Jimmy Carter/Ted Kennedy feeling to it===
Is J.B. Ronald Reagan then?
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 9:51 am:
OW
Please stop helping Rauner with your Anti-Ives postings. You are either against him, or you are not. Your way nominates him unopposed. Our way doesn’t. He doesn’t deserve a coronation. He doesn’t deserve the nomination.
Ives may be crazy, but she’s not Rauner and the battle is drawn. Either join up or be quiet. Find something positive about this positive development.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 9:58 am:
===Your way nominates him (Rauner) unopposed.===
… and they will completely clueless how many Republicans in real ballots actually support him.
Not a great way for an under water incumbent to run, not fully knowing where his base weakness is in raw ballots.
===Please stop helping Rauner with your Anti-Ives postings. You are either against him, or you are not===
It’s not binary when analyzing the politics and the campaign strategy. Sorry.
Ives running helps Rauner. It allows a Rauner measuring that being unopposed doesn’t allow.
===Either join up or be quiet.===
Nope. I’ll comment as I’ve always have.
This ain’t the Confederacy.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 10:08 am:
Well, if it takes decades to learn the budget, as Rep. Ives said yesterday, it will take at least a few cracks at circulating petitions.
- Retired Educator - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 10:16 am:
People the petitions need to be filed, before the game begins. I read on here yesterday Ives was also circulating petitions to hold her spot in the GA. Wait till the decision is finalized, then have at it. Right now you are arguing apples and sledge hammers. No point to the early animosity, let the game plsy out until filing time.
- Honeybadger - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 10:20 am:
Who’s running the Ives campaign?
- A guy - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 10:23 am:
She’s being talked about. That may be victory enough. For her.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 10:23 am:
===Who’s running the Ives campaign?===
Ives: That’s a really good question. But I’ll tell you what: I’ll put up my experience and the team that I am assembling, including my lieutenant governor, and our principles, against anybody else who’s running right now, their experience and their lack of principles.
But you know this is not just a Jeanne Ives campaign. We have a whole team of thinkers behind me that re to make sure the we have great policy formation and that we run an ethical office.
http://nprillinois.org/post/qa-woman-taking-gov-rauner
- Ducky LaMoore - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 10:31 am:
===Is J.B. Ronald Reagan then?===
I’ll let you know November 7th, 2018.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 10:32 am:
==But you know this is not just a Jeanne Ives campaign. We have a whole team of thinkers behind me that re to make sure the we have great policy formation and that we run an ethical office.==
Perhaps an entire institute. A “Policy Institute,” if you will…
- Donnie - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 10:59 am:
==Perhaps an entire institute. A “Policy Institute,” if you will…==
Then she’s doomed.
- Grandson of Man - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 11:02 am:
I’m with VM. Rauner is unelectable. What he did to the state can’t be rewarded with reelection. I certainly don’t absolve Ives for her contribution to the damage, and don’t remotely support her, but I want to see prolonged damage to Rauner from the right.
Plus, if Rauner the super rich union busting corporate CEO can shamelessly shape shift to try to appear as a regular working class guy, why not Ives or anyone else, if they change to become more cooperative and help the state pass critical legislation? Ives is not phony in the Rauner kind of way, to my knowledge, so it should be okay.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 11:09 am:
Thanks “Raunonynous” posters
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 11:16 am:
If there’s one thing we’ve learned from the past few election cycles, it’s that VM knows winning election strategy, and predicts accordingly. /s
- ste_with_a_v_en - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 11:32 am:
VanillaMan
You really think Ives, the poster child for right wing lunacy is a better option? Her biggest backer is an anti-LGBT hate group, and she said “gays are trying to weasel their into society”
You don’t have to be pro-Rauner to think Ives is the wrong direction.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 11:36 am:
Thanks “Raunonynous” poster.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 11:44 am:
BTW, I have repeatedly adviced incumbents to always tell their voters what they’ve done to earn reelection.
Rauner’s got nuthin’ to tell. That’s why he’s pouring millions into his Anti-Madigan, Anti-GA, Anti-whatever commercials.
Didn’t work for Quinn, won’t work for Rauner either.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 11:58 am:
==You really think Ives, the poster child for right wing lunacy is a better option? ==
Compared to Rauner lunacy?
- Winnin’ - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 12:04 pm:
Everyone needs to take a deep breath and focus on being more respectful to each other.
The nation just elected a President who was recorded sharing his feelings about women.
Together, we can learn from our past mistakes and learn from each other.
We live in a time like no other. But it took us millions of years for the troglodyte behavior to finally shake out.
There will be blips along the way.
Let us continue to strive to avoid offensive behavior to one another.
- Honeybadger - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 12:18 pm:
Thanks Rich Miller for responding. I just want to say I’m a thinker and I think I’m not going to vote for Jeannie Ives.
Now I get what OW is alluding to I think. Maybe and it’s quite possible that the Illinois policy Institute, Jeanne Ives and other far right-wing extremists are challenging Governor Rauner to make him look like a moderate. In the end they are going to support him when he wins the Republican nomination for governor.
- ste_with_a_v_en - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 12:41 pm:
—-Compared to Rauner lunacy?—
I see you can’t answer my question. I guess you’re cool with that. Her first order will be to ban transgender students from schools and repeal gay marriage. Glad you’re okay with that.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 12:45 pm:
===Her biggest backer is an anti-LGBT hate group, and she said “gays are trying to weasel their into society”
You don’t have to be pro-Rauner to… ===
(Sigh)
Sen. Oberweis, a strong Rauner backer and phony conservative wanted Pat Brady removed for supporting SSM as opposing SSM was a Republican “thing”
- ste_with_a_v_en -,
I’ll look forward to you asking Gov. Rauner to call out Sen. Oberweis as wrong
- ste_with_a_v_en - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 12:52 pm:
–I’ll look forward to you asking Gov. Rauner to call out Sen. Oberweis as wrong–
I’ll call him out. It was wrong. And that was in 2013, before Rauner was governor. And since we elected a pro-choice, pro gay rights governor, I show you that it’s still wrong. I testified in favor of the changes to the platform at the convention in 2016 to be more inclusive of gay marriage. I don’t know why you won’t admit to supporting a candidate affiliated with a hate group.
- ste_with_a_v_en - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 12:53 pm:
OW, my bad, I thought you VM, but I stand by my earlier points.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 1:08 pm:
Rauner is a pro-LGBT?
How so?
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 1:14 pm:
There is this from Equality Illinois…
http://bit.ly/2z9LwXH
I haven’t heard from the 67 members who voted against SSM, and I wonder now how those members like Sen. Oberweis feel about this and HB40…
- ZC - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 1:37 pm:
I’m assuming if Ives runs she will make Rauner’s position on abortion a major part of her campaign platform.
Is that really the fight Rauner wants during his primary? Yes, he can re-establish his “moderate” credentials by taking a more pro-abortion position than Ives, but how many crossover voters are there really in IL on that topic, when / if JB is the alternative? And in the meantime Rauner really needs the pro-life base in IL to stick with him. Some of these voters will sink the top of the ticket on principle, this issue is so incredibly important to them.
I do not see Rauner’s angle in having Ives challenge him and remind his base how much he’s angered them this past year.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 2:00 pm:
=I’m assuming if Ives runs she will make Rauner’s position on abortion a major part of her campaign platform.=
I saw Ives last night on Chicago Tonight. While abortion will be a part of her platform if Ives runs, I don’t get the sense that it will be a “major” part. She seems cognizant enough to recognize that running on a single issue doesn’t accomplish much particularly if it costs her the seat she has. She seems more fixated on branding Rauner as a liar. She rattled off a number of those lies last night and abortion was just a small part of the narrative.
I agree that a rabid Ives may make Rauner look more reasonable. But if she maintains a steady narrative around Rauner’s deceptions and lies I do think it will leave a mark. In that regard she seems more focused than the press and even the Democrats and it’s hard to see how that helps Rauner. And if Republicans are forced to align themselves with Ives or Rauner on that basis it could get interesting.
- DuPage - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 2:05 pm:
Ives, even more extreme, more Raunerite then Rauner.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 2:14 pm:
–Her first order will be to ban transgender students from schools and repeal gay marriage. –
And if you think a governor actually has the power to do either, where do you think that puts you on the lunacy spectrum?
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Nov 1, 17 @ 2:35 pm:
If you can’t do the little things right…