“We were promised a conservative reform governor. Instead, we got an Ivy League gender studies professor.” - @JeanneIves in announcing her primary challenge to @GovRauner last eve. She joins us at 7:07am. @MorningAnswer
Rep. Jeanne Ives of Wheaton says in remarks released early Monday by her campaign that she’ll side with “taxpaying Illinois families” instead of the “political ruling class.” She notes that she supported Rauner’s campaign in 2014, but says Illinois needs a new path.
* Ives on Rauner: ‘we got an Ivy League gender studies professor.’ “I supported and helped get Bruce Rauner elected governor in 2014. I believed his argument that his personal wealth would free him to do right by Illinois and lead the revolt against the political ruling class. I was wrong. The tough-talking dude on a Harley with no social agenda turned out to an empty Carhartt jacket. We were promised a conservative reform governor. Instead we got an Ivy League gender studies professor. Benedict Rauner betrayed us at every turn.”
Proft and Ives knew Rauner was an Ivy League gender studies professor but they were OK with it because they wanted his money. Who knows? Maybe Proft is a gender studies professor too. Takes one to know one.
===“I supported and helped get Bruce Rauner elected governor in 2014. I believed his argument that his personal wealth would free him to do right by Illinois and lead the revolt against the political ruling class. I was wrong. The tough-talking dude on a Harley with no social agenda turned out to an empty Carhartt jacket. We were promised a conservative reform governor…”===
Shoulda stopped there, but her campaign is about trying to rip conservatives from Rauner and build support off HB40, sanctuary state, criminal justice reform, any of the things conservatives “feel” are too liberal.
This is actually good stuff…
“I supported and helped get Bruce Rauner elected governor in 2014. I believed his argument that his personal wealth would free him to do right by Illinois and lead the revolt against the political ruling class. I was wrong.”
Like Rep. Breen, this adds credibility by owning the mistake of supporting Rauner, and not dismissing her own role in creating Rauner.
The “Ivy league gender studies professor dig” is a specific kind of dog whistle that says a lot about where the country is politically.
Sure, it hits the standard anti-elite chords that always resonate with many American voters, across the political spectrum.
But, the “gender studies” angle adds an additional layer. Looking at some of the more conservative publications, and especially in comments sections, there’s a feeling among certain segments that the traditional social order is breaking down. See, for an extreme example, Breitbart’s coverage of VA state legislator Danica Roem. Roem’s status as a transgender woman was interpreted as “transgender ideology,” rather than as merely a difference in identity.
For these people, gay marriage, increasing visibility of trans people, the overall mainstreaming of LGBT stories in popular media, etc. are really scary, because they represent a threat to established norms.
If you accept the truth, that these developments are the result of genuine grassroots movements of people who want rights and safety, then your resistance to that change feels wrong.
But what if you see these changes as top-down, the product of an elite, intellectual class, that you already dislike and distrust? Well then, you’re not doing the oppressing, you’re being oppressed! It’s not that you’re afraid of unfamiliar things or people who are different — you’re being forced by elites who know nothing about you to accept their weird lifestyles.
All that angst is personified by an Ivy League gender-studies professor.
Ives has scored “Poor” on the ICLR (Illinois Community Living Report) for two years running. This is the only legislative scorecard which measures how she’s actually treated Illinois citizens with disabilities during key votes. She can’t premise a run on this particular issue. Pick another talking point, Jeanne.
Gender studies professor? It will be interesting to see if Ives will run somewhat of a substantive campaign. The only real beef she has with Rauner is that he is pro-choice and she is pro-life. Yet it seems she’s determined to just ad-hominem him and scream and yell and hope it works.
Humans don’t hear dog whistles. Claiming your opponent uses them insults voters who you need to win over for electoral success. Voters are attracted to candidates for good reasons. You have to top those reason to win them over. Don’t insult voters - ever. Let the other side.
If you don’t respect views opposite of yours, you will lose elections. You will be arrogantly blinded throughout the election. No one really likes snobs.
Ives is not to be written off. She isn’t to be mocked or insulted, or you’ll make her more attractive to voters.
You go, Ives. She is a tough, smart, driven person that has ideas that many here deplore. Fair enough, but with her there will never be a caption “Pick a lane” - if you’re in hers and trying to block, you’ll be a grease spot.
“The only real beef she has with Rauner is that he is pro-choice and she is pro-life.”
She also has frequently targeted the LGBT community and he has signed every pro-equality piece of legislation he has received. “We’re here to talk about economics” can only get her so far, and this gender studies remark is just the first salvo.
not to be nitpick, but the flags are placed wrong on her stage. As somebody who will run as a veteran and as a patriot who loves this state and loves this country, the least she can do is honor flag protocol and place the US flag in its proper place.
oh, so Ives and her big shiny ball have invented a new phrase game now we await her list. put together any two of a list of phrases to code flash the right wing into voting. her first offering, ivy league and gender studies. ooh, what’s next? spin the big shiny ball and find out.
Anyone saying that Ives and Palin are similar is exposing themselves as having never listened to either person. They are completely different speakers in sentence structure, vocal tone, word selection and volume.
It’s a silly thing to say.
Try to convince people not to support Ives by basing your rationale on real, not imagined personal traits.
=Try to convince people not to support Ives by basing your rationale on real, not imagined personal traits.=
It’s not my job to convince people not to support Ives. And frankly I don’t think I could do a better job of this than Jeanne.
It’s too bad that Rauner doesn’t have credible opposition. And my dislike for Rauner will never translate into any positive feelings towards Ives. As far as I can tell she’s pretty much cut from the same ideological cloth as Rauner except for a handful of social issues.