Hey, Rich- We just spotted this on TV. I don’t think the Pritzker campaign has formally “launched” it yet. Pritzker must be nervous if he’s spending money to defend his conversations with Blagojevich.
…Adding… Pritzker campaign manager…
Odd strategy from the Rauner camp to be bragging about "finding" a negative ad against their candidate…I mean we're putting it on TV, guys. But hey, it's been a rough few days for the best political team in America. Appreciate you doing the press on the ad for us! https://t.co/Lxf9uWqwJs
TV News Anchor: A new court filing suggests Bruce Rauner isn’t telling the truth about…
Announcer: A new scandal in Springfield. Serious corruption in the governor’s office. Not only has Bruce Rauner continued to do private business, he’s been doing it at the governor’s mansion. So, what does Bruce Rauner do? He tries to distract with attacks in the Democratic primary. But the truth is, JB Pritzker did not say anything improper. And he was accused of no wrongdoing. Bruce Rauner, attacking JB Pritzker because he can’t defend his own record.
Rauner said, “No private business was conducted on public property. That issue is a contract dispute.”
At its core, the question raised by the lawsuit against Rauner is simple to address. He has claimed from his first days as governor that he would have no involvement in managing an investment portfolio worth hundreds of millions of dollars to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest.
Kirkpatrick’s lawsuit contends Rauner violated that pledge. In defending himself, Rauner has appeared evasive and is now attempting to parse the difference between personal involvement with an investment and personal involvement with a contract dispute stemming from an investment.
It is a distinction without a difference. Rauner is being disingenuous and obtuse, and we rate his statement as False.
* Pritzker campaign…
“Despite repeated vows to the contrary, Bruce Rauner was caught conducting business while governor, and he continues to lie to cover it up,” said Pritzker campaign spokeswoman Jordan Abudayyeh. “This failed governor broke the trust of the people, exposed himself to conflicts of interest, and refuses to come clean to Illinois families.”
===We just spotted this on TV. I don’t think the Pritzker campaign has formally “launched” it yet. Pritzker must be nervous if he’s spending money to defend his conversations with Blagojevich.===
Skyhook, in reverse.
The Raunerites did this in 2014.
When Rauner’s “Superstars” faced thecsame questions..,
“It’s baloney. We’re just informing voters. Total balkney.”
I do find it exciting that the person sending that didn’t acted the Rauner ethical “lapse”.
With the caveat that, as I’ve said many times, I am rubbish at rating these ads, I don’t like this one. JB should just zero right in on Rauner’s scandal and not address Rauner’s attacks on him at all.
Also, while this is probably based on some latent misogyny on my part, the “concerned woman” voice they all use in all these ads is like nails on a chalkboard to me.
For the love of Pete… how can you swing and miss on the porch deal? Pritzker’s Crew just did.
Why muddy the water. Go after, full tilt, on the porch.
Stop with the meddling. Stop. Just stop.
You have the money, run two tracks, go after Rauner. This is a real “cheap-y” way to try to solve two issues.
It’s forgettable and it misses the whole point of the back porch zing.
It’s only a “C-“ because it’s on TV.
Rauner is winning the messaging here. Either step it up, with the unlimited cash to do things correctly, or just keep chasing with ads that muddy slam dunk easy hits that frame “Skyhook, in reverse”
This JB ad is too inside baseball to make an impact on voters. “My scandal is less bad than your scandal” is not a winning sales pitch for either side or either candidate. Ugh.
Governors govern 24/7, so conducting personal business on government time in government provided housing shouldn’t be a surprise.
It might be a no-no, but to most citizens, it’s not a big deal.
If a governor was exposed as profitably conducting personal business at the Mansion during working hours, it would raise attention because it would show a split allegience to a governor’s duty. But not this. Citizens usually accept that legal problems don’t wait.
Blagojevich, Ryan, as well as other non-felonious governors, needed to conduct personal legal business while governor. This is not a big deal at this point.
Making it a big deal won’t necessarily score political points. It’s a kerfuffle.
I agree that doing personal business is not a big deal.
But that’s not really what this scandal is about, is it? No, this scandal is that Rauner led everyone to believe he was putting his business in a “blind trust” type of structure, one where he would neither know about its investments and holdings nor control any aspect of it. He said so repeatedly, and reassuringly, that we had no reason to worry about potential conflicts because he was ceding all power over his fortunate to an independent manager in NYC.
That was all a heaping pile of (deleted). That’s the scandal and it’s a doozy.
- Robert the 1st - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:09 am:
Hah. No one outside of this blog knows about the porch deal and this ad doesn’t even attempt to explain it. Why not just run “JB Pritzker; Bruce Rauner’s best shot at re-election.”
==Hah. No one outside of this blog knows about the porch deal and this ad doesn’t even attempt to explain it.==
You don’t need to explain it, and in fact, “when you’re explaining, you’re losing”. All you need to say is that Rauner was conducting private business in the Governor’s mansion and lying about it. For all my misgivings above, this ad manages that.
===No one outside of this blog knows about the porch deal and this ad doesn’t even attempt to explain it.===
Here’s how I’d say this…
“Very few who are paying attention know about the porch deal and this ad doesn’t even attempt to explain it.”
Is the Pritzker Crew asleep at the switch? What is going on over there exactly?
This ad is designed for people paying attention abc with shorthand nods to things.
It’s lazy to its purpose, and a “cheap-y” way to try to ha edit do too much.
Either go full tilt after it, explain the trust and Rauner misleading, or don’t.
You have to tell people what you’re saying, this ad assumes so much and is framing this whole thing as a deflection.
Uh, hello… the phony blind trust and the deal on the porch IS the meat.
The more I think about it, it’s a miss that may be a precursor how Pritzker’s Crew doesn’t fully grasp 1) How Rauner actually best Quinn 2) How to keep Rauner off-balance 3) A clear understanding how to use their unlimited resources.
If Pritzker wins the Primary, these types of passes in ads won’t cut it. No way. It’s a swing and a miss at too many things.
===No one outside of this blog knows about the porch deal ===
Lol. By the time November rolls around, I have a feeling the “porch scandal” will be so well known it will become a euphemism, like “hiking the Appalachian Trail.”
I hope they try again on this. There’s a powerful one two punch to be had around lying, the “blind trust” and the porch.
- Grandson of Man - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:18 am:
It’s true that Pritzker was not charged or convicted of anything, so Rauner’s attacks are a nothingburger. I think it’s good to point out Rauner’s hypocrisy in regards to his own business dealings, which may or may not be a nothingburger.
I want to see what the candidate will do for the state and like Pritzker’s positive spots much better.
C+
- Robert the 1st - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:25 am:
The “porch scandal” will only be red meat for Democrats who always vote Democrat. Normal people don’t care about someone discussing their private investments. It just doesn’t play as well as tapes of a candidate talking to an imprisoned former governor.
- Robert the 1st - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:26 am:
Don’t get me wrong. I really hope JB gets the nomination…
D
Unnecessary and confusing to combine the two issues.
Rauner is offering his chin. Tag it.
–quote R everything is in a blind trust
–quote R not involved, not familiar w lawsuit
–court docs 2 mtgs, one at the mansion
–court docs 300%, $15 mil on $5 mil not enough
Body shots, and a shot to the chin
===Normal people don’t care about someone discussing their private investments.===
Yes, normal people love being lied to, repeatedly, by their Governor. They love to be treated like a bunch of rubes who are so gullible that they’ll believe the BS coming out of Rauner’s mouth every time his lips start to move.
Yep, go with that.
- Last Bull Moose - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:29 am:
Agree with OW and others. Poor ad.
They attack and then parry. Order should be reversed, parry then attack.
There is a huge opportunity to establish Rauner as a constant liar. Convince people he does not tell the truth and all his attack ads are weakened. LBJ had a credibility gap. Rauner has a worse one.
- Robert the 1st - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:30 am:
Meh. Sometimes you need to depend on the “stupidity of the American voter.” Certainly works on a national level.
- Arthur Andersen - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:32 am:
Close but no cigar. The not-so-blind trust, and maybe the 300% profit ain’t good enough are the issues here, not the back porch.
I heard Stuart Levine was on the TRS investment board steering money to Rauner’s company while being paid by Rauner. Haven’t seen it brought up in any ads.
I’m changing my nickname. Seriously, a contract dispute is not business? They’ve entered the Kellyanne Conway realm of alternative facts. … FKA Workin’
I think it’s adorable that you’ve appointed yourself the spokesman for all “normal people.”
But it’s sad that you are so lacking in confidence of your own opinions that you have to pretend that everyone shares them.
- Skyfall in fast forward - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:42 am:
Is it too-insider for the voters to remember ex-con Celllini, current Rauner pinstripe patronage $$$, and billion + in mismanagement, so that it will not be at issue?
Pritzker had legal conversations (illegally released) with Blagojevich.
Rauner continues to do state business as Blagojevich with some of the same convict players.
==Is it too-insider for the voters to remember ex-con Celllini, current Rauner pinstripe patronage $$$, and billion + in mismanagement, so that it will not be at issue?==
One of the “he’s” (Kirkpatrick) can prove (via the Gov’s secretary) that one, if not both, meetings took place. The other “he” (Rauner) was shown to be less than honest about the meetings, the blind trust, and the lawsuit.
Governor Loman’s “Silk Purse” just went “Oink.” A meeting to discuss a contract dispute involving Rauner’s private business is not the conduct of private business? Really? Oink.
- don the legend - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 11:17 am:
Last Bull Moose…”establish Rauner as a constant liar….
That right there. So much ammunition. JB has all the money necessary to non stop, point out his lies.
Go on the offensive and keep Rauner off balance and in a responsive mode.
“Hey, Rich- We just spotted this on TV. I don’t think the Pritzker campaign has formally “launched” it yet. We must be nervous if we’re this desperate to change the subject from our candidate getting humiliated by Ives yesterday.”
Are we forgetting the popularity of Blagojevich? He would have been re-elected and legal means were necessary to oust him out of office. Not a fan of Blagojevich but I have always had trouble seeing how his actions are much different from other politicians actions. Yes his actions were illegal, but I still think the man on the street has trouble seeing that. I’m just not so troubled by the link to the former governor las I am to deaths in the nursing home.
Rauner admitted that he had a meeting at the Trib yesterday. So, in this case, Rauner is the “he” of he said, he said. And “he” is trying to play word games with regard to the meeting topic and doesn’t even address the “blind trust” which has never existed.
You should have watched the video. If you did, maybe turn on the subtitles and watch it again.
=Hah. No one outside of this blog knows about the porch deal and this ad doesn’t even attempt to explain it.=
Interesting. The Peoria news stations ran it as a headline story this morning. I think the viewers are probably not all blog followers (too bad for them).
I give the ad a week C. Just not clear, could have been much better if it was focused on the lies.
- Ginhouse Tommy - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 12:21 pm:
The Feds were on the hunt for Blago and anyone doing anything shady with him. They obviously or didn’t have enough or weren’t interested in J.B. at that time or they would have went after him too. They probably have Blago talking to other too but they are not running for Governor.
Not too good. C- is the highest grade I could award. I mean seriously J.B. is the best you got? It is like children saying that they are not bad because others are naughty too. Rauner is a liar, but it is a stretch to say that a crime occurred.
I agree with others that combining the two issues in one ad is not a good idea. Instead hit Rauner hard on the blind trust lie.
If you want to do a Blago ad, make it about the tapes were sealed because no charges were filed, but Rauner broke the law and released the tapes anyway. Let Rauner explain that the Tribune broke the law first as his justification.
In fact, I would do a simple ad such as “Rauner broke the law when he released the the sealed conversations of private citizens. How many more laws has Rauner broke?”
The commercial with Blagojevich and Pritzker they have a belly laugh about Superior Bank - that was owned by his sister Penny - that it should have been called Inferior Bank. That bank gave high loans to minority in the City of Chicago who couldn’t afford to own them and after Inferior when down they lost their homes.
Not counting people that were depositors who lost their money being under insured with FDIC.
And his large tax break on his home of over 200,000, and everyone else when up..
- Real - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 9:48 am:
I rate this ad an A+ the newspaper quotes was a gread add in.
- SaulGoodman - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 9:52 am:
LOL - the Rauner folks are pushing out JBs negative ad hitting Rauner?
I’m so confused…
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 9:53 am:
===We just spotted this on TV. I don’t think the Pritzker campaign has formally “launched” it yet. Pritzker must be nervous if he’s spending money to defend his conversations with Blagojevich.===
Skyhook, in reverse.
The Raunerites did this in 2014.
When Rauner’s “Superstars” faced thecsame questions..,
“It’s baloney. We’re just informing voters. Total balkney.”
I do find it exciting that the person sending that didn’t acted the Rauner ethical “lapse”.
Guess they just don’t think ethics matters.
- PublicServant - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 9:54 am:
And then there’s the warehouse deal with the Cellini Family.
And the spending of 2.8 billion that was never appropriated while his “wingman” was comptroller.
And then there’s the IT contract….hrrrmm…lotta comercials yet to come. Can’t wait.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 9:56 am:
Nice to see the Rauner campaign take a break from compiling that list of the boss’ investments in entities that have Illinois government contracts.
–They have directed that all gains from investments that have state contracts be donated to charity.–
So, that accounting will be done and released soon?
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20150109/NEWS02/150109824/rauner-wife-put-investments-in-blind-trust
- Arsenal - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 9:57 am:
With the caveat that, as I’ve said many times, I am rubbish at rating these ads, I don’t like this one. JB should just zero right in on Rauner’s scandal and not address Rauner’s attacks on him at all.
- @misterjayem - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 9:59 am:
“Pritzker must be nervous if he’s spending money to defend his conversations with Blagojevich.”
Okay, then what’s it say about Rauner’s shaky nerves that he spent money on an ad campaign attacking Pritzker during the Democratic primary?
(Doesn’t anyone on Bruce’s team ever think any of these things through?)
– MrJM
- Arsenal - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 9:59 am:
Also, while this is probably based on some latent misogyny on my part, the “concerned woman” voice they all use in all these ads is like nails on a chalkboard to me.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:00 am:
To the Ad,
“C-… “
Below… a “gentleman’s C”
“Why?”
For the love of Pete… how can you swing and miss on the porch deal? Pritzker’s Crew just did.
Why muddy the water. Go after, full tilt, on the porch.
Stop with the meddling. Stop. Just stop.
You have the money, run two tracks, go after Rauner. This is a real “cheap-y” way to try to solve two issues.
It’s forgettable and it misses the whole point of the back porch zing.
It’s only a “C-“ because it’s on TV.
Rauner is winning the messaging here. Either step it up, with the unlimited cash to do things correctly, or just keep chasing with ads that muddy slam dunk easy hits that frame “Skyhook, in reverse”
Not good.
- Responsa - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:00 am:
This JB ad is too inside baseball to make an impact on voters. “My scandal is less bad than your scandal” is not a winning sales pitch for either side or either candidate. Ugh.
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:04 am:
Governors govern 24/7, so conducting personal business on government time in government provided housing shouldn’t be a surprise.
It might be a no-no, but to most citizens, it’s not a big deal.
If a governor was exposed as profitably conducting personal business at the Mansion during working hours, it would raise attention because it would show a split allegience to a governor’s duty. But not this. Citizens usually accept that legal problems don’t wait.
Blagojevich, Ryan, as well as other non-felonious governors, needed to conduct personal legal business while governor. This is not a big deal at this point.
Making it a big deal won’t necessarily score political points. It’s a kerfuffle.
- hisgirlfriday - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:05 am:
Dumb ad, JB.
Don’t conflate Bruce’s misdeeds in the gov mansion with a defense of your guy on Blago.
Go straight negative on Bruce and define him as the liar, incompetent, and cruel person he is.
People vaguely know Bruce is an incompetent weak governor but he needs way more definition from Team JB.
- 47th Ward - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:08 am:
===It’s a kerfuffle.===
I agree that doing personal business is not a big deal.
But that’s not really what this scandal is about, is it? No, this scandal is that Rauner led everyone to believe he was putting his business in a “blind trust” type of structure, one where he would neither know about its investments and holdings nor control any aspect of it. He said so repeatedly, and reassuringly, that we had no reason to worry about potential conflicts because he was ceding all power over his fortunate to an independent manager in NYC.
That was all a heaping pile of (deleted). That’s the scandal and it’s a doozy.
- Robert the 1st - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:09 am:
Hah. No one outside of this blog knows about the porch deal and this ad doesn’t even attempt to explain it. Why not just run “JB Pritzker; Bruce Rauner’s best shot at re-election.”
- 360 Degree TurnAround - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:10 am:
It was a good first jab, although the messaging is a little murky.
- Henry Francis - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:11 am:
Keep it simple.
Play tape of new transparency Guv stating its all in a blind trust and he has no control.
Then mention lawsuit that transparency Guv tries to keep hidden from public
Then play tape of him stating he has no idea of lawsuit and it’s all in a blind trust.
Then say how it’s all untrue. Not only is it not in a trust, it isn’t blind.
And while his DHS isn’t properly accounting for over $6B of your money, he is focused on $5m of his private money. From his private investment.
And trying to hide it on the back porch of the only one of his 10 mansions that we pay for him to live in.
- Piece of Work - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:13 am:
The “porch deal” is he said, he said. Did others confirm this happened?
- Arsenal - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:14 am:
==Hah. No one outside of this blog knows about the porch deal and this ad doesn’t even attempt to explain it.==
You don’t need to explain it, and in fact, “when you’re explaining, you’re losing”. All you need to say is that Rauner was conducting private business in the Governor’s mansion and lying about it. For all my misgivings above, this ad manages that.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:17 am:
===No one outside of this blog knows about the porch deal and this ad doesn’t even attempt to explain it.===
Here’s how I’d say this…
“Very few who are paying attention know about the porch deal and this ad doesn’t even attempt to explain it.”
Is the Pritzker Crew asleep at the switch? What is going on over there exactly?
This ad is designed for people paying attention abc with shorthand nods to things.
It’s lazy to its purpose, and a “cheap-y” way to try to ha edit do too much.
Either go full tilt after it, explain the trust and Rauner misleading, or don’t.
You have to tell people what you’re saying, this ad assumes so much and is framing this whole thing as a deflection.
Uh, hello… the phony blind trust and the deal on the porch IS the meat.
The more I think about it, it’s a miss that may be a precursor how Pritzker’s Crew doesn’t fully grasp 1) How Rauner actually best Quinn 2) How to keep Rauner off-balance 3) A clear understanding how to use their unlimited resources.
If Pritzker wins the Primary, these types of passes in ads won’t cut it. No way. It’s a swing and a miss at too many things.
- 47th Ward - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:18 am:
===No one outside of this blog knows about the porch deal ===
Lol. By the time November rolls around, I have a feeling the “porch scandal” will be so well known it will become a euphemism, like “hiking the Appalachian Trail.”
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:18 am:
I hope they try again on this. There’s a powerful one two punch to be had around lying, the “blind trust” and the porch.
- Grandson of Man - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:18 am:
It’s true that Pritzker was not charged or convicted of anything, so Rauner’s attacks are a nothingburger. I think it’s good to point out Rauner’s hypocrisy in regards to his own business dealings, which may or may not be a nothingburger.
I want to see what the candidate will do for the state and like Pritzker’s positive spots much better.
C+
- Robert the 1st - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:25 am:
The “porch scandal” will only be red meat for Democrats who always vote Democrat. Normal people don’t care about someone discussing their private investments. It just doesn’t play as well as tapes of a candidate talking to an imprisoned former governor.
- Robert the 1st - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:26 am:
Don’t get me wrong. I really hope JB gets the nomination…
- Real - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:27 am:
OW
The ad does mention the porch deal.
- Langhorne - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:27 am:
D
Unnecessary and confusing to combine the two issues.
Rauner is offering his chin. Tag it.
–quote R everything is in a blind trust
–quote R not involved, not familiar w lawsuit
–court docs 2 mtgs, one at the mansion
–court docs 300%, $15 mil on $5 mil not enough
Body shots, and a shot to the chin
- 47th Ward - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:28 am:
===Normal people don’t care about someone discussing their private investments.===
Yes, normal people love being lied to, repeatedly, by their Governor. They love to be treated like a bunch of rubes who are so gullible that they’ll believe the BS coming out of Rauner’s mouth every time his lips start to move.
Yep, go with that.
- Last Bull Moose - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:29 am:
Agree with OW and others. Poor ad.
They attack and then parry. Order should be reversed, parry then attack.
There is a huge opportunity to establish Rauner as a constant liar. Convince people he does not tell the truth and all his attack ads are weakened. LBJ had a credibility gap. Rauner has a worse one.
- Robert the 1st - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:30 am:
Meh. Sometimes you need to depend on the “stupidity of the American voter.” Certainly works on a national level.
- Arthur Andersen - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:32 am:
Close but no cigar. The not-so-blind trust, and maybe the 300% profit ain’t good enough are the issues here, not the back porch.
- Arsenal - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:32 am:
==The “porch scandal” will only be red meat for Democrats who always vote Democrat.==
In a state where Democrats have a natural (though not unstoppable) advantage, that’s pretty valuable.
==Normal people don’t care about someone discussing their private investments.==
Disinterest in your Governor lying to you and covering up his shady business meetings isn’t “normal”.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:33 am:
47th, were you outraged when a pretty high government official said families would save $2500 on their health insurance?
- Grand Avenue - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:36 am:
Looking better for Biss every day
- DuPage - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:37 am:
I heard Stuart Levine was on the TRS investment board steering money to Rauner’s company while being paid by Rauner. Haven’t seen it brought up in any ads.
- Contract Disputin' - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:38 am:
I’m changing my nickname. Seriously, a contract dispute is not business? They’ve entered the Kellyanne Conway realm of alternative facts. … FKA Workin’
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:41 am:
–Normal people–
I think it’s adorable that you’ve appointed yourself the spokesman for all “normal people.”
But it’s sad that you are so lacking in confidence of your own opinions that you have to pretend that everyone shares them.
- Skyfall in fast forward - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:42 am:
Is it too-insider for the voters to remember ex-con Celllini, current Rauner pinstripe patronage $$$, and billion + in mismanagement, so that it will not be at issue?
Pritzker had legal conversations (illegally released) with Blagojevich.
Rauner continues to do state business as Blagojevich with some of the same convict players.
- 47th Ward - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 10:45 am:
===47th,===
Pick a name or don’t waste my time.
- Arsenal - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 11:02 am:
==Is it too-insider for the voters to remember ex-con Celllini, current Rauner pinstripe patronage $$$, and billion + in mismanagement, so that it will not be at issue?==
I hope not, but I suspect it is.
- Jocko - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 11:10 am:
==The “porch deal” is he said, he said.==
One of the “he’s” (Kirkpatrick) can prove (via the Gov’s secretary) that one, if not both, meetings took place. The other “he” (Rauner) was shown to be less than honest about the meetings, the blind trust, and the lawsuit.
- Lamont - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 11:14 am:
There’s so much good stuff JB can use against Rauner and he wastes half this ad trying to defend himself from a Rauner ad. Attack, attack, attack!
- 37B - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 11:15 am:
Governor Loman’s “Silk Purse” just went “Oink.” A meeting to discuss a contract dispute involving Rauner’s private business is not the conduct of private business? Really? Oink.
- don the legend - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 11:17 am:
Last Bull Moose…”establish Rauner as a constant liar….
That right there. So much ammunition. JB has all the money necessary to non stop, point out his lies.
Go on the offensive and keep Rauner off balance and in a responsive mode.
- @misterjayem - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 11:19 am:
“Hey, Rich- We just spotted this on TV. I don’t think the Pritzker campaign has formally “launched” it yet. We must be nervous if we’re this desperate to change the subject from our candidate getting humiliated by Ives yesterday.”
– MrJM
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 11:26 am:
===The “porch deal” is he said, he said.===
… ‘cept for the schedule logs and the admitting they met… twice.
Oh, I know… “you know”, lol
- Barrington - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 12:05 pm:
Are we forgetting the popularity of Blagojevich? He would have been re-elected and legal means were necessary to oust him out of office. Not a fan of Blagojevich but I have always had trouble seeing how his actions are much different from other politicians actions. Yes his actions were illegal, but I still think the man on the street has trouble seeing that. I’m just not so troubled by the link to the former governor las I am to deaths in the nursing home.
- JS Mill - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 12:11 pm:
===The “porch deal” is he said, he said.===
Rauner admitted that he had a meeting at the Trib yesterday. So, in this case, Rauner is the “he” of he said, he said. And “he” is trying to play word games with regard to the meeting topic and doesn’t even address the “blind trust” which has never existed.
You should have watched the video. If you did, maybe turn on the subtitles and watch it again.
=Hah. No one outside of this blog knows about the porch deal and this ad doesn’t even attempt to explain it.=
Interesting. The Peoria news stations ran it as a headline story this morning. I think the viewers are probably not all blog followers (too bad for them).
You need to get out a little.
- JS Mill - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 12:12 pm:
I give the ad a week C. Just not clear, could have been much better if it was focused on the lies.
- Ginhouse Tommy - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 12:21 pm:
The Feds were on the hunt for Blago and anyone doing anything shady with him. They obviously or didn’t have enough or weren’t interested in J.B. at that time or they would have went after him too. They probably have Blago talking to other too but they are not running for Governor.
- H'mm - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 12:30 pm:
Not too good. C- is the highest grade I could award. I mean seriously J.B. is the best you got? It is like children saying that they are not bad because others are naughty too. Rauner is a liar, but it is a stretch to say that a crime occurred.
- A Jack - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 12:55 pm:
I agree with others that combining the two issues in one ad is not a good idea. Instead hit Rauner hard on the blind trust lie.
If you want to do a Blago ad, make it about the tapes were sealed because no charges were filed, but Rauner broke the law and released the tapes anyway. Let Rauner explain that the Tribune broke the law first as his justification.
- A Jack - Tuesday, Jan 30, 18 @ 12:59 pm:
In fact, I would do a simple ad such as “Rauner broke the law when he released the the sealed conversations of private citizens. How many more laws has Rauner broke?”
- jay bee - Wednesday, Jan 31, 18 @ 7:26 am:
The commercial with Blagojevich and Pritzker they have a belly laugh about Superior Bank - that was owned by his sister Penny - that it should have been called Inferior Bank. That bank gave high loans to minority in the City of Chicago who couldn’t afford to own them and after Inferior when down they lost their homes.
Not counting people that were depositors who lost their money being under insured with FDIC.
And his large tax break on his home of over 200,000, and everyone else when up..