Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today’s edition: Crosstabs, mail, TV buys
Next Post: Rauner on patronage: Zero if elected
Posted in:
* My weekly syndicated newspaper column…
Bruce Rauner reportedly had one of those bugs that was going around last week.
I feel his pain. I was sick with one thing or another all week. Luckily, I took a little time off, or I’d probably have felt even worse.
Rauner didn’t take any time off and it showed. For the first time at his press conferences he read his statements right off the page, painfully stumbling over his words. It wasn’t a pretty sight.
He and his campaign also seemed grumpier last week. “Pat Quinn is not the folksy, bumbling fool he’d like us to think he is,” Rauner growled on Monday. On Tuesday, Rauner’s campaign barred some college journalism students from his press conference and Rauner himself refused to even have a word with them afterwards. On Wednesday, he turned his head and pointedly ignored a follow-up question from a Chicago TV reporter about the NFL scandals. More on that in a moment.
Maybe the recent Chicago Tribune poll which showed him trailing Gov. Pat Quinn by eleven points somehow added to his physical misery. It was Rauner’s personal decision, after all, to not flood the airwaves with TV ads during the spring and summer when Quinn didn’t have the money to adequately respond. He plain cheaped out, and now it’s gonna cost him a lot more money to win this thing, and he has nobody to blame but himself.
Or maybe it was that bottom-feeding Chicago Magazine “profile” published last week. Six thousand words were spilled on Chicago’s glossy pages to rehash boring stuff we already knew apparently in order to give the magazine an excuse to slip a couple of needlessly invasive personal items into the middle that told us absolutely nothing about the candidate or what sort of governor he’d be. I’d be pretty upset, too.
But, hey, that’s the game, I suppose. There will always be those who will try to use a person’s family to somehow disqualify the candidate for public service. It’s a filthy business. And despite the author’s claims to the contrary, let’s just say there’s at least a strong suspicion among the Raunerites that the Quinnsters somehow had a role in getting this information into the public realm. That’d make anybody grumpy.
Whatever’s going on, sickness, a bit of poll-induced regret/fright or protective familial anger, he and his campaign have to get over it. The Quinn campaign has obviously gotten under their skin. Quinn looks and sounds like a kindly, harmless older man. In reality, he’s a calm yet vicious street fighter who shows no remorse for his adversaries. He’s at his best during periods of chaos, and this campaign is only going to get more chaotic.
And that brings us back to the NFL scandals. Chicago TV reporter Mary Ann Ahern asked Rauner if he’d had any communication with the Pittsburgh Steelers (of which he’s a minority owner) about the recent NFL physical abuse scandals. Rauner said he hadn’t and explained that he was too occupied with winning an election in order to turn the state around. When she followed up to ask him to comment on the NFL scandals in general, he turned his head to take another question.
A better candidate would’ve used Ahern’s question to swing for the fences. It was a prime opportunity to talk about not only the NFL’s problems, but his own commitment to fighting domestic violence and then compare that to the very real cuts Quinn has made to domestic violence shelters over the years.
I’m not saying at all that the question was planted, but the Quinnsters were most definitely talking up the issue the night before and had a press conference already scheduled Wednesday to speak about women’s issues. Ahern denies ever talking to the Quinn campaign about it and I believe her. Rauner was clearly set up, by himself.
You gotta be ready for everything in this game and Rauner obviously wasn’t. Rauner may look upon himself as a cut-throat businessman, but business ain’t got nothing on Illinois politics, baby.
I hope you got some rest and tried to get healthier, dude, because you really need to step it up. We can all smell the blood in the water. And that’s your blood, Bruce. Fair warning. The sharks are circling and plenty more are on the way. If you want to win this thing, you’re gonna need a bigger boat.
Discuss.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 9:24 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today’s edition: Crosstabs, mail, TV buys
Next Post: Rauner on patronage: Zero if elected
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I’m so glad you’re feeling better Rich!
No one becomes a lawyer and then the Gov by being folksy or bumbling. I don’t think many people believe that of Quinn. We all realize that politicians excel at being convincingly great actors…they all portray some theme or character-type.
Comment by Belle Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 9:33 am
This is why…
If you’re going to have a multi-candidate Primary fight, the winner be battle-tested in that fight so come General Election time, the battle scars and a Crew use to feeling heat can steer the ship..,to a safe harbor.
It’s like the S. S. Minnow out there, thinking the domestic Piranhas were a test.
Not even close.
Sharks feed and move, because if they don’t do both, they die.
Bruce needs to get better, his Crew needs to become better…fast.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 9:39 am
Great column.
Comment by Soccermom Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 9:44 am
The Chicago Magazine piece on Rauner was trash, just prurient gossip.
Felsenthal claimed to have interviewed something like 60 sources. See any evidence of that?
And what was the point of plastering the kids pictures in some sort of family tree graphic?
Rauner’s business and political lives are fair game, as are his ridiculous policy “plans.’ So, unfortunately, is the Payton clout episode.
But going out of your way to to point out the troubles of a kid that has nothing to do with anything is just mean and small.
Are there any editors in this town anymore?
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 9:47 am
The one upside is he can buy a bigger boat.
Comment by OneMan Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 9:51 am
“Are there any editors in this town anymore?” Should read “Are there any editors anywhere anymore?”
Comment by Skeptic Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 9:54 am
If Rauner weren’t running ads about “violent criminals” who don’t do enough “prison time,” I’d feel differently about the Chicago Mag piece. I know it’s not polite to point out hypocrisy, but impolite is different than irrelevant.
Comment by crazybleedingheart Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 9:56 am
The Chicago Magazine was pure complete trash. Did Chicago Magazine fire all of its editors? Will the Chicago Magazine trash piece on Quinn be published in December?
I took issue with Ahern’s question and her denials that the Quinn campaign didn’t put her up to it ring pretty flat.
What is it about the press where it won’t admit to receiving “opposition research” and then using it? Other than Rich Miller reprinting “opposition research” and labeling it as such, I don’t see other media groups or reporters doing the same thing.
The planted negative stories about Fioretti for Mayor of Chicago are a prime example to use in making my point.
Comment by Louis G Atsaves Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 9:58 am
To the Chicago Mag “piece”
The only things, only, that is fair game are the Dem donations Rauner attributed to his wife, and Payton Prep, because A) Rauner used his personal clout and it’s hypocrisy and the lying about it, even to this day, and B) the even more sad way he threw the Daughter under the bus with the “perfect” test score.
To the rest,
Pretty disappointing and disgusting way to decide to educate people on Rauner.
The Edgar line “I don’t know you” does not give license to do a piece like THAT.
Bad form.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 10:00 am
===I took issue with Ahern’s question===
Why? It was a meatball right over the plate.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 10:00 am
===I took issue with Ahern’s question===
“As a husband and father, I am strongly opposed, and will not tolerate domestic violence and child abuse.
Easy peasy.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 10:03 am
Great article. The fact that Rauner’s people did not anticipate and plan for every single scenario such as the nursing homes, off shore accounts etc, is pretty astonishing. I agree it was a bad move not to hit the airwaves in the spring, but not fatal. To allow the Quinsters to come out hammering as they have the past month and not prepared to counter punch is pretty inexcusable.
Comment by OLK 73 Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 10:06 am
I agree with wordslinger. Leave Rauner’s family out of it. Business dealings and government relationships are totally fair game.
“poll which showed him trailing Gov. Pat Quinn”
A new poll shows Rauner is in the lead 3, which is within the poll’s MOE. That polling firm showed Rauner up by something like 12 around a month ago.
According to the pollster, Democrats are coming home to Quinn, which may have been what the outlier Trib poll showed.
Being in a statistical tie with Quinn, a legendary campaigner who may have a large GOTV crew, should be cause for angst.
As Rich pointed out this weekend, Rauner’s prisoner release ad has a glaring typo (assualt).
Comment by Grandson of Man Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 10:06 am
Stop crying, Louis. If it had happened the other way around you’d be on here championing how bad Quinn was, is, will be. That goes for Bruce and the other Bozos as well.
“Rauner may look upon himself as a cut-throat businessman, but business ain’t got nothing on Illinois politics, baby.”
Truer words were never written Rich.
Comment by low level Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 10:08 am
I respectfully disagree with the group about the Chicago Magazine piece. Felsenthal writes terrific profiles, and this was no exception. One of the problems voters face is that they don’t know who Rauner is (part of the reason is that Rauner refuses to say what he really thinks about anything.) The article, in my opinion, attempted to answer that.
And while the stuff about Rauner’s son might have crossed the line, his first marriage is absolutely fair game. Rauner made it so by opposing same-sex marriage.
Comment by Roland the Headless Thompson Gunner Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 10:14 am
Great piece, Rich. The Ahern question was a fastball right down the middle, and Bruce took it for a called third strike. Just goes to show you that he can’t think on his feet. Without his staff coaching him on answers, he strikes out all the time. Big wallet doesn’t translate to running a state from the governor’s mansion. Seems like the more time remaining, the weaker Rauner seems to be.
Comment by Big Joe Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 10:23 am
Quinn is selling himself. His lawnmower and Explorer ad were positives. After wasting millions on silly negative ads, Quinn is finally reminding voters why they voted for him in 2010.
Rauner has had it easy and now he won’t.
Comment by VanillaMan Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 10:30 am
Honestly, it was a bit unsettling during the week last week. Expected some heavy feedback in the field. Suprisingly, Rauner was very well received in two areas of DuPage. South central in Downers Grove and Lisle Twps and north central in Bloomingdale. There was no measurable sign of a bad week. Odd. It was a lot of knocks as well. Clearly, it’s DuPage, he should do well. However, people were more receptive and locked in than any walks before.
Good article, Rich.
Comment by A guy... Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 10:36 am
Amen Brother Rich!
Comment by Amalia Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 10:36 am
A couple of things.
Hey, Bruce. People sometimes get sick on the trail. (In fact, it’s almost a certainty that you’re going to get worn down and catch something from one of the many germ-ridden voters who are shaking your hand.) That’s why it’s a good idea to choose a running mate who can step up and take your place without shoving a foot in his/her mouth. Something to consider next time around.
This whole, “No fair, you got that idea from the Quinn camp” thing is just laughable. That is, in fact, exactly what the Quinn camp is supposed to be doing. And your camp is supposed to be doing the same thing. And Mary Ann Ahern’s job is to figure out which questions are worth asking.
Incidentally, I do give Bruce credit for not using his kids as campaign props. So it was cheesy to drag his children and siblings into this whole thing.
Comment by Soccermom Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 10:38 am
===”It’s a filthy business.”===
Buyers beware! This is not a regular market.
Great column Rich. No harm to the wit, in the past few days. Hope you’re feeling better physically.
My guess is that Rauner is just fine thinking and answering on his feet, in social and business settings. If that question were posed in those settings, he would indeed have “knocked it out of the park.” He has just absorbed mucho training from his campaign staff to avoid all unprepared-for questions. Temporary problem for him.
C’mon Bruce. You’re better than this.
Comment by walker Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 10:40 am
Could the headline “It’s gonna get worse” work here as well?
Comment by Levois Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 10:46 am
Rich, I’m with you. I’m feeling bad for Bruce. Let’s hope he is feeling better and that everyone makes it a little easier for Bruce. He has put a lot of his own money in.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 10:47 am
“And while the stuff about Rauner’s son might have crossed the line, his first marriage is absolutely fair game. Rauner made it so by opposing same-sex marriage.”
This is the point of view I’m just not understanding. Attacking Rauner because of a troubled kid would be bad form.
Criticizing him because (just like with his daughter) Rauner is advocating one kind of government for his family and another for the rest of us…how is that crossing the line?
Comment by crazybleedingheart Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 10:47 am
Mary Ann Ahern’s questions is perfectly appropriate for a minority owner of the Pittsburgh Steelers of the National Football League, who is also running for Governor of the State of Illinois.
Comment by Del Clinkton Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 11:00 am
As a very long time Republican activist, I have seen my share of “businessman” candidates with no prior political experience. And I have been duly critical of them in light of their lack of political experience and almost outright refusal to bend their approach to compensate for that deficiency (usually due to the outsized egos successful, wealthy businessmen have).
For over a year now, I have marveled at how good Rauner has been as a political candidate. Sure there have been some mishaps, but they were minor and Rauner pretty quickly recovered. Fox News and others have pronounced Rauner to be an excellent retail campaigner.
Miller is correct in criticizing Rauner’s miscue in responding to Ahern’s NFL domestic abuse question. This is the least politically adroit I have seen Rauner conduct himself. By both evading and then ignoring the question, the “rich businessman ego” side of him took command. It was a fairly simple question to leverage into a strong pronouncement on combatting domestic violence, and I don’t understand why he missed that, other than my observations above. (BTW, who cares whether he spoke to the Steelers about NFL domestic abuse or not–meaningless.)
Rauner has to use these press opportunities to make sincere statements about public issues of the day, even if that means evading the direct question (which wouldn’t hurt him), and he can do so by making broad policy pronouncements (e.g. “the good society abhors domestic violence, and as governor I will do everything in my power to combat it”) without getting into the weeds. People need to hear what he has to say about these issues, even if he makes broad, bland pronouncements.
Comment by Conservative Republican Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 11:31 am
Now we’re seeing Bruce really isn’t all that much of a businessman either. A true work your way up, put everything at risk guy would have been able to think on his feet faster.
Bruce has been successful thanks to his dad helping him get started and his ability to get clouted state contracts. Not that there’s anything neccessarily wrong with that. The problem comes in when you are running for Governor and use this, ahem, “business experience” to make the case that you are qualified.
Comment by low level Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 11:40 am
Another thing, get rid of that derisive laugh in place of answering questions.
Comment by Wensicia Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 12:00 pm
I respectfully dissent on the Felsenthal article, which was very light on what you might think of as prurient details and a fairly comprehensive introduction for voters who haven’t so far been paying a lot of attention. More here on my reasoning http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/zorn/chi-chicago-magazine-profile-on-rauner-counterpoint-point-20140922-story.html but the summary graf reads as follows >>One major take-away from Felsenthal’s profile in Chicago Magazine — a sister publication of the Tribune — is that in many ways Rauner is running a stealth campaign. It’s not a Rose Garden campaign. He’s out on the stump nearly nonstop. But it’s a campaign that is so light on specifics, so heavy on the “I’m not bumbling old Pat Quinn,” that even after you read all that Felsenthal could find out about Rauner, you’re still left with the “Who is this guy anyway?”
Comment by Eric Zorn Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 12:07 pm
===One major take-away from Felsenthal’s profile in Chicago Magazine — a sister publication of the Tribune — is that in many ways Rauner is running a stealth campaign.===
LOL
Yeah, nobody has ever written that before.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 12:21 pm
that column was excellent and mary ann ahearn did her job well with her question.
I used to like chicago magazine but I and most people I know stopped reading it after they got into Senator Kirk’s marriage with a nasty hit piece on his former wife. They have a journalist who really trafficks in national enquirer bottom feeding stuff and it’s killed the publications reputation with a lot of people on the north shore who also no longer read it. So many worthwhile things to write about right now and they go low brow, again.
Comment by Shore Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 12:37 pm
===One major take-away from Felsenthal’s profile in Chicago Magazine — a sister publication of the Tribune — is that in many ways Rauner is running a stealth campaign.===
I must’ve missed whose stopping you Mr. Zorn from taking Rauner to task as your sister publication did.
Anyone? Why not..,you?
Would you run that exact piece with your name on it?
With respect.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 12:41 pm
–Another thing, get rid of that derisive laugh in place of answering questions.–
That seems to be a nervous tic when he can’t think of how to get back on script.
Didn’t the cheez-whiz kids ever tell him that the question asked does not determine the answer given?
The Ahern question is a case in point. As soon as he got the gist of “domestic violence” he should have been off to the races. He didn’t have to get down in the weeds on his ownership stake.
The complaining about the question from the Rauner camp is revealing and should be concerning to Rauner backers. That was a gift, not a shot.
If you can’t tell the difference, you’re in the wrong line of work.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 12:42 pm
===That was a gift, not a shot. If you can’t tell the difference, you’re in the wrong line of work. ===
Exactly, perfectly right.
The push-back on Ahern is ridiculous. He bungled a perfect softball and blamed it on the pitcher.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 12:45 pm
===One major take-away from Felsenthal’s profile in Chicago Magazine — a sister publication of the Tribune — is that in many ways Rauner is running a stealth campaign.===
I think the point here is that if that is his strategy (and it is), if that’s the way he wants to play it, then virtually NOTHING is off limits.
If Rauner wants to communicate as little as possible as a strategy then I want to know as much as possible.
For example, if he wants to be so very secretive, at least now I can infer that maybe the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. I think there’s a real kernel of truth in that old saying.
It’s kind of reminds me of the campaign contribution caps. If he decides to blow the caps with his own money, then nobody else is limited either.
If he wants to limit what I know, then I want to know everything. If he wants people to err on the side of respecting his privacy, then he shouldn’t be running for governor.
Comment by Mighty M. Mouse Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 1:15 pm
@Oswego Willie — I’ve written quite a lot about Rauner’s gauzy, plan-free, specific-impaired campaign. Some of it linked here at Cap Fax. As for the content of the article, as noted, I don’t think she sensationalized or overemphasized personal details … we can’t say that a candidate’s bio is important and then say, oh, we mean only a carefully sanitized bio. I’f I’d been tasked with writing 6,000 words on Rauner it probably would have included the same sorts of things in roughly the same proportion were I to be aiming at Chi Mags audience. You? Anyone else? Cut out the personal stuff and add a couple of hundred more words about what he’s not saying about the property tax freeze, pension reform, the torrent of red ink that will accompany his proposed income tax cuts? Now that’d be a real page turner!
Comment by Eric Zorn Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 1:17 pm
If you own it, then you do.
I know you have written about many of the Rauner shell talking points, and even more about his issues of a lack of substance.
I wondered, aloud, if you would put your name to that, and you answered. You also made a very good point that 6,000 words about what he has “given” wouldn’t be such a page-turner, especially for Chicago Mag, but if we are going to have to wait until September for 6,000 words about the March 17th GOP Nominee, 5th months removed from his win, I guess the education has more to do about the timing of the education than the education itself?
Just disappointing I have to wait. 5 months to learn about things that will make pages turn.
I enjoy your work, thanks for your honest response.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 1:31 pm
–I’f I’d been tasked with writing 6,000 words on Rauner it probably would have included the same sorts of things in roughly the same proportion were I to be aiming at Chi Mags audience.–
Don’t blame it on the “audience.” “Chicago” has delusions that they do “Vanity Fair” type journalism, as in their recent shaky Chicago crime stats piece.
All that stuff about the divorce tells you what?
Off the top of my head, before I’d go fishing through police blotters in Montana for dirt on a troubled kid who’s a civilian, I might take a trip up to Duluth to chat with a troubled fixer who is not.
How about that chart on the kids? What does that tell you?
I’d be more interested in chart detailing his business and political relationships. That might be more informative in relation to the gig he’s pursuing.
And how does a magazine named “Chicago” go in-depth on an old divorce and do virtually nothing on a possible future governor’s business and political ties with Rahm Emanuel and Bill Daley and that hinky SBC deal that made them all rich (or richer, as the case may be)?
After UNO, how do you not even take a look at who gets what at the charter schools he’s pushed?
The article is just dish for North Shore and Gold Coast gossip. It has nothing to say about Rauner as a possible governor.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 1:38 pm
I think Bruce can, in fact, think fast. I believe his problem is, in politics, he thinks it’s better to say nothing rather than possibly uttering liberal speak, or worse, saying something he thinks Quinn might say, even if it’s the right thing to say.
Comment by Cheswick Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 1:39 pm
===The article is just dish for North Shore and Gold Coast gossip. It has nothing to say about Rauner as a possible governor.===
Maybe that explains, in part, why the gossip is done in September?
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 1:52 pm
perhaps it was all just driven because Bruce refused to do some modeling for one of their fashion spreads.
Those used to crack me up…
They had one once with some dude dressed as a jr mobster or something hanging out a a boxing gym with his Moll both of them wearing clothes that suffice to say price and fashion wise were not aimed at the OneMan demographic.
As for the divorce stuff, thanks to Jack Ryan and Blair Hull not sure there is much that would really surprise anyone anymore.
Comment by OneMan Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 2:15 pm
I’ll comment one more time on this. In response to Ahern’s question I believe Rauner could have given two possible responses.
The NFL is losing significant sponsors pulling out fast and they need to do something to stop the bleeding.
Or,
Domestic violence, whether against women, men, children or the elderly and regardless of social class is wrong. We need to stop the bleeding.
By choosing “no comment” he is leaving it to the voters to determine his priorities.
Comment by Casual observer Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 2:41 pm
Adding, I believe he sees this as a fiscal issue not social. That’s scary and totally out of touch.
Comment by Casual observer Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 2:45 pm
–The NFL is losing significant sponsors pulling out fast and they need to do something to stop the bleeding.–
No. they’re not losing sponsors. Many have made statements of concern, but no one of significance has dropped.
Radisson has “suspended” it’s relationship with the Vikings, but that’s because they no longer want the Radisson logo to be the backdrop for Viking pressers.
Believe me, if the NFL were losing major sponsors, Roger Goodell would already be gone. So far, he’s bought some time with the Mueller investigation.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 2:49 pm
Zorn and OW, a match made in Disneyland if there ever were one. I can just see the chin rubbing, patches on the elbow of the corduroy blazers over the formal flannels, and the sweet aroma of rum maple pipe tobacco….while absolutely not one good point is made. Lots of repeating though, oh yeah, a real echo chamber.
Comment by A guy... Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 3:24 pm
You stay classy - A Guy… -.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 3:29 pm
BTW, - A Guy… -, I am defend “your guy” and the fact that since March, no story, come September, we get an article that could have been written months ago, with little more than gossip that had been floating around.
If you want to defend “your guy”, - A Guy… -, go for it.
Confusing.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 3:41 pm
Said Willie:
“It’s like the S. S. Minnow out there, thinking the domestic Piranhas were a test.
Not even close.
Sharks feed and move, because if they don’t do both, they die.”
C’mon man, you’re either in favor of similes and metaphors or you ain’t. Gotta pick a side or get run over in the middle. tee hee.
Comment by A guy... Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 4:03 pm
Let’s see:
Primary - piranhas
General - Sharks
Boat? S. S. Minnow
They go together.
“This ends ‘Painting a Metaphor’…”
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 4:14 pm
Funny they seemed to like the Madigan story Chicago Magazine did a few months back, but not this one.
Comment by low level Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 4:35 pm
Rich Miller and or Eric Zorn:
It would be interesting to survey GOP state legislators to see where they are on Rauner’s various “VAGUE” policy positions.
I.E. the property tax freeze, pension reform, the torrent of red ink that will accompany his proposed income tax cuts?
Now that’d be a real page turner if the state legislators actually had the courage to answer the questions on record!
Comment by My 2 cents... Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 4:40 pm
Jeez, THAT CHICAGO MAGAZINE ARTICLE! I almost failed to read it all because I felt the need to take a shower after the family chart and all the personal information. I’m not in favor of Rauner, but that was a personal information dump of epic proportions covering multiple generations. It makes me sad for his children. One thing is for sure now, he used his wife in a commercial and she is fair game for her contributions to Republicans so get to that people because that is substance. I’m more worried about that than I am about their scandalous marriage.
Comment by Amalia Monday, Sep 22, 14 @ 6:59 pm