Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Early voting and GOTV
Next Post: Good morning!
Posted in:
* My weekly syndicated newspaper column, reformatted to Crain’s style…
Let’s talk about one of the weirdest things that happened this campaign season.
Earlier this year, ultraconservative activist Jack Roeser told me that his friend Bruce Rauner believed life began at conception. “I’d describe him as a guy who is a morally right-to-life guy, but not on the hustings,” Mr. Roeser, who has since passed away, said about Mr. Rauner.
Jack and many of his right-to-life allies backed Mr. Rauner every step of the way, while the candidate, who belatedly admitted that he’s pro-choice, spent much of the Republican primary focusing his attention on pledging battles with Springfield Democrats and their teachers union allies and fighting for term limits.
The candidate has often said that he has “no social agenda,” and would instead focus solely on cleaning up government and getting the economy running again. But he also wanted to avoid stressing social issues for fear of alienating a relatively small but still important base of Republican voters who just won’t vote for a pro-choicer of any party. Every vote counts, especially if you’re a Republican running in Democratic-leaning Illinois.
But the issue exploded during the campaign’s final week. As I’ve told you before, Local 150 of the Operating Engineers Union — one of Gov. Pat Quinn’s strongest supporters — spent big bucks supporting the unabashedly pro-life, pro-gun Libertarian Party candidate for governor, Chad Grimm. The idea was to siphon votes away from the GOP candidate. Like I said, every vote counts if you’re a Republican in Illinois.
The Republican Party of Illinois pushed back, sending mailers and doing thousands of robocalls warning Republicans that Mr. Quinn and his allies were trying to “steal” the election by pushing the Libertarian, and claiming that Mr. Grimm was for gay marriage and belonged to a party that is officially pro-choice.
Mr. Rauner has contributed about 80 percent of every dollar the party has raised. He installed a loyal ally as party chairman. They haven’t done much over there without first checking in with the candidate.
Meanwhile, the pro-choice group Personal PAC launched a TV attack ad on Mr. Rauner in Chicago. The ad urged viewers to vote for the statewide ballot initiative on employer mandated birth control, and claimed Mr. Rauner had given millions to “right-wing groups and politicians who oppose birth control coverage”
Mr. Rauner himself had earlier aired a TV ad only in the Chicago area touting his “pro-choice” views. The Personal PAC ad was designed to counter Rauner’s message.
Not long after, the Rauner-funded Illinois Republican Party countered the Personal PAC ad with a Chicago TV ad claiming that the pro-choice Mr. Rauner was for employer-funded birth control.Talk about your mixed messages on all sides.
You’ve got your Quinn-backing unions pushing an anti-union Libertarian because he’s pro-life and pro-gun, while giving even more money to Mr. Quinn, who is pro-choice and a major proponent of gun control.
You’ve got your Republican candidate claiming he’s pro-choice.
And you’ve got the almost totally Rauner-funded state GOP saying he’s for employer-funded birth control while spending big bucks (mostly Mr. Rauner’s) to warn rank and file Republicans against voting for a pro-gay marriage candidate from a pro-choice party.
Whew.
The Democrats were outraged, incensed even that Mr. Rauner would be so duplicitous. It was proof, they said, that Mr. Rauner was really anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage at heart.
The Democrats only said that in Chicago, of course.
The truth is they’ve been planning this all along. Folks at the very top of the Quinn campaign told me during the summer they were going to make trouble for Mr. Rauner with Downstate conservatives by pushing him as far to the left as they could in Chicago.
The Democrats’ close allies helped keep the pro-life, pro-gun Libertarian on the ballot when the Republicans tried to kick him off and then they funded his campaign in order to peel votes away from Rauner.
In other words, the Quinn campaign was behind what spies call a “false flag operation.” And Mr. Rauner funded two diametrically opposed advertising messages about abortion at the same time in an attempt to save his political neck.
I don’t know who will win the election. But I sure know who lost.
You.
* Meanwhile, this e-mail coming to light is probably not what you want to see when you’re on a major Downstate swing trying to gin up the conservative base…
From: Diana Rauner
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2014 4:04 PM
Subject: Bruce Rauner is pro-choice!Hi friends, so sorry to flood your inbox, but you know how committed I am to reproductive rights; and I can’t stand to sit by while Personal PAC unleashes yet another round of attacks against Bruce. Here are the facts:
Bruce has been one of the largest supporters of the ACLU Reproductive Rights Project for over 20 years. He has been a major supporter of Planned Parenthood both locally and nationally for a similar time, such that Cecile Richards told her local staff in Illinois earlier this year, “if I hear anything negative about Bruce Rauner my head will explode.”
Bruce has been unequivocal in his support for reproductive rights throughout a contentious Republican primary and publicly stated his support for reproductive rights in primary debates. He won the primary despite his pro-choice stance, in part by convincing pro-lifers to put aside their views on this issue in favor of economic ones.
Bruce has been in conversation with Personal PAC for over two years. Theirs was the only questionnaire that he has completed in this race, and the only question he got “wrong” was on parental notification. Bruce supports it– I don’t, but 75-80% of the population does, including a majority of people who consider themselves pro-choice.
Democrats are nervously counting on an enduring edge among female voters in most states to prevent a Republican rout in Tuesday’s elections. Yet so great is the uncertainty that even before the returns are in, some are second-guessing the party’s strategy of focusing more on issues like abortion and birth control than on jobs and the economy.
The danger for Democratic candidates is that their advantage among women could be so reduced by dissatisfaction with President Obama and the country’s course that it is not enough to offset Republicans’ usual edge among the smaller population of male voters. Should that happen, a party pollster, Geoff Garin, acknowledged, “They’ll lose.”
But he and other Democratic strategists professed optimism, however tempered, for the party’s imperiled Senate majority, among other things. Mr. Garin pointed to surveys of states with the most competitive Senate contests showing that on average Democratic candidates lead among women by about 12 points, while men favor the Republican by an average of nine points. Since women account for more than half the electorate, Democrats theoretically can withstand some erosion of support.
As for the party’s emphasis on women’s issues, he said, “If Democrats weren’t running on these issues, the situation would be much worse.” […]
“On balance, I am not convinced the Democrats will make sufficient inroads with white women to make up for the margin by which they are going to lose white men,” said Bill McInturff, a Republican pollster.
posted by Rich Miller
Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 2:40 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Early voting and GOTV
Next Post: Good morning!
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Rich, your column is incorrect on this point. Bruce Rauner was openly pro-choice from beginning to end. He said this to Greg Hinz back in June 2013: On abortion, “I support a woman’s ability to decide early in a pregnancy,” in consultation with her physician, family and others.” http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20130606/BLOGS02/130609882/rauners-views-on-guns-gays-abortion-taxes-and-more
Comment by anon Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 2:51 pm
There is nothing belated about his admission. Diana Rauner’s letter, however, is troubling for numerous reasons. 1 - if he cut a deal with pro-life leaders - what was the deal? 2 - so if he is playing these kind of games - no one really knows what his position is other than that he wants to win election. From both perspectives - whether you are a pro-choice-Democrat or a pro-life Republican, Rauner is not trustworthy on this issue.
Comment by anon Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 2:55 pm
The Rauners have indeed spread money around. In the end it is a zero sum game at best with right and left causes balancing out.
Comment by Uptown Progressive Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 2:59 pm
Did anybody ask the unborn child what HE OR SHE THINKS OF THIS? This is a human life here.
Comment by come judgement day Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 3:00 pm
you know what the problem is with the Rauner campaign? the do as we say not as we did approach. Diana, you cannot expect us to believe you when you have given over a million dollars to super conservative candidates and causes, you know, anti choice candidates and causes. It appears that Bruce, and you, are speaking one way to the public, and other ways in private. and you sure are moving money around to anti choice activities in private. also, when Cecile Richards speaks, we will listen. until then, stick to pretending you really care about reproductive choices. we see YOUR record, Diana. we are following the money.
Comment by Amalia Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 3:01 pm
I don’t know who will (missing win) the election. Typo aside, I agree, it’s been an ugly campaign. I don’t think we can ever go back to the “good ole days” if there was such a time.
Comment by AC Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 3:02 pm
Looks like Mitt’s look like a lib scheme has hit a wall. GOPies across the state are disgusted and won’t buy the guy
TTFN Mitt
Comment by circular firing squad Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 3:06 pm
“Dear Diana,
You’re not helping.
Signed,
Downstate, conservative, hard core, bedrock Republucans”
When the wife gets into it like this, the wheels are off the wagon. Englander has lost the reins of the stagecoach, it’s heading off a cliff, with Diana making the horses go faster.
Comment by Oswego Willy Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 3:06 pm
I think it is sad that Diana Rauner is challenging Terry Cosgrove’s integrity and commitment to reproductive rights when Terry has devoted his entire life to the cause. It is even more infuriating because Diana is deceptively claiming her husband is pro-choice when all of Bruce’s statements, actions and contribution clearly indicate a lack of commitment to reproductive rights. People who support reproductive rights and marriage equality for that matter should be angry.
Comment by Pro choice Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 3:12 pm
75th district is set to flip….http://www.chicagonow.com/chicago-political-commentary/2014/11/nothing-about-illinois-state-rep-john-d-anthony-adds-up/#.VFU73jTF-Xe
Comment by 75th district Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 3:15 pm
Willy gets it right again why can’t she just leave it alone
Comment by regular democrat Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 3:19 pm
Abortion is one of those issues where you can’t weasel-word and try to be all things to all people. You can change your mind, but you have to pick a side then take your lumps.
Regarding the column, the most shocking thing to me is that one guy could buy the Illinois Republican Party. — and on the cheap, too.
When did the wheels fall of the wagon there? When did Illinois business interests decide that they weren’t worth investing in anymore?
Comment by Wordslinger Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 3:46 pm
Diana and Bruce, leave the triangulating to the Clintons. you are not triangulating. You are just very, very trying.
Comment by Amalia Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 3:56 pm
I think this shows what a pro Raunervich is. When he talks to women’s groups he’s pro-choice. When he talks to conservatives, he’s pro-life. When he talks to progressives, he’s pro increase in the minimum wage. When he talks to his business buds, he’s pro eliminating the minimum wage. When he talks to those same tycoons, he’s for ending public employee defined benefit pensions. When he talks to retirees, he’s pro DOB pensions. Yessir, he’s a real pro.
Comment by Norseman Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 4:07 pm
“I’m Bruce Rauner and I approved this ad. And I approve of whatever you approve of.” Please vote for me. Please.
Comment by Macker Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 4:09 pm
Trying to be everything to everyone usually backfires . I guess in a couple of days we will see if it happens again, or if P.T. Barnum’s motto works out well for Rauner instead.
Comment by Roadiepig Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 4:10 pm
WSCR - the Score in Chicago, each time there is a commercial break there is an ad from Bruce. Each time. Funny that none of his pro-choice stands are talked about at all. On a mostly male audience I guess they don’t want to stress Diana’s points.
Bozo Bruce and the clowns are trying to have it every way. Not just both ways - every possible way. $30M or however much it’s been against an unpopular governor and they’re down to mailers attacking a Libertarian guy. Amazing.
The other point is that the economy is improving like crazy, again, job numbers that came out Thursday - was the 4th quarter in a row to show growth.
Comment by low level Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 4:18 pm
Wow seems the Rauner campaign has tanked, maybe he isn’t the smartest in the room, I think its over folks, when Quinn wins Tuesday hope we all can enjoy the most massive taxation possible without middle class relief, and the 2nd amendment will be challenged….again.. sheesh
Comment by railrat Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 4:27 pm
How you be a friend of Jack Roeser and Cecile Richards, you must be lying to one or both of them. But that is his MO- he can’t really tell the Truth and the Christians are beginning to realize that. If Roeser were alive, he would see through Rauner’s duplicity.
Comment by MIMI Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 4:39 pm
“Rauner posted ads in Chicago and the collar counties saying he’s pro-choice. Did he really think we wouldn’t find out?”
— Downstate
Comment by Wensicia Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 4:42 pm
@MIMI, right, pro choice Christians are seeing the duplicity.
Comment by Amalia Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 4:44 pm
Wensecia-Did he really think we wouldn’t find out?”
BR really doesn’t care what you think, all he cares about is that he can pull the wool over your eyes- Sociopathy 101
Comment by MIMI Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 4:48 pm
Amalia- any IL voter can see his duplicity- that the point he is rudderless- NO moral compass that’s why he can charge $1500 for a preeemie medications that cost $78 before he took over That’s why he uses pension to bear the liability of his companies. That is why he threatens his female CEO and tries to silence Dave McKinney. Say what you will about Grimmm and Quinn- they both have moral compasses- something Rauner lacks- and any thinking Christian has got to see that, it’s clear as a bell.
Comment by MIMI Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 4:54 pm
Rich -
Several have claimed that Rauner was telling folks during the primary that he was “personally pro-life.”
Which seems to greatly contradict his wife’s letter.
Someone is being untruthful here.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 5:00 pm
Rich, Did Munger’s campaign reveal carol sente’s secret partner on October 31 as they promised they would?
Comment by Curious Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 5:08 pm
And I don’t know that I would characterize Grimm’s candidacy as a “false flag” operation. The operating engineers were pretty transparent that they were supporting Grimm because they wanted Rauner to lose.
Being anti-Rauner is a legitimate political aim. It sends a message to all future Republican statewide candidates that trying to run to the right of Scott Walker on the union issue doesn’t work in Illinois.
Does Quinn benefit? Sure. But that’s Rauner’s fault, and his campaigns. He is a self-funder. He didn’t have to rail against unions to raise money, and if you look back it probably hurt him more than it helped in the primary. He certainly didn’t have to run 50 yards to the right of Dillard and Rutherford to win.
And I agree with Caprio. Pick your lane and take your lumps.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 5:13 pm
===How you be a friend of Jack Roeser and Cecile Richards, you must be lying to one or both of them.===
I’m friends with plenty of people who do not share my political views. Am I doing something wrong here? Does that make me a hypocrite?
Just wondering. The logic of “Rauner gives money to or hangs out with those who do not totally agree with his position, thus that makes him a hypocrite x 1,000″ still escapes me.
Comment by Louis G Atsaves Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 5:28 pm
===“Rauner posted ads in Chicago and the collar counties saying he’s pro-choice. Did he really think we wouldn’t find out?”
— Downstate===
===- MIMI - Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 4:48 pm:
….BR really doesn’t care what you think, all he cares about is that he can pull the wool over your eyes- Sociopathy 101===
He is a sociopath. A number of folks have noticed.
Rauner chose to continuously, shamelessly and even needlessly lie, and to ignore facts and truth. He even would lie when it was unnecessary, gratuitous and he was taking a great risk for little benefit:
Rauner’s attack on Quinn is a crime against truth
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2014-03-05/opinion/ct-rauner-quinn-crime-chicago-primaryoped-0305-zor-20140305_1_crime-rate-bruce-rauner-gun-ownership
Comment by Mighty M. Mouse Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 5:29 pm
Earlier today, reading articles at Illinois review, I was somewhat surprised at the vitriol directed towards rauner in the comments section. I assumed some of the christian conservatives would refuse to vote for him over this issue but if those comments are at all reflective of the majority, this issue could well cost him the election. I figured they would hold their noses and vote for him, but they don’t seem to appreciate the full throated “He’s Pro-Choice” litany from Bruce and wife.
Also, seeing OW’s buddy Lou Atsaves arguing with Laurie Higgins over the definition of “insane” in the comments section is totally worth wading through the crazy.
Comment by Lester Holt's Mustache Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 5:35 pm
MIMI - Really, Roeser knew what Rauner was and he was hoping to finally have a seat at the table. He and his people happily helped deceive their “pro-family” membership. Roeser was as deceitful as Rauner. That’s why this is biting Rauner with pro-choice leaders.
Comment by anon Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 5:35 pm
I’ve always been skeptical of pro-choice Republicans, especially those who are members of a legislative body. Because even though they claim to be pro-choice, they usually have no problem voting to elect pro-life party leaders in their caucuses.
Comment by Anonymous Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 5:36 pm
Rauner is many things, but he’s not a sociopath. All of his actions are the result of political calculations. (unless you want to label politics sociopathic)
Comment by Wensicia Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 5:37 pm
Lester Holt:
Many pro-life voters will vote for a pro-choice Democrat before they will vote for a Republican who tried to pass themselves off as pro-life when they are really pro-choice.
By pretending to be pro-life, Rauner has mock those with conviction. Quinn at least respectfully disagrees.
And if liberal leaning democrats and independents had any doubts, the mailer attacking Grimm ought to quell them.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 5:42 pm
How do you equate the two candidates? Who did Quinn tell he was against abortion? And which pro-life groups did Quinn give money to?
Rauner is a hedge fund master who hedged too much on abortion
Diane Rauner is wrong. Her husband is a politician, just not a very good one.
Comment by Anonymous Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 5:50 pm
VOTE QUINN OUT YES / HE AND CONVICT ROD BLAGO
+ GOOD FRIEND JAY DO NOTHING HOFFMAN
HAVE RAN THE STATE OF ILLINOIS INTO THE GROUND
HURT IDOT AND CLAIM THEY CARE / WHAT A JOKE
WAKE UP VOTERS NOW !!!!
Comment by Anonymous Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 5:51 pm
YDD - the comments section at IR definitely confirms your statement, though I wonder if that is just the most commited of the pro-lifers or a majority of them. The few that I know personally claim (at least to me) that ousting Quinn is worth voting for Bruce.
Comment by Lester Holt's Mustache Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 5:56 pm
By pretending to be pro-life, Rauner has mock those with conviction. Quinn at least respectfully disagrees.
BINGO- that is precisely the point= NO MORAL COMPASS, say what you will about Grimm and Quinn- they don’t lie to you in your face
Comment by MIMI Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 5:56 pm
@MIMI 4:54 The way I read the article, not only did GTRC buy one drug and ramp the price, but they also bought the only other competing drug and did the same. If I read correctly, it’s a double-down on sick.
Comment by just got to say this Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 6:07 pm
That cogent and well reasoned comment from Anonymous has convinced me to vote for Bruce. NOT
Comment by West Side the Best Side Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 6:11 pm
Anonymous @ 5:51 :
CAN I FIND YOU AT IDOT BY FOLLOWING THE SCREAMING NOISES?
Comment by Lester Holt's Mustache Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 6:22 pm
Thanks Mimi.
On the flip side, this is the way liberal Democrats feel when a candidate professes to be a “reformer” and then you find out he actually in the tank.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 6:23 pm
How is it possible to be pro-life and Libertarian?
Libertarians want government out of everything.
Except for women’s nether regions?
Comment by Matt P. Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 6:29 pm
===Rauner is many things, but he’s not a sociopath. All of his actions are the result of political calculations. (unless you want to label politics sociopathic)===
You’re entitled to your opinion but I completely disagree. Rauner reminds me of an old article I read called “How to Spot the Office Psychopath”, in which the author Henry Lloyd-Roberts concludes:
“. . . These ‘qualities’ are fundamental in helping them [psychopaths] climb the corporate ladder: They can be manipulative, arrogant, callous, impatient, impulsive, unreliable, superficially charming and susceptible to flying into rages. Further redeeming features include a fondness for breaking promises and blaming colleagues when things go wrong. It is their single-minded focus, however, that helps them to achieve their corporate goals.”
I have other reasons but there’s just a paragraph.
Comment by Mighty M. Mouse Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 6:49 pm
Well, Matt P., it’s possible by having the same duplicitous worldview as Republicans who claim to be conservative but are anti-choice. Or who claim to be pro-life but cut out both sex ed and the safety net.
That’s why some pro-lifers would rather support an honest pro-choice Dem than a fake pro-life Republican: fewer abortions, meaningful choices, less suffering.
Comment by crazybleedingheart Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 6:52 pm
I wonder how many friends Diana will find she has after her husband loses this election. We’ve certainly learned a lot about how flexible her own beliefs are and who she’s willing to go to bat for.
Not at all sure it’s poor kids.
Comment by crazybleedingheart Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 6:54 pm
Matt P:
How about the anti-corruption, anti-union, anti-pension guy who made his fortune wheedling insider deals to manage the pension investments of union members?
I have long said that the ability to hold to completely contradictory beliefs equally is what separates humanity from lower forms of intelligence.
But, there are limits to how many contradictory positions we will allow our elected leaders to hold. We would like them to be somewhat predictable.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 7:10 pm
Regarding abortion, Rauner was against it before he was for it before he was against it. After he met Diana he definitely was for it but after he met with Roser he was against it. He still has time to switch a few more times before tues
Comment by low level Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 7:12 pm
….and, there is a difference between holding two contradictory positions AND telling people you hold one position in Chicago and the opposite position in Effingham.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 7:12 pm
Then Genius Englander will explain it all by blaming/threatening any reporter who dares mention this bizarre Flip flop flop by having them fired.
Comment by low level Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 7:17 pm
Corinne Wood received many death threats during the 2002 primary, because she ran as a pro-choice Republucan. In fact that entire primary was an 8 month argument about abortion. She too self-funded and overspent, to come in third. Not saying she didn’t have other issues, but this was a highly available history lesson there for the taking.
Comment by Redux Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 7:34 pm
The problem with Rauner is that most of what we know about him is based on what his campaign pros have put out. He has chosen to remain mostly hidden behind that.
The only thing we know for sure about his own psyche is that he is ambitious. Let’s not pretend do diagnose based on a public persona that others have created for him.
And yes, campaign staffs behave with a sort of sociopathy in order to win. Part of the ugliness of that career choice.
Comment by walker Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 8:09 pm
Walk, I think Rauner’’s biggest problem is most of what we know about him comes from Quinn’s campaign.
Rauner defined himself as a regular guy with a cheap watch and a junk van. It was ridiculous on many levels, including the “b.s.” and “who cares” levels. Didnt work.
He left a blank slate on his entire business career, even though he was running as a “successful” businessman. And Quinn was more than happy to fill in that blank slate.
Rauner has been on TV for more than a year, and there has not been one spot featuring a business partner or a former employee saying anything good about him or his life’s work.
The dude couldn’t even name a successful company he’d invested in.
It’s mind-boggling. How could it happen?
But it left Quinn a gapin
Comment by Wordslinger Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 8:45 pm
Well said Word! Although I thought there was an employee in a rebuttal ad in the primary. But then again, I’m fuzzy on all the commercials we’ve seen.
Comment by Norseman Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 8:57 pm
The reality of the Diana Rauner letter?
Diana readily admits distortion and clarification …
…on an issue, she herself, said Bruce Rauner has NO agenda on.
That is real.
That makes her, and the messaging, and the campaigns falsehoods come to the limelight.
Stagecoach. Wheels. Fall off. Horses go faster.
Comment by Oswego Willy Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 9:00 pm
Yep, plenty if mixed messages, which is why this registered GOP voter / NRA member who should be supporting Rauner is voting for Quinn. At least I know that Quinn has done, pretty much where he stands, and have a fair idea of where he wants to go … and I’ll count on the courts to reign in any D overreach on pensions and guns.
Comment by RNUG Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 9:14 pm
===Yep, plenty if mixed messages, which is why this registered GOP voter / NRA member who should be supporting Rauner is voting for Quinn.===
My neighbor told that to me.
One voter, not a sample, but eerie he said that exact thing to me while outside.
Comment by Oswego Willy Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 9:17 pm
- Lester Holt’s Mustache FTW
Comment by Roadiepig Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 9:23 pm
RNUG and OW… long lost neighbors!
Rauner’s problems with the unions are huge. Whole moderate republican families will be out there voting for Quinn. Atleast I personally know 4. Then there are the Cat retirees, most of them repubs, ain’t voting for Rauner. I have never known so many people that would not vote for a horrible candidate like Rauner but would vote for a horrible candidate like Oberweis….
Comment by Ducky LaMoore Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 9:40 pm
===Bruce has been in conversation with Personal PAC for over two years. Theirs was the only questionnaire that he has completed in this race===
What a couple of bullies both of the Rauner’s are.
It’s UNBELIEVABLE that ALL of the various groups that have questionnaires meekly submitted to this treatment and silently accepted it! Total wimps.
But not Cecile Richards!!! I heard she released a letter a couple of hours ago supporting Pat Quinn!
But maybe you’all don’t believe that Diana Rauner is just as tough a bully as Bruce. Yet out of all the advisors in Rauner’s campaign, who appears to have decided to make this election about abortion?
I also heard that people are slapping “pro-choice” stickers on Rauner signs, and I don’t mean in Cook or the collar counties. I mean in the hinterlands.
I don’t know who. I don’t think it’s a compliment.
But thanks for trying. Keep on keepin’ on, love ya!
Comment by Mighty M. Mouse Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 10:03 pm
- Ducky LaMoore -,
Nah. It’s the message at the end that Rauner is trying to stop from reconciling;
Regular GOP voters, 2 or 3 “R ” Primary Ballot voters, who are NRA members…are not with Rauner, and they should be.
It’s the Cake, that’s not baking.
Comment by Oswego Willy Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 10:10 pm
“You know me …[I’m Pat Quinn}.” vs. Bruce the myth and enigma Rauner. R’s for Quinn.
Comment by Samurai Saturday, Nov 1, 14 @ 10:29 pm
OW … that is eerie, since I know we’re separated by close to two hundred miles. Otherwise I’d have you over for an adult beverage or two.
But I’m not totally sure Quinn’s base is all that solid either. My mother-in-law, who I would have counted a rock solid D (retiree with a tiny state pension), confessed to me the other night she wasn’t sure who to vote for in the Gov race and asked what I thought. All the negative ads have soured people on both sides.
It won’t be for Rauner, but I’m expecting to be at one lower level R victory party Tuesday night.
Comment by RNUG Sunday, Nov 2, 14 @ 12:44 am
RNUG, Rauner still might win, but if he doesn’t , the Illinois GOP needs to check into Betty Ford and sober up, because they will have hit rock bottom.
The idea that you could beat twice by Blago, then twice by Pat Quinn , is the equivalent of waking up iin some flophouse in a bathtub full of ice with a kidney missing.
Time for some reflection, and changes.
Blago was a sociopath, but the GOP couldn’t beat him.
Quinn is an honest, but profoundly unpopular, guy in many circles, who has had to make brutal , but responsible, choices in the wake of the catastrophic loss of individual wealth that occurred when the bubble burst.
But he’s never been an electoral juggernaut.
I hope Rauner loses. He’s a navel-gazing phony, a paper-shuffling conman, who just wants the gig, like he wants a Manhattan penthouse with a moat.
I’ve worked my ass off all my life in Illinois. It’s been a hump, one g-d rhing after another, but that’s life anywhere.,
My folks immigrated here and helped build this state. I guarantee you that my kids and their friends are going to blow your doors off, because they are that that smart, that tough and unlike John Kass and certain editorial boards, they aren’t sellouts or scared of N-E-THANG.
So when some cheap huslter comes selling himself as a messiah to a land “without hope, without possibilities,” I get offended. And I have only two words.
If you’re guessing, either “you” or “off” are acceptable for the second word.
Comment by Wordslinger Sunday, Nov 2, 14 @ 2:42 am
“So when some cheap huslter comes selling himself as a messiah to a land “without hope, without possibilities,” I get offended.”
Well said, as usual,Word. Agree completely.
Comment by low level Sunday, Nov 2, 14 @ 3:06 am
I really find it highly inappropriate that Terry Cosgrove is a salaried appointee of Pat Quinn while still running Personal Pac (where he also earns a healthy salary).
Cosgrove ought to choose between his state appointment or Personal Pac. It looks like a conflict of interest.
Comment by Under Further Review Sunday, Nov 2, 14 @ 8:16 am
How does Bruce feel about Employer Funded Erectile Dysfunction products? They help to impregnate women. Wouldnt eliminating these products reduce the number of Abortions?
Comment by Del Clinkton Sunday, Nov 2, 14 @ 8:47 am
The one person who we never heard from during this “interesting” gubernatorial campaign was Bruce Rauner’s ex-wife. We would have found interesting her thoughts as to whether she believed Bruce had a “working” moral compass and the intellectual makeup needed to be an excellent governor for Illinois in the state’s current crisis. These ex-spouses are swept under a rug and the lazy or biased media fails to bother to seek their opinions.
An ex-spouse often gives a much deeper and truthful insight into the character of the political candidate. Pat Quinn’s ex-spouse might also be worth asking for her thoughts and opinions on her ex-husband.
Comment by Coffee Cup Sunday, Nov 2, 14 @ 8:59 am
Great column Rich. Really nailed it. And as I’ve told friends for a long time, Rauner is pro-choice. Any attempt to suggest otherwise was just a flat-out lie in an attempt to deceive people like Jack Roeser.
Comment by Cronus Guy Sunday, Nov 2, 14 @ 9:14 am
Word says exactly how I feel. Rauner made billions destroying companies and the careers of thousands of people. He has zero experience in government and is obviously ignorant of what the Governor’s role is. He throws ads out proclaiming people who live in Illinois have no hope for their future, but if he’s elected he will save us. Save us from who? He and his ilk are the reason for most the economic issues facing this state. He’s a tool and I wouldn’t vote for him if he was the only one running.
Comment by Macker Sunday, Nov 2, 14 @ 9:25 am
Coffee Cup,
Thank God there is no there there, or you would have heard about it by now and Alan Keyes would be wrapping up the race in Rauner’s stead.
We are better off with the race we have, as unlikely as that sounds.
Comment by Carroll County Sunday, Nov 2, 14 @ 10:22 am
Abortion certainly has become the issue in the 10th.
Schneider has a new spot that features a group of women (actors) going back and forth on the phone about Dold, Republicans and reproductive rights.
Dold has an excellent spot that directly references and rebuts Schneider’s “rug” spot. Very clever and well done.
Comment by Wordslinger Sunday, Nov 2, 14 @ 10:24 am
Some people who contribute money to the Ounce of Prevention and don’t know Diana personally are receiving political emails from her. If she is using Ounce resources to campaign, that is not only illegal but the Ounce could lose its non-profit status.
Comment by Watching Rauner Sunday, Nov 2, 14 @ 10:33 am
Ok So through out the campaign, Rauner’s guys have said they were not filling out any questionaires. And so he got a “?” from NRA for not filling out the survey. A first in my career for an Illinois Gov.
lots of gun owners are not happy. They dislike Quinn but Rauner has given them nothing but a trust me and some vague statement about not supporting a semi-auto ban.
No now it comes out, that he did fill out a survey. After telling everyone under the sun his campaign was not filling out any. And its for a left of center group.
And people wonder why he can’t put this thing away and is havingtrouble downstate where Quinn was liked by what 26% of the people at the end of session.
congrats guys you blew it. And if you do mange to find enough voters who think they are willing to try something new, it will becuase they are so fed up, not your brillant strategy. as I have said for months — inspite of himself not becuase of himself
Comment by Todd Sunday, Nov 2, 14 @ 10:57 am
===congrats guys you blew it. And if you do mange to find enough voters who think they are willing to try something new, it will becuase they are so fed up, not your brillant strategy. as I have said for months — inspite of himself not becuase of himself===
That is sunshine, being shined on the truth, of the Rauner “plan”…and…what has happened all these months, and how the result is in spite of themselves, win or lose.
That is real.
Comment by Oswego Willy Sunday, Nov 2, 14 @ 11:04 am
Word: I agree with you on what gaping holes Rauner left in his campaign, that Quinn could forcefully fill. My complaint was simply against those who think they can diagnose some psychological malady from that kind of information.
My biggest disgust with Rauner and allies, as you probably have noted by now, is that they continually tear down Illinois to win. This is a great state, recovering now, and still situated to have a great future. Hardly a “state hopeless and without possibilities” as Rauner personally called it.
Comment by walker Sunday, Nov 2, 14 @ 12:39 pm
Maybe Rauner needs another closer ad. Instead of “I’m not a witch” he could say “I’m not a psychopath.”
Comment by DuPage Mama Sunday, Nov 2, 14 @ 1:41 pm
===The one person who we never heard from during this “interesting” gubernatorial campaign was Bruce Rauner’s ex-wife.===
I would expect she has a financial interest in keeping her mouth shut. Besides, she might have good reason to believe Rauner can be vindictive. Possibly she watches television or surfs the web.
===Some people who contribute money to the Ounce of Prevention and don’t know Diana personally are receiving political emails from her.===
I’ve heard that several folks are saying that too.
===Blago was a sociopath, but the GOP couldn’t beat him.===
===Word: I agree with you on what gaping holes Rauner left in his campaign, that Quinn could forcefully fill. My complaint was simply against those who think they can diagnose some psychological malady from that kind of information.===
I agree Blago is a sociopath and I think the same can accurately be said about Rauner.
My analysis is absolutely not at all based in the slightest on “that kind of information,” which is an empty phrase devoid of content. However, I must admit that that phrase IS perfectly suited for the defense of Bruce Rauner, phony and no there there.
Comment by Mighty M. Mouse Sunday, Nov 2, 14 @ 5:03 pm
Mighty Mouse: We probably agree on most issues, and are clearly on the same side in this race. Best wishes to both of us on Tuesday.
Sorry, I just don’t like loosely throwing around terms of real illnesses that people suffer from.
Comment by walker Sunday, Nov 2, 14 @ 8:02 pm