Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: The rest of the story
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Gonzales trumpets Tribune endorsement
Posted in:
* I’m excerpting way too much of this David Brooks column, but for good reason…
We live in a big, diverse society. There are essentially two ways to maintain order and get things done in such a society — politics or some form of dictatorship. Either through compromise or brute force. Our founding fathers chose politics.
Politics is an activity in which you recognize the simultaneous existence of different groups, interests and opinions. You try to find some way to balance or reconcile or compromise those interests, or at least a majority of them. You follow a set of rules, enshrined in a constitution or in custom, to help you reach these compromises in a way everybody considers legitimate.
The downside of politics is that people never really get everything they want. It’s messy, limited and no issue is ever really settled. Politics is a muddled activity in which people have to recognize restraints and settle for less than they want. Disappointment is normal.
But that’s sort of the beauty of politics, too. It involves an endless conversation in which we learn about other people and see things from their vantage point and try to balance their needs against our own. Plus, it’s better than the alternative: rule by some authoritarian tyrant who tries to govern by clobbering everyone in his way.
As Bernard Crick wrote in his book, “In Defence of Politics,” “Politics is a way of ruling divided societies without undue violence.”
Over the past generation we have seen the rise of a group of people who are against politics. These groups — best exemplified by the Tea Party but not exclusive to the right — want to elect people who have no political experience. They want “outsiders.” They delegitimize compromise and deal-making. They’re willing to trample the customs and rules that give legitimacy to legislative decision-making if it helps them gain power.
Ultimately, they don’t recognize other people. They suffer from a form of political narcissism, in which they don’t accept the legitimacy of other interests and opinions. They don’t recognize restraints. They want total victories for themselves and their doctrine.
This antipolitics tendency has had a wretched effect on our democracy. It has led to a series of overlapping downward spirals:
The antipolitics people elect legislators who have no political skills or experience. That incompetence leads to dysfunctional government, which leads to more disgust with government, which leads to a demand for even more outsiders.
Several Illinoisans sent me that column over the weekend, and it wasn’t because of Donald Trump.
* Related…
* Greg Hinz: How Trump and Rauner are alike
Actually, that headline is misleading and apparently designed as click bait. Here’s what Greg wrote…
Given such realities, it’s not hard to explain why people will turn to crisp, simple answers and tough-talking, self-financed, little-understood Type A business titans who declare they know the formula to restore past glory.
No, I’m not talking about Gov. Bruce Rauner, though some similarities definitely exist. Rather, my target is Trump, and to a lesser degree Vermont’s Bernie “I’ll make everything free” Sanders.
* For the record, I just want to make it super clear that in no way do I believe that our governor is a racist or a misogynist. I do not believe that the two men are peas in a pod. Rauner went out of his way to court African-Americans and Latinos. He did very well with suburban soccer moms, partly as a result of his eagerness to attract minority support, partly because he’s pro-choice. I’m betting that Trump won’t do nearly as well in a general election here as Rauner did.
But, despite their very real and very important differences, the comparison between the wealthy Republican men is just too easy to make for many folks and it’s starting to pick up a little bit of steam on social media as the presidential candidates begin converging on Illinois.
…Adding… It’s not just coming from Trump/Rauner critics. From Talk of the County…
Team Trump, Rauner
The people making negative comments about Donald Trump and Gov. Bruce Rauner need to wake up. It’s our chance to straighten out this country and this state. Rauner is holding back because every year the Democrats have raised taxes so they can run the state any way they want. They work for us and it’s our tax money but unfortunately our state representatives are doing whatever they please.
And…
Hated by progressives billionaire Gov. Bruce Rauner of Illinois is making tough choices to save the state. Reminds me of Trump
— Kern (@SoybeanMaster) February 28, 2016
*** UPDATE *** From the twitters…
.@GovRauner won't comment on Trump or 2016 Race but says there is "no place" for KKK/racism in America #twill
— Politics Tonight (@PoliticsTonight) February 29, 2016
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:04 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: The rest of the story
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Gonzales trumpets Tribune endorsement
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Trump’s claim that he’s somehow going to a build a wall on the southern border and make somebody else pay for it does remind me of Rauner’s claim that he will miraculously make the Speaker agree to union-busting legislation.
Both have a great appeal to people looking for simple solutions, but neither has a chance in “heck” of happening.
Comment by Gooner Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:08 am
Adding “For the record” disclaimers at the end of a post like that is like saying “With all due respect” before an insult. It’s meaningless.
Comment by Watchman Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:16 am
This is spot-on. I agree with you that the Governor and Donald Trump are not peas in a pod. They do, however, share a glaring trait - the kind of political illiteracy that David Brooks is writing about in that column. Political illiteracy when combined with large amounts of money equals trouble. The “aha” moment for me regarding the Governor was that picture in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin that showed Rauner holding his completed ballot regarding judge’s running for retention. Rauner had marked no for every single judge. This is a sample of his knee jerk illiteracy and like many of this type, he is proud of his ignorance. This quote sums up the type well:
The worst illiterate is the political illiterate, he doesn’t hear, doesn’t speak, nor participates in the political events. He doesn’t know the cost of life, the price of the bean, of the fish, of the flour, of the rent, of the shoes and of the medicine, all depends on political decisions. The political illiterate is so stupid that he is proud and swells his chest saying that he hates politics. The imbecile doesn’t know that, from his political ignorance is born the prostitute, the abandoned child, and the worst thieves of all, the bad politician, corrupted and flunky of the national and multinational companies.”
Bertolt Brecht, the 20th century German playwright and poet.
Comment by paddyrollingstone Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:16 am
“racist or a misogynist”
I takes this to mean you assign these labels to Donald Trump?
Comment by Saluki Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:18 am
The way a candidate approaches a campaign, reaching out to and convincing blocks of voters such as women or African-Americans or Latinos, in no way defines either their core personality or their governance. In short, campaigns are testimony and governance is evidence.
And with all due respect, the evidence is that, while technically not a misogynist nor a racist in their every, despicable aspect, Rauner is more a racist and misogynist than any other Governor of Illinois in the past 62 years. His policy decisions directly and adversely affect women and all people of color in favor of a very few, exclusively male, white individuals. I’m not sure if it is any better that Rauner is not an overt racist and misogynist like Trump. Is a wolf in sheep’s clothing preferable to an easily recognizable lupine predator? While it may make no difference to those among the flock that are paying attention, wolf-junkies as opposed to political junkies, for the majority of the flock, or in this case the electorate, it makes a huge and often fatal difference. For my money, give me the overt, give me the liar as opposed to the teller of half-truths. At least the former knows where the truth exists. The teller of half-truths, the veiled racist/misogynist has forgotten where he placed the truth in the first place. Evidence always, ALWAYS, trumps testimony.
Comment by Springfieldish Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:20 am
Memes are okay when the point is to be funny or joke around with friends. Memes that are used as political statements or fodder are just gasoline on a tire fire.
Comment by Team Sleep Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:21 am
For these anti politics candidates and their supporters it’s all about winning and enforcing their narrow minded objectives. They’ll refuse any compromise. Which sets up a vicious cycle where nothing gets done and the anger intensifies.
Yet, they’re winning because their views, none other, are always just.
Comment by Wensicia Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:26 am
For the first time since ISU opened in 1857, the state of Illinois is not appropriating any money for higher education.
That’s shakin’ things up.
The governor claimed that he vetoed all those appropriation bills because they were out of balance.
It’s true, they were. But his actions led to much higher deficits, literally out-of-control spending in some areas of state government without limiting appropriation bills.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:27 am
I think there is more comparison between Madigan and Rauner. They disagree but they are operating very much in the same way (something that was very well displayed in today’s capfax).
Also, something not mentioned in the Brooks article is how the political map making process has brought about much of our political mess. Both parties if they are in power use our 21st century data to rig the elections in their favor. Our legislative districts have just became a large echo chamber for each party.
Comment by Ahoy! Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:32 am
‘Bernie “I’ll make everything free” Sanders’
Gee, I can’t understand why a dismissal of liberal policies in such a simple, easy to understand yet completely incorrect and ignorant way could possibly lead to the rise of the tea party. Oy….
Comment by Ducky LaMoore Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:33 am
Meh. I’m not sure Trump would be worried about comparison’s to Rauner in Illinois. If either side thinks Trump has a shot at winning Illinois, then the BIG problem is not Trumps.
Comment by Downstate Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:33 am
Testimony IS evidence. What are you trying to say? They are not two separate things. The jurors (or judge) will weigh said testimony accordingly.
Comment by Perry Masonic Temple Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:39 am
Read that yesterday…I usually can’t stand Brooks, but I think he nails it there. I am revolted by “I am not a politician” in a stump speech, as much by the thought of the people lapping it up as the candidate’s own hypocrisy.
Comment by Threepwood Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:40 am
Liberals think they’re enlightened when they do the exact same thing. It applies to both sides of extreme.
Comment by Liberty Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:43 am
@Liberty
That’s a pretty funny name for someone telling me what I think.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:46 am
Frustration with longstanding government servants/career politicians is a common thread.
But at the GOP Presidential debates, Trump has been criticized by his opponents for being too willing to cut a deal with democrats. That doesn’t sound like Rauner.
Comment by Robert the Bruce Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:46 am
At the risk of incurring the wrath of the usual crowd, I’d take a different view of who is compromising here. Rich has said it time and again, Rauner has said he will compromise. Madigan has not.
Comment by phocion Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:48 am
Yikes, what a load of incoherent babble from a writer I usually find insightful. If all you’ve taken from the Bernie Sanders campaign is “I’ll make everything free,” you simply haven’t been paying attention. And how is it free if we’re paying for it?
Comment by Johnny Pyle Driver Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:48 am
Both are given to hyperbole.
Comment by Gordon Willis Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:51 am
Again, gang, shifting gears…I am not so certain Rauner is on opposite sides of some Democrats (let’s make up a name: Rahm Emanuel) who have not always been pro-union. That’s about as passive-voice as I can make it.
Comment by Perry Masonic Temple Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:52 am
- phocion -
@RonSandack: I’m frustrated 2, but taking steps towards reforming IL more important than short term budget stalemate. - Ron Sandack, 9/28/15
Kinda-sorta blows your whole “Because Madigan!” thingy out of the water.
And please, don’t portray your self as a victim of the “usual crowd”, be better than that.
Thank you.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:54 am
== Rich has said it time and again, Rauner has said he will compromise. Madigan has not.==
Entering earth’s orbit after throwing a slew of non-starter proposals from outer space is not compromising.
I can compromise all day long on stuff that was never going to become law and say its “compromising”. It doesn’t make it so. And Madigan has said that we would compromise on DCEO, workers comp, and property taxes.
He’s just not willing to give up the farm for a tax increase that anyone who can add knows is a necessity and not a bargaining chip.
Comment by Abe the Babe Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:54 am
What Johnny Pyle Driver said!
Comment by NoGifts Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 11:58 am
Believe it or not Rich there is an academic field of study called memetics, there is even a Journal of Memetics with the required incomprehensible articles. There are at least two schools of thought on memetics – the gene-like view and the virus-like view on how ideas, or behaviors, or styles spread from person to person within a culture. In my opinion, the issue whether or not Governor Rauner shares any racist or a misogynist perspectives with Mr. Trump is irrelevant to how the idea of non-traditionalist no or minimal compromise politics has spread in our country and in Illinois.
Governor Rauner’s acquisition of the no compromise perspective is clearly gene based and comes from his own successful experience in the business world. Similarly Mr. Trump has had success with such high stakes minimalist compromise posturing in his business ventures. I think in both the case of Trump and Rauner it’s not an evolution of Tea Party politics, but rather the Tea Party types jumping on in support of a very traditional minimalist compromise perspective coming out of the business world. A world where after all there will be another deal to be had tomorrow so why pay up or compromise on an offer.
Comment by Rod Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 12:00 pm
PMT - Read some jury instructions sometimes. Testimonial evidence does not overcome direct evidence like photographs, scientific testing, or, in the case of a discrimination case, direct or verifiable results. Testimony can be tempered by bias, interest and motive while direct evidence cannot, except to the extent that the actual testing or tester can be scrutinized.
So, the import of what you’re saying is that you BELIEVE Rauner when he SAYS he’s not anti-union, when all the EVIDENCE is to the contrary? Okay fine.
Comment by Springfieldish Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 12:00 pm
Perhaps if the whole country wasn’t forcibly squeezed into a two-party system, more voices would feel they were heard.
Comment by Shemp Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 12:03 pm
I don’t think Rauner and Trump bear any resemblance whatsoever, though I do believe that Rauner is of the model described by Brooks. He represents the “hostage taking” “anti-politics.” Trump is a phenomenon of his own. He’s seemingly neither conservative nor liberal, or both if it suits him at the moment. He has won handily despite have almost no clear, coherent policy on any subject. The closest he comes is his tax policy which would cut taxes for everybody and yet somehow not add to the deficit. And building a wall that somehow he’ll make Mexico pay for. Everything else seems to change on a whim as it fits whatever audience to whom he’s pandering
Comment by Johnny Pyle Driver Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 12:05 pm
Phocion, saying “I will stop destroying higher education and the social service infrastructure if you join me in destroying unions” might be viewed as a “compromise” by you, but perhaps not everyone.
Some view it as an unprecedented and illegitimate abuse of power.
Candidate Rauner recognized that, which explains why he gave no inkling as to his true intentions during the campaign.
Let me ask you something: if Pat Quinn had refused to fund higher education and social services unless a millionaire’s surtax and a $15 minimum wage were passed by the GA, would you consider that a “willingness to compromise,” a legitimate use of power?
I support both of those things, and I would not.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 12:05 pm
Rich,
I actually see quite a difference between Rauner and Trump. Trump promises to be a deal-maker and about half of his program is classically Democratic. While anti-politician, he is not deeply against politics per se.
Rauner is in the radically libertarian “burn the house down,” Republican camp, closer to Ted Cruz than to Donald Trump. He is in the “shut down the government” or “Threaten default to get your way” camp. That is Rauner’s over strategy here. It’s not a deep read. But for instance Trump does not seem interested in “entitlement reform.” Something akin to “entitlement reform” is at the heart of Rauner’s and Cruz’s whole agenda. It stems from the widely shared Republican perception that government, and with it politics, are not just the root of all evil, they are in essence evil, (a threat to “liberty” or whatever.)
Ironically, Trump may be the last politician left in the Republican Party. The rest of the Republican Party has given itself over to even more bizarre fantasies than his fantasy of a wall paid for by Mexico! Hey, if tax cuts can deliver balanced budges, Mexico can pay for the wall. Equally goofy ideas.
Comment by History Prof Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 12:07 pm
==The antipolitics people elect legislators who have no political skills or experience. That incompetence leads to dysfunctional government==
Illinois doesn’t elect ==nobody nobody sent==. Many of our legislators and constitutional officers are political vets or lifers with years of experience.
If ==competence== means passing unbalanced budgets and charging $100 Bill to your kids so you can avoid unpopular decisions, Mr Brooks nails it.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 12:11 pm
Who cares if Rauner is not racist? His policies are impacting women and minorities in a dissaportionate manner.
Comment by common sense Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 12:12 pm
One more criticism of the Hinz article. It’s hard to follow as he just sort of jumps from one vague linkage to another. I’m ok with his linking Trump and Sanders by one of the sources of frustration for voters: the hollowing out of the middle class. Where everything falls to incoherence is when he tries to link Sanders’ popularity with “crisp simple answers” and “tough talking, self-financed, little understood Type A business titans.”
Obviously Sanders is not a tough talking self-financed little understood Type A business titan.
But neither is he peddling crisp, simple answers. He has what you call a worldview. It may be hard to comprehend what a worldview is given the pandering nature of our political system, but having a coherent worldview is actually attractive to a lot of voters. I detested much of what Ron Paul stood for, but I campaigned for him because he had a consistent worldview. You didn’t have to try to twist yourself into knots to justify the wildly contradictory positions on issues that arise when a candidate only stands for the position that gets him the most support at the moment.
Far from an “obsession” (as I’ve seen it written elsewhere), Sanders possesses a worldview. In his worldview, the obscenely rich have rigged the electoral process and the business environment for their own benefit, and therefore, his platform involves wresting control back from them for the people. Disagree with it, I don’t care. But that’s where he stands, and you can infer lots of things logically from there. It’s not simplistic, it’s holistic.
Comment by Johnny Pyle Driver Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 12:15 pm
Apart from the desire of many to make a comparison, I see little to compare between Donald Trump and Governor Rauner. The Governor is a Gold Coast conservative, to be sure. But, he is no Citizen Kane, my closest fit to Trump.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 12:27 pm
Sorry, the Citizen Kane reference was mine.
Comment by Keyser Soze Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 12:30 pm
==I takes this to mean you assign these labels to Donald Trump?==
I don’t care much for Trump, but the ==racist== or ==misogynist== label is too simple.
www.nytimes.com/2015/12/22/us/politics/donald-trump-african-americans.html
Comment by Formerly Known As... Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 12:32 pm
Does it really matter whether Trump truly means the racist and misogynistic things he says or maybe he’s just saying them to stoke the racist and misogynistic fears of voters he’s courting? Whether racism is his worldview or simply a tool for his benefit, it’s destructive either way
Comment by Johnny Pyle Driver Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 12:37 pm
The Trump-Rauner comparison makes some sense, although History prof is correct in that when you delve past surface similarities in personal style, Trump is much more classically political (i.e., willing to “make a deal”) than his press would indicate. The comparison with Sanders is inane. What he’s proposing is radical cost-shifting, not “free for everybody.” He’s also not, as Hinz implies, somehow “lacking experience”; he’s spent decades in Congress, where he’s done significant work and developed a rep as someone who can work across the aisle.
Also, Springfieldish is right. Who cares if Rauner, in his personal life, appears unprejudiced, or if he “courted” minorities and “soccer moms” (as if the latter were somehow representative of women everywhere, anyway)? His policies have disproportionately harmed women and minorities, at least those who aren’t well-off. And pro-choice? Maybe–but has that really been tested? Remember, he also “has no social agenda.”
Comment by Crispy Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 12:38 pm
The politicians sure did a great job creating the public pension mess. Way to go, guys.
Comment by jim Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 12:40 pm
“Rauner has said he will compromise.”
And Pat Quinn said he was put on earth to fix Illinois’ pension mess.
Talk is cheap.
– MrJM
Comment by @MisterJayEm Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 12:43 pm
I certainly do not view Rauner as being like Trump. I do, however, see him as another Cruz, someone who is rigid in his beliefs and speaks of reforms and compromises as merely Trojan horses as a means to achieving their real agenda.
Comment by Buzzie Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 12:48 pm
Great article. It’s a lesson that someone as arrogant as Rauner refuses to learn, to the damage of so many. He can’t get anti-union legislation passed unless perhaps it’s mild restrictions.
Rauner spent so much time on an ideological bender when he could have recognized what’s possible and worked on that, such as workers comp and property tax reform.
Rauner wants to force his anti-union agenda on the state very rapidly, telling us that unless we do it, Illinois will never recover. This is coming from someone who makes $168,000 or whatever a day. How much money does Ken Griffin make per day?
Rauner does not care or want to be bothered with knowing that it takes time to change the political environment. He apparently is not used to dealing with lots of people who also have power.
Comment by Grandson of Man Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 12:56 pm
== Rauner has said he will compromise. ==
THE operative two words here: “HAS SAID”
raunner SAYS a lot of things; many which aren’t true as demonstrated by his actions of lack thereof.
== If all you’ve taken from the Bernie Sanders campaign is “I’ll make everything free,” ==
Well, he seems closer to socialist than liberal; he talks about providing much more without saying how he will pay for it nor where the money is coming from, so ‘make everything free’ is just like a shorthand.
Comment by sal-says Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 12:57 pm
To focus solely on Illinois, perhaps the IL GOP has persuaded itself that Michael Madigan is a dictator and if only he could be removed, John Cullerton, Kwame Raoul, Lou Lang, Barbara Flynn Currie, Sara Feigenholtz and all the others would embrace Governor Rauner as their liberator.
Even if Michael Madigan were somehow deposed, I don’t think his successor would come anywhere close to “cooperating” in ways Governor Rauner would find acceptable.
Comment by Bill White Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 12:58 pm
@Downstate said: “I’m not sure Trump would be worried about comparison’s to Rauner in Illinois.”
No, but Rauner should probably be worried about comparisons to Trump.
Comment by phil T. Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 1:00 pm
Rauner isn’t like Trump. Trump is actually much more moderate than Rauner is. Illinois has been declining across the board since Rauner took office and it isn’t by accident. He has stated so saying that pain now will result in gain later. Unless Rauner changes course and agrees to compromise, which he has failed to do so far despite what he says publicly, he is destined to become the worst Governor Illinois has had in my lifetime.
We are living in an increasingly plutocratic society and Rauner only wishes to increase the speed of this transition. Until which time that we remove private money from campaigns, we are destined for trouble. The trend of mega wealthy people buying elections is becoming more common as we speak, another parallel between Trump and Rauner. Rauner has been a disaster for Illinois these past 13 months and I fear Trump will be the same if he wins.
Comment by The Dude Abides Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 1:04 pm
We are seeing a change in generations. This happens often. See the president on the 20 dollar bill? Jackson was feared and not without merit. The long standing status quo robbed him of his election in 1824, hoping the movement he led would die down or die when he did. It came back stronger in 1828 with his election.
Jackson had two bullets in his old shriveled up body from duels. He killed men. He killed Indians. He fought a battle after the treaty was signed. He ignored court orders. He ignored the US Supreme Court when he forced Native Americans out of their homelands. He destroyed our banking system. He was emotional, reckless and hateful. He was suffering from depression and grief. He was vengeful and petty. He owned slaves. He got rich developing real estate, then went bankrupted more than one.
He was censured by Congress. He survived two assassination attempts. He died bankrupted and bitter. He hated the status quo. He hated the politically powerful. He closed the debtor prisons. He hated the rich running the country. He believed that all white men should have the vote. He gave the spoils system credibility as a way of running governments for the next 50 years.
He was a complete nut and considered one of our best presidents.
We survived Jackson and his nutty dictatorship. We’ll survive the next nutty one as well.
If you find yourself nodding in agreement with wealthy journalists and critics, you need to check yourself. Democracy is worth saving over the fears of our moneyed elitists. Sometimes what happens is that democracy lets a new generation to let lose and take over in the worst way.
I think we’re seeing this today. Calm down and enjoy the rare experience of seeing this happen now. Don’t panic. We’ll be OK.
He founded the two party system. He created the Democratic Party, and his opposition created the Whigs.
Comment by VanillaMan Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 1:10 pm
“Well, he seems closer to socialist than liberal; he talks about providing much more without saying how he will pay for it nor where the money is coming from, so ‘make everything free’ is just like a shorthand.”
Again, you simply must not be paying attention:
https://berniesanders.com/issues/how-bernie-pays-for-his-proposals/
not sure how much more clear he could be really. And how often does a politician give you this much detail? The top 3 GOP candidates want to give $8-12 Trillion in tax cuts over the next decade. How do we pay for that? Vague promises of growth and winning.
Comment by Johnny Pyle Driver Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 1:14 pm
@sal says
Single-payer healthcare paid for with payroll tax, tuitionless college paid for with tax on derivatives, infrastructure improvement paid with higher taxes on wealthy. What spending has he proposed that he has not proposed a way to pay for it?
Comment by Ducky LaMoore Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 1:17 pm
True Trump is more moderate than Rauner and that is why the HOP is fragmenting over Trump. The Koch Rauner wing may run a third party. I would point out that the anti politics didn’t arrive from space. Its The result I years decimation of the middle class from bad trade deals to inaction on aything for the middle class and anything the oligarchs want.
Comment by illinois manufacturer Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 1:24 pm
Trump can be vile, mean and extremely vulgar, but a lot of people like the fact that he simply speaks his mind, regardless of the expletives and insults. Somehow I imagine that if that were Rauner’s style, what we would hear would be far worse because this Governor has a really sinister anti-social view of his fellow Illinoisans and what kind of lives they deserve.
Comment by kimocat Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 1:27 pm
The grown up conversation should be: how to get rid of the employer provided healthcare system.
And, I, for one am glad that Moderate Republican Bernie Sanders is asking the question.
Comment by Jack Stephens Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 1:29 pm
The elephant in the room, and no one wants to talk about it….with Obama is race.
Where was the Republican leadership when their party used every word, but the “n-word” to humiliate the President?
Other than Patriotic Moderate Democratic Senator John McCain….I cant think of anyone.
Comment by Jack Stephens Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 1:31 pm
“Trump can be vile, mean and extremely vulgar, but a lot of people like the fact that he simply speaks his mind, regardless of the expletives and insults. ”
Something I’ll never understand. “He speaks his mind.” Yea, the problem with that is what’s on his mind now is completely different from what was on his mind yesterday. So he can trash an entire race of people today, and then tomorrow he can pretend he never said it! Isn’t that the opposite of being a “shoot from the hip” truth teller?
Comment by Johnny Pyle Driver Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 1:32 pm
“I don’t care much for Trump, but the ==racist== or ==misogynist== label is too simple.”
And Strom Thurmond’s relationship with some black people was complicated. For instance, he had a child with a 16-year old black girl.
Nevertheless, Thurmond was an unrepentant racist.
– MrJM
Comment by @MisterJayEm Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 1:43 pm
==They want “outsiders.” They delegitimize compromise and deal-making. == This antipolitics tendency has had a wretched effect on our democracy. It has led to a series of overlapping downward spirals==
Chicago, the home of ==insiders== and ==deal-making==, passed 100 murders last week and has an insolvent school system.
That also has ==a wretched effect on our democracy==. ==Insiders== can be as bad as ==outsiders==.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 1:52 pm
The elephant in the room, and no one wants to talk about it….with Obama is race.
He was elected twice to our nation’s highest office by a majority of Americans. No one stands with you when you vote and no one sees how you vote. If race was an issue, we’d have seen it in 2008 and 2012. Didn’t happen. Case closed. American passed the bigotry test.
Comment by VanillaMan Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 2:01 pm
I’ll never understand the meme that if 20% of the country elects an African American, racism is over for the entire country. It doesn’t even pass a quick logic test.
Comment by Johnny Pyle Driver Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 2:04 pm
==”Ultimately, they don’t recognize other people. They suffer from a form of political narcissism, in which they don’t accept the legitimacy of other interests and opinions. They don’t recognize restraints. They want total victories for themselves and their doctrine.”==
This is the best description of Rauner I have seen.
Comment by Mama Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 2:23 pm
Finally! A Republican who rejects racism.
Comment by Jack Stephens Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 2:36 pm
Vanilla@1:10…..”we will survive the next one as well”. Do you mean the Obama administration?(and I voted for him once…ooooppps.)
Comment by Blue dog dem Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 2:42 pm
I’m not sure either is a racist or misogynist. I am fairly certain both are narcissists. They’ll both court, or refuse to repudiate, whichever groups they believe will serve their agenda and get them in power. That is probably the biggest single similarity between the two.
Comment by YNM Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 2:56 pm
Rauner is like Trump in that he’s a political novice, says whatever pops into his head, insults everyone, and doesn’t understand co-equal branches of givernment. Nor do they understand the function of governing.
As Illinois has gone these past 14 months, so goes the nation if Trump gets elected.
Comment by Thoughts Matter Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 3:45 pm
Serious question, where can I go to find Madigan’s compromise solutions for the state’s current issues. I would like to read more about his proposals.
Comment by Anon Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 4:02 pm
Not sure where some people were in 2008 and 2012 but race was used in every possible way.
*ObamaCare* is not meant as a term of endearment. If so, then we would start referring to its replacement as:
TrumpCare
KasichCare
RubioCare
CruzCare
CarsonCare.
RyanCare
McConnellCare
Get it?
Comment by Jack Stephens Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 4:22 pm
This is an excellent discussin. Looking forward to a quiet evening to contemplate all the sources and comments.
Comment by cdog Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 4:33 pm
Jack@4:22. Am I the only Union guy calling it the “ObamaPacificPartnership”? And I don’t think I could ever be considered a racist.
Comment by Blue dog dem Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 4:35 pm
Rauner is offering to compromise on his agenda. Sort of like suggesting to my wife that I would like to have sex with 10 additional women, but as a gesture of compromise we can lower it to 5. Rauner is leveraging the entire government, social serives, and educational systems to get things he wants and then sayimg madigan wont compromise because he won’t accept the poison pills raumer puts in the proposals.
Comment by relocated Monday, Feb 29, 16 @ 7:58 pm
Your memory is short and biased.
In 1994, it was called “Hillarycare”.
Or was that being sexist?
Btw, Obamanomics isn’t racist either. In 1980 Reagan’s economic belief went from being “voodoo economics”, to “Reaganomics” as an insult, that is, it was utility it created a boom economy. Then it became a compliment.
New policies are mocked like that. But when they work they become compliments
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Mar 1, 16 @ 7:59 am
Finally! A Republican who rejects racism.
Oh shut up and read some US history.
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Mar 1, 16 @ 8:46 am