Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: “This is basically fraud”
Next Post: Poll: 66 percent of Illinoisans support legalization of “recreational marijuana”
Posted in:
* My Crain’s Chicago Business column…
Shortly after Donald Trump was elected, political types said women were coming out of the woodwork wanting to run for office.
A pro bono consulting group popped up in Illinois in November called Rodham Consulting, a nod to presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s family name. Political professionals wanted to lend their advice and assistance to those newly energized women. Within just a few days, 122 potential candidates, advisers and others had signed up to participate.
Millions of women marched in Washington and other cities after Trump was inaugurated. The Chicago march was so large that police shut it down. There was clearly something new in the air.
But here we are in late March, and no Illinois women have yet come forward to say they definitely want to run for governor against Republican Bruce Rauner.
Democratic U.S. Rep. Cheri Bustos, a moderate downstater, for a while talked about running but ultimately decided to stay in Congress.
Democratic U.S. Rep. Robin Kelly of south suburban Matteson floated her name months ago, but most observers figure she’ll stick with her super safe congressional seat.
Colleagues of state Sen. Heather Steans (D-Chicago) have long believed she might run for governor. She has the policy chops for the job and she’s also a strong fundraiser. But Steans is supporting J.B. Pritzker’s Democratic gubernatorial bid.
So, as Women’s History Month winds down and Trump’s unpopularity ratchets up, the list of announced or almost announced Democratic candidates for governor includes five people, all men: Pritzker; Chris Kennedy, the son of slain presidential candidate Bobby Kennedy; Chicago Ald. Ameya Pawar; state Sen. Daniel Biss of Evanston and Madison County Regional Superintendent of Schools Bob Daiber.
Please click here to read the rest before commenting. Thanks.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Mar 27, 17 @ 8:59 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: “This is basically fraud”
Next Post: Poll: 66 percent of Illinoisans support legalization of “recreational marijuana”
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
The bigger the field gets, the more welcoming it gets to a lone female candidate.
Comment by Roman Monday, Mar 27, 17 @ 9:01 am
ugh. just because a woman isn’t running for Governor does not mean that women aren’t trying for office elsewhere. A more interesting question is why is there such a difference in the Dems and Repubs when it comes to women running for office? look at the dramatic difference in women in congress by party….three times the number of Dem women as Rs. Also, if men faced the kind of blatant sexism when running for office that women face when running, heck face every day, they would find it harder to run for office too.
Comment by Amalia Monday, Mar 27, 17 @ 9:21 am
=== A more interesting question is===
It’s an important question, for sure, but it’s a question that’s been dealt with many times before. This question here is new.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Mar 27, 17 @ 9:24 am
More proof that the hysteria after Trumps election was just that - hysteria. A temper tantrum because everyone was so sure that Hillary would win.
Comment by Dave's Not Here Monday, Mar 27, 17 @ 9:29 am
Why J.B. instead of Penny?
Comment by Robert the Bruce Monday, Mar 27, 17 @ 9:38 am
How about a little geographic diversity, too? Pritzker, Biss, Kennedy and Pawar all come from the same 12 to 15 mile swath of the north lakefront.
Comment by FT Monday, Mar 27, 17 @ 9:42 am
FT, there’s a downstater running and mentioned above. Try to keep up.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Mar 27, 17 @ 9:50 am
In theory you want to see some gender diversity, but this election the only woman the Dems should even think about running is Lisa Madigan I think Rauner would prefer running against Bustos, Kelly, or Steans than against a matching deep-pocket candidate. I’ll keep saying it for the infinitesimal value this message might have (if that): the biggest threat to the Democrats is if Pritzker and Kennedy destroy each other and/or a crowded race allows a niche candidate without statewide appeal to win the primary.
Comment by lake county democrat Monday, Mar 27, 17 @ 9:59 am
A female extended family member considered it last year. In a pow wow with the family it was determined that it put the family at too much financial risk. It would be too tough for her to leave her job and then to get another one if she lost. It’s a high price of entry. This doesn’t answer your question Rich but I think it does show a problem with the pipeline. Plus who would want to inherit this mess.
Comment by Honeybear Monday, Mar 27, 17 @ 10:04 am
The new women candidates are running locally, with many other new activist groups supporting them. We have a hew woman US Senator and some women Congress members. Almost half of those running for state offices on the Dem side are women.
So the question remains: Why no women candidates for Governor?
Part of it is likelihood to raise big money from the start. Part of it is statewide name recognition. But not every male candidate sits well on those criteria.
Side note on the “hysteria” and “temper tantrum” comments: Unfortunate terms that might reflect back poorly on the commenter. That’s not what I am seeing. I wouldn’t bet against this new grassroots surge.
Comment by walker Monday, Mar 27, 17 @ 10:04 am
I’m embarrassed to say I hadn’t thought about this. I agree about Mendoza being a spark plug though I wish she didn’t have to be the one carrying the ball so much of the time in opposing Rauner. It would also be nice to see a woman in both primaries.
Comment by Earnest Monday, Mar 27, 17 @ 10:11 am
Since Madigan & Mendoza are runnin’ the state who needs to waste time runnin’ against BigBrain?
Comment by Annonin' Monday, Mar 27, 17 @ 10:11 am
Maybe none of the potential women who could run see this as their moment to do it? Think back to Barack Obama running for U.S. Senate. It was basically do or die for his political career versus lawyering and teaching. That type of inflection point is not here for the women mentioned in your column Rich.
Comment by Precinct Captain Monday, Mar 27, 17 @ 10:22 am
Agree with Walker. MANY new faces are running locally and raising buckets of cash. There are several groups creating long-range plans for more female involvement. It won’t happen over night, but it IS happening.
Comment by FIREDup! Monday, Mar 27, 17 @ 10:41 am
Maybe Lisa could take her husband’s last name and try to run. But frankly, I think her time to run for governor has passed by. Her time was 2014. Too bad it didn’t seem doable to her and/or work out for all the reasons we’ve discussed here on many occasions. Many believe she’s done a good job in her current position and could have been a competent governor. But the Madigan name recognition is not a benefit anymore. Quite the contrary.
Comment by Responsa Monday, Mar 27, 17 @ 12:32 pm
Rich -
I think you partly answered your own question. Steans is backing JB. She is the only woman in the GA with the independence to run.
Outside of Springfield, there are not many women in politics currently with the political base to make a statewide run. Kelly, Bustos, Preckwinkle, Shakowsky.
Unless you can convince Mary K. O’Brien to consider leaving the bench…
As for having just been sworn in for Comptroller, Mendoza shouldn’t let that stop her. Poll, see what the poll says. Didn’t hurt Obama to launch his bid before he was even sworn in to the Senate. I don’t imagine it will hurt her chances if she is ‘drafted’.
Comment by Juvenal Monday, Mar 27, 17 @ 2:19 pm
Carol Ammons? Woman, African-American, downstater. Also not lacking confidence.
Comment by Telly Monday, Mar 27, 17 @ 3:56 pm