Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x4 - Pritzker responds - Oppo dump - Biss campaign responds - Berrios campaign responds *** Kennedy demands Berrios resignation
Next Post: I just… can’t
Posted in:
* Politico…
An inevitable candidate. Accusations of a rigged primary. Early commitments from organized labor.
The Illinois Democratic primary for governor sounds a lot like Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential primary campaign — which didn’t end up well for the party.
Opponents of billionaire J.B. Pritzker, the front-runner for the Democratic nomination in Illinois, are now using the Clinton example in an effort to level the field, warning that the party risks blowing a prime opportunity to knock off a vulnerable Republican governor by repeating the same mistakes it made in 2016.
Evoking Sen. Bernie Sanders, Pritzker’s top competitors — Chris Kennedy, the son of the late Robert F. Kennedy, and state Sen. Daniel Biss, a Harvard-educated mathematician — say they’ve been elbowed out at every turn by party insiders. They say the Democratic establishment in one of the nation’s biggest blue states has greased the skids for an untested candidate, simply because he has bottomless pockets.
Illinois Democrats are so mesmerized by Pritzker’s unlimited cash pile, and so presumptuous that he will win because of it, Biss says, that few are asking the most basic question: can one wealthy businessman, Pritzker, defeat another wealthy businessman, Gov. Bruce Rauner, in a general election?
C’mon, Daniel. Few are asking? Every professional political type has asked that question about Pritzker. That’s their number one question: Can this guy Pritzker beat Rauner? Getting that man out of office is what they care about.
They didn’t just mindlessly follow the money. Hey, the money’s good, for sure. Pritzker’s cash allows everyone to concentrate on “important” stuff like Madigan’s House races. But all that is for naught if Rauner wins.
* While I do not doubt that Madigan is discouraging people from contributing to Kennedy, Chris’ family has so far given their own flesh and blood less than Biss’ family has given him. Despite his vast powers, and he has many, Madigan cannot control the entire Kennedy clan. They need to step up here.
Also, one of Kennedy’s top advisors is Treasurer Michael Frerichs’ chief deputy. Frerichs recently endorsed Pritzker. Frerichs is no Madigan pawn.
* And this whole idea of comparing Pritzker-2018 to Clinton-2016 is a bit much. Clinton started the primary with enormous advantages (including party support), but she also began with lots of serious baggage that everybody knew about. Pritzker started out as a virtual unknown outside Chicago.
Besides, Clinton went on to win the national popular vote and Illinois has no electoral college. She also won Illinois by 17 points.
It’s just not a great comparison. More like grasping at straws. Plus, if you wanna bring Hillary Clinton into the topic, you also need to bring in Bernie Sanders. If Pritzker is Hillary, who is Bernie? Despite their claims to the mantle, neither Biss nor Kennedy has managed to fire up vast numbers of party members to lead a Bernie-esque insurgency. Maybe that will happen before March. But it certainly is not in evidence today. Bernie raised a ton of money from every-day people to effectively counter Hillary’s big bucks from special interests, unions and the wealthy. These two guys, not so much.
* What I’d really like to see is polling, or research or other info showing Kennedy or Biss doing significantly better against Rauner next year than Pritzker, or Pritzker doing so much worse that he could actually lose the race. The last numbers I heard months ago (Dem and GOP polling) had Pritzker beating Rauner something like 52-38. But, whatever, it’s way early. That can change. Tell me how.
Until then, it’s all just a bunch of posturing, whiny words.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 1:44 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x4 - Pritzker responds - Oppo dump - Biss campaign responds - Berrios campaign responds *** Kennedy demands Berrios resignation
Next Post: I just… can’t
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Damn, Miller, you’re fired up. I like it!
Comment by Tom Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 1:49 pm
Amen Rich Miller!
Comment by Anon0091 Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 1:54 pm
So Pritzker doesn’t come with “serious baggage”?
The comparison is being rightfully made because both individuals saw both parties circle the wagons around them before any type of serious vetting took place, debates were held or new entrants were allowed to raise coin.
The DNC purposefully blocked entrants and undercut Bernie at every turn. Is that any different than Madigan lining up labor behind Pritzker in an unprecedented fashion this early in the election cycle?
Because of that, Pritzker is the single most vulnerable candidate to face Rauner and will likely lose. If at his nadir, Rauner was at 38 and Pritzker barely crosses 50, then I have two words for Mr. Hyatt.
Good luck
Comment by SmartiePants Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 1:58 pm
==They didn’t just mindlessly follow the money.==
You say this, yet this is the primary reason nearly everybody gives for wanting to elect him. Odd that
Comment by John Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 1:58 pm
===yet this is the primary reason nearly everybody gives for wanting to elect him===
Whatever. Did Blair Hull win the insider primary? Nope. It’s more than his money.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 2:00 pm
Biss could have taken up the bernie/leftist mantle if he’d kept carlos ramirez-rosa on, but he burned a lot of goodwill with how he booted his Lt. Gov decision.
Comment by tgk Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 2:00 pm
Whew. Wow. Whew.
Thank you.
To the Post,
Let’s break some of this down;
===Can this guy Pritzker beat Rauner? Getting that man out of office is what they care about.===
That’s also the point of the elections. It’s not to see who can say what the fanciest or best. “Can they win”. That’s the 3rd question after…
1st?
===They didn’t just mindlessly follow the money. Hey, the money’s good, for sure. Pritzker’s cash allows everyone to concentrate on “important” stuff like Madigan’s House races. But all that is for naught if Rauner wins.
* While I do not doubt that Madigan is discouraging people from contributing to Kennedy, Chris’ family has so far given their own flesh and blood less than Biss’ family has given him. Despite his vast powers, and he has many, Madigan cannot control the entire Kennedy clan. They need to step up here===
… money.
2nd…
===* What I’d really like to see is polling, or research or other info showing Kennedy or Biss doing significantly better against Rauner next year than Pritzker, or Pritzker doing so much worse that he could actually lose the race. The last numbers I heard months ago (Dem and GOP polling) had Pritzker beating Rauner something like 52-38. But, whatever, it’s way early. That can change. Tell me how.===
… polling.
That’s why this is whining.
Stop.
Either get in the game with the monies, build a coalition that polls in the lead or close to it, or forget these whiny “but they” ridiculousness with amateur comparisons to Hillary, and embarrasing omissions of the failures not named Pritzker.
Pathetic. Do better. Understand the game, or don’t whine about the current status of the game at play.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 2:03 pm
==It’s more than his money.==
like what? His sterling record of public service? His longstanding commitment to the issues he suddenly champions? As you say, “whatever”
Comment by JohnnyPyleDriver Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 2:13 pm
Pritzker the Progressive
I’ll raise your taxes and hide mine. Vote for me.
Nice ring to it if I say so myself.
Comment by SmartiePants Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 2:17 pm
When I attended the Madison County caucus, the literal, single argument for Pritzker was that he was the only one that had the money to defeat Rauner. That was the pitch. The entire pitch. The advocate literally said he likes other candidates, but only one has enough money. And this isn’t an isolated incident. This is the argument THEY are making. And you say, oh well that’s not hte only reason. Somebody should tell his advocates
Comment by JohnnyPyleDriver Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 2:18 pm
Meh, Politico can be so lame. This is contrived click-bait.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 2:23 pm
===the literal, single argument for Pritzker===
Don’t care.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 2:26 pm
“His sterling record of public service? His longstanding commitment to the issues he suddenly champions? As you say, “whatever””
Yes. He’s been an outspoken advocate for many of these issues (choice, LGPT, early childhood education, anti-discrimination) for literally decades. And for what else, he’s put together a robust statewide campaign, he’s traveled all over the state, he’s taking it to Rauner constantly and he’s a hell of a lot more likable than the other two. So yea, it’s not just about money.
Comment by Anon0091 Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 2:31 pm
I’ve had the opportunity to talk with both Pritzker and Biss in a small group setting (Kennedy’s only come to the area once, and by the time he showed up two hours late I’d had to leave). As someone who started out not seeing any particular differences between any of these guys, I’m not at all surprised to see Biss losing the invisible primary. He doesn’t have a case to make about why he should be the nominee or the governor, and doesn’t seem all that engaged in on-the-ground issues or the minutiae of governing, at least in the context of his campaign. I get the impression he thought there was a mass of Bernie people who would rise beneath him, and that all he had to do was talk in broad strokes about billionaires. FWIW, Pawar also talked a lot about billionaires, but also had a story to tell, and was engaged when it came to actionable policy.
Pritzker is nothing special, but he seems to be a good guy who’s interested in the function of governing, and who’s making an affirmative case for himself. He also picked the best running mate. I don’t know that I’m going to vote for him in the primary (I’ll vote for whoever wins the D nom in the general), but he’s the only one who hasn’t given me a convincing reason not to.
Comment by LXB Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 2:31 pm
==Don’t care.==
It shows
Comment by JohnnyPyleDriver Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 2:36 pm
“Meh, Politico can be so lame. This is contrived click-bait.”
Seems a bit sexist considering the author.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 2:42 pm
Another problem with these Bernie Hillary analogies is that the underlying premise, namely that Bernie would have won, is probably wrong. While Hillary had a lot of baggage, Bernie is an avowed socialist. I just can’t see the average suburban mom voting for a socialist. Moreover, one of the many reasons HRC lost was because she underperformed among African Americans. The primaries showed that Bernie just did not reach that voting bloc and so I imagine he would have done even worse with AA’s.
Comment by TominChicago Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 2:44 pm
–Seems a bit sexist considering the author.–
LOL, how?
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 2:47 pm
===If at his nadir, Rauner was at 38===
Trump got 39 percent here last year. You can’t go much lower than that as a GOP.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 2:48 pm
Great commentary Rich. As I said before the Clinton comparison doesn’t make any sense seeing that she won Illinois and the popular vote. I didn’t know of the poll showing Pritzker beating The Worst Republican Governor in America.
Comment by Real Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 2:50 pm
Money is a factor, but money alone can’t overcompensate for a lousy candidate. JB has been aggressive and thus far is sticking to his message.
Comment by Norseman Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 2:52 pm
Biss spends a lot of time whining about JB and his advantages. It’s real easy, whoever gets the most votes-WINS.It may be too late but maybe Biss can explain why I should vote for him instead of crying about JB. I thought the idea was to defeat Rauner. Let’s hear about that. In spite of JB’s inherited wealth, Biss acts like the entitled one here. Nobody said running for this spot would be easy. Step up or step back.
Comment by Trapped in the 'burbs Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 2:54 pm
Trump @ 39%. Rauner will do much better than that. 45%.
Comment by blue dog dem Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 2:56 pm
Throw Ives into your polling calculations, please and thank you.
Also, points made on both sides of the above argument.
Comment by cdog Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 2:58 pm
Since we’re comparing, how different has Pritzer’s early campaign been different than Rauner in 2013?
Comment by Timmeh Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:02 pm
–Seems a bit sexist considering the author.–
LOL, how?
Considering the author of the article. Considering you called her newspaper click-bait, demeaning both her and her employer.
BTW, weren’t you a former reporter? Isn’t it a cheap shot to unanimously call out one of the better reporters in the state?
Figured if anyone would have a bit of goodwill to Natasha, it would be you. Smells of sour grapes IMO.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:04 pm
–Since we’re comparing, how different has Pritzer’s early campaign been different than Rauner in 2013?–
Pritzker hasn’t bankrolled any dark-money negative spots against his primary opponents and then lied about it.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:07 pm
===how different has Pritzer’s early campaign been different than Rauner in 2013?===
Other than Wordslinger’s point, it’s been pretty similar. Spend money on ads, open tons of field offices, hire a bunch of people, lock up the top party insiders and the GOP’s top donors (including their leader Gidwitz).
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:11 pm
===Smells of sour grapes===
Sour grapes? Word has a pretty good life.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:14 pm
Unfortunately Biss and Kennedy do not inspire the same level of enthusiasm that Bernie did, even though the former was once a federal prosecutor.
Comment by Collinsville Kevin Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:14 pm
-Sour grapes? Word has a pretty good life.-
Do you think it was a click-bait article from Natasha?
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:15 pm
Anonymous, you may be mistaking me for Wordslinger. He can write what he wants. But simply calling the piece clickbait doesn’t make him a sexist, regardless of the author.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:19 pm
–Considering the author of the article. Considering you called her newspaper click-bait, demeaning both her and her employer.–
LOL, I kind of think both can handle such vicious attacks.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:20 pm
Hi Rich, wanted to talk over a few issues you brought up.
First, I don’t think that the fact that ONE staffer who works for a JB endorser also advises Chris Kennedy is very convincing evidence that the establishment is not in the bag for JB.
Second, it is pretty unreasonable to ask to see polling showing Kennedy or Biss doing better than JB against Rauner. We’re 11 months away from election day, how valuable is that? Kennedy’s last poll showed him at 70% name rec with dem primary voters, Pritkzer at 80%. What do we think those numbers are with general election voters? Maybe around 40% each? But if you are looking for some evidence of what voters think of JB, Kennedy’s last poll did show that Kennedy’s lead grew from 6% to 12% when you went from all Dem primary voters to just those who knew both. Doesn’t that say something about JB?
Lastly, please explain to me how Hillary winning a blue state by 17 points does anything to disprove the notion that the establishment is in the bag for JB.
Comment by Downstate Dem Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:34 pm
==If at his nadir, Rauner was at 38 and Pritzker barely crosses 50, then I have two words for Mr. Hyatt.
Good luck==
I guess I understand why some people would want to poormouth this, but for a challenger to be up 14 points and over 50% is a *great* result.
Comment by Arsenal Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:39 pm
===Kennedy’s last poll===
You’re dismissing Rich’s own poll? Hmm.
===Kennedy’s lead grew from 6% to 12%===
Rich’s poll has Kennedy behind Pritzker… soundly.
You dispute that?
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:39 pm
Thanks for the answer and for not calling out my lack of proofreading.
Comment by Timmeh Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:41 pm
@Oswego Willy - If Rich’s poll had similar distinctions (w/ regards to those who knew both candidates) please share. That was the reason the poll was shared. The question is about JB’s likability, not whether he is ahead in the primary or not.
Comment by Downstate Dem Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:42 pm
Rich, I would vote for JB Pritzker in the primary IF he supported some kind of public funding/matching funds system for political campaigns. But, Pritzker won’t commit to supporting that.
The system is broken. Rauner can buy elections. JB can buy elections. Until we change the system so voters can elect someone who doesn’t have to depend on large contributions from wealthy people, corporations, special interests, or their own personal wealth, nothing is going to change.
New York City has 6:1 matching funds system for city offices, and several states have either a matching funds system or clean elections system. We can do it in Illinois. Biss passed SB 1424 through the Senate and it’s currently sitting in the Rules Committee in the House. It would create a matching funds system like New York City has. If Pritzker pledged to push for and sign that bill or something like it, he’d have my vote in the primary and general.
Biss, Kennedy, Daiber, and Hardiman all support public funding for campaigns. JB doesn’t.
Comment by Somebody once told me Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:42 pm
===does anything to disprove the notion that the establishment is in the bag for JB. ===
Who’s trying to disprove that? It’s true.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:42 pm
==But if you are looking for some evidence of what voters think of JB, Kennedy’s last poll did show that Kennedy’s lead grew from 6% to 12% when you went from all Dem primary voters to just those who knew both.==
That’s a pretty dated poll from a compromised source. I think CapFax/WAA poll tells us a lot more about the race.
Comment by Arsenal Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:44 pm
====If Rich’s poll had similar distinctions (w/ regards to those who knew both candidates) please share.===
Rich did that. In his own post.
You do the work to disprove it.
Rich put all three in the mix, Kennedy trailed horribly.
That’s just the way it is.
You don’t like the results, that doesn’t make them invalid.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:45 pm
“First, I don’t think that the fact that ONE staffer who works for a JB endorser also advises Chris Kennedy is very convincing evidence that the establishment is not in the bag for JB.”
It’s not “one staffer.” It’s Jay Rowell - the Deputy Treasurer and one of Frerichs top guys - who has been one of the top people behind Kennedy’s candidacy from the beginning. And the point Rich was making was simply that Madigan wasn’t controlling people and forcing them to support Pritzker.
I always find it pretty amusing that some people think Madigan is the great and powerful Oz controlling everything and everybody. He’s not.
Comment by Anon0091 Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:45 pm
There’s also the irony of asking for hypothetical match-up polls against Rauner 11 months out when hypothetical polls had Hillary beating Trump by 10-15 points that far out.
Comment by Downstate Dem Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:45 pm
==The question is about JB’s likability, not whether he is ahead in the primary or not.==
Do you really think a political neophyte is going to get a lot of votes from people who don’t like him?
Comment by Arsenal Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:46 pm
===Hillary beating Trump by 10-15 points that far out.===
…Clinton then beat Trump… in Illinois… by 16+ points.
Keep up.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:46 pm
“That’s a pretty dated poll from a compromised source. I think CapFax/WAA poll tells us a lot more about the race.”
And the Kennedy poll from June had him at 44 in a two way race. He’s now at 15. So you suggesting a tiny number liked Kennedy more than Pritzker is kind of silly.
Comment by Anon0091 Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:47 pm
===the Kennedy poll from June===
Pretty darned dated.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:48 pm
===The question is about JB’s likability…===
No, it’s about electability.
Quit. Whining.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:49 pm
@Oswego WIlly - you’re really not understanding me.
“Rich put all three in the mix, Kennedy trailed horribly.” That is not what we are debating!!!!
I brought up a poll where it clearly showed that Kennedy’s lead grew significantly among voters who knew both candidates. If you have numbers that contradict that, please share.
Comment by Downstate Dem Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:50 pm
==like what?==
A robust platform that reflects the Democratic Party’s consensus, an effective campaign apparatus, a good “Retail politics” demeanor, and the absence of drama in filling out his ticket.
Comment by Arsenal Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:51 pm
The real comparison to the Hillary campaign that political hacks should be making is that half of J.B.’s staff is imported from Hillary’s campaign. That is the clear avenue for critique.
Comment by Big Amazon Guy Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:51 pm
“No, it’s about electability.”
Hahahaha sure. Exchange electability for likability if you want. As if the two are not connected in any way.
Comment by Downstate Dem Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:52 pm
===I brought up a poll where it clearly showed that Kennedy’s lead grew significantly among voters who knew both candidates. If you have numbers that contradict that, please share.===
LOL
Can’t “Wish Biss” out of the race.
Argue with reality, it just stop whining.
It’s not like Rich picked Biss randomly to add and gum up thd works…
Geez, Louise… pathetic.
Biss is in. Get over it.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:53 pm
===Hahahaha sure. Exchange electability for likability if you want. As if the two are not connected in any way.===
“Meh. Maybe, maybe not” - Fake Richard M. Nixon.
People vote abc poll for winners.
Kennedy is getting downright pummeled right now, embarrassingly so.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:55 pm
@Oswego Willy - I literally can’t understand what you are trying to say so I’m going to stop responding.
Comment by Downstate Dem Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:55 pm
===Hillary beating Trump by 10-15 points that far out.===
…Clinton then beat Trump… in Illinois… by 16+ points
Those were national polls, c’mon Willy. She won the popular vote nationwide by 2. Everyone worth their paycheck in this business knows a general election poll 11 months out of a general (and especially before a primary) isn’t going to be very accurate.
Comment by DrurysMissingClock Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:55 pm
===… literally can’t understand what you are trying to say so I’m going to stop responding.===
That’s because you are willfully ignorant that Daniel Biss is running.
That’s “willful” ignorance.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:57 pm
===Lastly, please explain to me how Hillary winning a blue state by 17 points does anything to disprove the notion that the establishment is in the bag for JB. ===
The article is arguing that the primary looks to be playing out like the Democratic 2016 Presidential Primary and this is bad because Hilary lost the general election.
This argument is crap because the general election comparison is an apples and oranges comparison.
Comment by GraduatedCollegeStudent Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:57 pm
==And the point Rich was making was simply that Madigan wasn’t controlling people and forcing them to support Pritzker.==
There’s a lot of JB endorsers who, while not on hostile terms with Madigan, don’t need to say “How high?” when he says, “Jump.” Frerichs, Manar, basically all the Congresscritters.
Comment by Arsenal Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:58 pm
==As if the two are not connected in any way.==
And, as such, I return to my question…
“Do you really think a political neophyte is going to get a lot of votes from people who don’t like him?”
Because the general consensus seems to be that JB is ahead in the polls, and if that’s true, and if likability and electability are connected as you say, then it doesn’t seem wise to assume that the result from Kennedy’s poll that you are citing failed to flip when the topline numbers did.
Comment by Arsenal Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:02 pm
When Illinois elects her governor by a national election decided by the electoral college… get back to me.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:05 pm
- Big Amazon Guy - Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 3:51 pm:
The real comparison to the Hillary campaign that political hacks should be making is that half of J.B.’s staff is imported from Hillary’s campaign. That is the clear avenue for critique.
In other words we should critique JB for hiring people who helped Hillary carry the state by 17 points? What would that critique entail?
Comment by TominChicago Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:06 pm
For at least the 3rd time.
Clinton. Won. Illinois.
By… 16+ points…
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:09 pm
@Tom @Oswego
The notion that Hillary’s two Hillary for Illinois staffers helped her win Illinois by 16 points is honestly hilarious.
Comment by Downstate Dem Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:16 pm
Hillary’s field team was so talented that they lost Iowa, Wisconsin, and Michigan to a man who literally has dementia. But ya 17 points.
Comment by AngryAmazonGuy Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:16 pm
===…Iowa, Wisconsin, and Michigan…===
When “Iowa, Wisconsin, and Michigan“ elect Illinois’ Governor for her, get back to me.
===The notion that Hillary’s two Hillary for Illinois staffers helped her win Illinois by 16 points is honestly hilarious.===
No, It’s pathetic is you want to argue “Kennedy head to head” when Biss is on the ballot.
Can’t “wish Biss” away.
That and you think Rich’s polling method is off… including Biss with Pritzker and Kennedy.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:19 pm
===Hillary’s field team was so talented that they lost Iowa, Wisconsin, and Michigan to a man who literally has dementia. But ya 17 points.===
If Pritzker was running for Governor of those states, I’d register concern. He isn’t, though.
Comment by GraduatedCollegeStudent Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:20 pm
===First, I don’t think that the fact that ONE staffer who works for a JB endorser also advises Chris Kennedy is very convincing evidence that the establishment is not in the bag for JB===
Soeebody else addressed this point above. It’s the treasurer’s top guy. And as I’ve said, of course the establishment is in the bag for him. Who in his right mind would disagree with that statement? You’re reading something I didn’t write.
===Second, it is pretty unreasonable to ask to see polling showing Kennedy or Biss doing better than JB against Rauner. We’re 11 months away from election day, how valuable is that?===
Um, Biss is claiming that Pritzker can’t win without any evidence and using what I consider to be a faulty analogy. I’d like to see some evidence.
===Kennedy’s last poll showed him at 70% name rec with dem primary voters, Pritkzer at 80%. What do we think those numbers are with general election voters? Maybe around 40% each? But if you are looking for some evidence of what voters think of JB, Kennedy’s last poll did show that Kennedy’s lead grew from 6% to 12% when you went from all Dem primary voters to just those who knew both. Doesn’t that say something about JB?===
Um, you don’t make much sense there.
===Lastly, please explain to me how Hillary winning a blue state by 17 points does anything to disprove the notion that the establishment is in the bag for JB.===
Like I said, of course the establishment is in with JB. Who says it isn’t?
You need a nap, dude.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:21 pm
Hillary’s field team is so talented that they only beat Trump by 3 points in DeKalb County. A county Obama carried by 6 points in 2012 and 17 points in 2008. It’s going to look real good in the papers when Republicans begin posting that half of J.B.’s field team are carpetbagging from out of state. Talk to any Democrat that isn’t found in the loop and you’ll see where J.B.’s favorability is really at.
Comment by AngryAmazonGuy Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:23 pm
===Hillary’s field team is so talented that they only beat Trump by 3 points in DeKalb County===
Hillary had a field team in DeKalb?
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:27 pm
===Hillary’s field team is so talented that they only beat Trump by 3 points in DeKalb County. A county Obama carried by 6 points in 2012 and 17 points in 2008. It’s going to look real good in the papers when Republicans begin posting that half of J.B.’s field team are carpetbagging from out of state. Talk to any Democrat that isn’t found in the loop and you’ll see where J.B.’s favorability is really at. ===
And how has Northern Illinois University fared under Rauner’s tenure as Governor? I wonder if that might be a more pressing concern if you live in DeKalb.
Comment by GraduatedCollegeStudent Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:27 pm
===Hillary’s field team is so talented that they only beat Trump by 3 points in DeKalb County. A county Obama carried by 6 points in 2012 and 17 points in 2008===
1) Obama is a Native Son, not your average POTUS candidate in IL
2)… and despite “that”… Clinton won Illinois by 16+ points.
Shave and whine all you want. Numbers are the numbers.
===It’s going to look real good in the papers when Republicans begin posting that half of J.B.’s field team are carpetbagging from out of state.===
What thd percentage, ya think, it flips to Rauner?
18%, lol
Clinton won Illinois. If anything, reminding people of Trump and Clinton… that’ll help a Dem, theorethically as Yrump now sits at 39.6% approval… in Illinois.
===Talk to any Democrat that isn’t found in the loop and you’ll see where J.B.’s favorability is really at.===
Blind scientific polls say Pritzker leads.
So… there’s that. LOL
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:28 pm
===Hillary’s field team is so talented that they only beat Trump by 3 points in DeKalb County===
Geez, this one has gone off the rails…..
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:32 pm
==Talk to any Democrat that isn’t found in the loop and you’ll see where J.B.’s favorability is really at.==
Why do the Democrats in the Loop not count again?
Regardless, I’m a Democrat and my phone number starts with 217, so let’s test your theory.
Comment by Arsenal Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:34 pm
==Hillary’s field team is so talented that they only beat Trump by 3 points in DeKalb County==
If Pritzker beats Rauner by 3 points in DeKalb County he’ll dance to Rubber Band Man right in the middle of Daley Plaza.
Comment by Arsenal Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:36 pm
Headed up to DeKalb County this weekend. I’ll ask relatives who work for NIU how they feel about Rauner’s stewardship.
Comment by Norseman Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:37 pm
===Geez, this one has gone off the rails===
Yep.
Also, a bigly great idea to try to win a Democratic primary by bashing a woman who won the state twice last year.
That is not a path to any sort of success, despite what the “Killary” crowd things.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:43 pm
@Rich she won the primary by two points lol relax
Comment by Downstate Dem Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:46 pm
===she won the primary===
Yep.
Clinton won.
Kennedy is getting beat by double digits, and Biss is in the race.
This is reality.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:49 pm
===Talk to any Democrat that isn’t found in the loop and you’ll see===
Anecdotes are not data.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 4:49 pm
A logical fallacy seems to underly much of the Politico article and the subsequent conversation, i.e. some people seem to presume that those who have come to the opposite conclusion must have done so by applying the same criteria in an inverted manner.
And that isn’t necessarily the case.
You can easily see how such a logical error might occur in this example of vegetarianism: Vegetarians order the salad because minimizing cruelty to animals is the most important factor in their choice of foods. By contrast, I order the steak. But I don’t order the steak because I want to maximize cruelty to animals. Rather, I order the steak because I do not weigh animal cruelty as heavily as I do some other considerations.
The strong feelings that animate the vegetarian’s decision are not necessarily driving my opposite decision.
Similarly, when Billy Joel songs come on the radio, I change the channel immediately because I hate the sound of them. But if someone leaves a Billy Joel song playing on the radio, that doesn’t necessarily mean that she loves it. It could mean she doesn’t care about music. Or maybe she’s deaf.
The strong feelings that animate my choice are not necessarily driving hers.
And the same is true for this Democratic primary: The mere fact that one believes Pritzker shouldn’t be the nominee because of his wealth does not mean that if someone else believes Pritzker should be the nominee it is necessarily because of his wealth.
– MrJM
Comment by @MisterJayEm Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 5:06 pm
“The mere fact that one believes Pritzker shouldn’t be the nominee because of his wealth does not mean that if someone else believes Pritzker should be the nominee it is necessarily because of his wealth.”
That was a long journey to get to a very good point!
And what’s wrong with Billy Joel anyway?
Comment by Anon0091 Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 5:25 pm
If Clinton had come out for legalization the world would be in a better place. Since Pritzker has, I don’t see him losing.
Comment by Biker Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 5:34 pm
===And what’s wrong with Billy Joel anyway? ===
If you gotta ask…
Also, nice job, MrJM.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 5:58 pm
Wow you Biss/Kennedy fans sound like the Lucky Pierre bot, trying to make a case for an unliked candidate with random anecdotes and “facts” that have already been disproven. Are you guys campaign employees, or just fans?
Like Arsenal, I too have a number with a 217 area code. Neither of your candidates have shown me or my family members any reason NOT to support Pritzker. We’re all open to a better candidate and your guys have a little over three months left to change our minds. Tell Chris and Daniel that they can feel free to start at any time.
Comment by Lester Holt’s Mustache Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 7:03 pm
===she won the primary by two points lol relax ===
That’s called a win. And if you think that bashing a woman who won this state twice is going to somehow turn your male candidate into Bernie Sanders, you are not going to experience anything close to a win. Female voters outnumber male voters in Dem primaries by a large margin.
You want Bernie’s supporters? Go earn them.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 7:32 pm
Here’s the header at Politico:
–”Illinois governor’s race haunted by 2016 presidential primary”–
Yeah, that ain’t click-bait.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 7:32 pm
MrJM, were you in my Pilosophy and logic class. Your comment reminded me of the logic proofs we had to do for class.
Comment by Norseman Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 7:53 pm
==Neither of your candidates have shown me or my family members any reason NOT to support Pritzker.==
And look, in my neck of the woods, Biss has visited and put on a good show (Kennedy…has visited).
But JB’s actually *organizing* the area.
==Female voters outnumber male voters in Dem primaries by a large margin.==
And from my vantage point (and this may be anecdata) all the energy is with women’s groups right now, anyway.
Comment by Arsenal Thursday, Dec 7, 17 @ 9:09 pm