Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: And here it is again…
Next Post: Insidery campaign stuff
Posted in:
* From the twitters…
Asked if Rauner is too rich to be governor, Vallas eventually says "yes."
— Monique Garcia (@moniquegarcia) September 4, 2014
* Rauner campaign response…
“We didn’t know a person’s income level was a qualification for office. Pat Quinn thinks only corrupt career politicians who have screwed up Springfield for decades are qualified to lead our state. The people of Illinois know better than that.” - Rauner spokesperson Mike Schrimpf
* The Question: On a scale of one to four, with four being the best, please rate the Rauner campaign response. Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
*** UPDATE *** Vallas has walked back his comment…
Later, Vallas sought to clarify his comments, telling the Tribune in an interview that it was not Rauner’s wealth that should disqualify him as governor but that “his wealth informs his policies.”
“Whether it’s his promising to eliminate the minimum wage, or taxing consumption, or slashing funding for public schools, it’s clear who Bruce Rauner benefits in his policies,” Vallas said. “It’s that his wealth and his experiences seem to be driving and seem to be informing his policies.”
“My problem isn’t the wealth, my problem is that his policies are being driven by his wealth and driven by his private business practices. That’s my fundamental problem with Bruce Rauner and the approach he is taking and it’s in stark contrast with what drives Pat Quinn.”
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 11:44 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: And here it is again…
Next Post: Insidery campaign stuff
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Went with a 3 on this one
CNBC just posted this about the rich folks tryin’ to become politicos!
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101972019
Comment by WhoKnew Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 11:47 am
Delete the second sentence and its a ‘4′. You shouldn’t need to mention your opponent every time you utter something.
Comment by Bogey Golfer Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 11:49 am
Rated the comment a ‘2′.
Comment by Bogey Golfer Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 11:49 am
It is a horrible thing to say, but it works for politics. I gave it a 4.
Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 11:51 am
This is the silliest Silly Season that I have witnessed in a long time. Is Rauner too rich to serve as Governor? Come on! The better questions - is Governor Quinn too desperate, misguided, and trite to continue to lead this State? Is Paul Vallas too out-of-touch with the people of Illinois (as he has been absent a while now)? #sigh
Comment by Black Ivy Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 11:55 am
Quinn’s whole campaign is based on the fact that 1. Rauner is rich and successful, 2. Rauner hired people to comply with the tax laws, 3. Rauner streamlined companies and did hsi job well, and 4. Quinn can “live” on minimum wage for a week.
Seems like his message is really a pro-Rauner given what I’ve learned about life.
What a sad state of affairs. Pun intended.
Comment by DuPage Moderate Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 11:56 am
3. Would have gone with a 2.5 but rounded up. It stays on message.
As for Mr. Vallas’ statement? That earns a negative 50.
Would we also say someone is too poor to be governor? To say that your bank account balance is now a qualifier or disqualifier in any way for someone to be President or dog catcher is flawed and a bit scary.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 11:56 am
I agree with Bogey Golfer. This is an electorate that voted for Blago the 2nd time even though they “knew better”.
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 11:56 am
Gave it a 3.
Could have gone 4…but,
“…Pat Quinn thinks only corrupt career politicians who have screwed up Springfield for decades…”
Yikes, c’mon. The shot that works is…
“We didn’t know a person’s income level was a qualification for office.”
Powerful, and cuts so many ways!
“We didn’t know a person’s income level was a qualification for office. The people of Illinois know better than that.”
There…is your 4.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 11:57 am
I think that the phrase “corrupt career politicians” trumps being rich.
Comment by Cassiopeia Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 11:57 am
rated it a 2…Brucie could have defended his right to be wealthy and seek office in a more adamant fashion…or simply said nothing about the Vallas comment…must bother him that people think that about him…
Comment by Loop Lady Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 11:57 am
Doesn’t Vallas know better than to not answer that question directly? No discipline or thought with Team Quinn. All shoot from the hip and pat themselves on the back.
Comment by Willie Stark Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 11:58 am
The campaign of a candidate who employed the infamous Stu Levine knows whereof it speaks when it talks about corruption.Talk about hypocrisy.Have we ever had a candidate with so much corruption- sleazy pension deals, dirty nursing homes,etc- running for governor?
Comment by truthteller Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 11:59 am
Response is a 3. Agree with FKA above as to the absurdity of being too rich to be Governor and questioning if being too poor to be Governor becomes a thing, as in, you failed in the private sector so why should we make you head of the state’s public sector?
Comment by Ron Burgundy Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:01 pm
So many rich Dems, and other GOPers, would have been DQ’d by this ridiculous standard: NJ Gov Corzine, CA Arnold, Kennedy’s, NYC Bloomberg, George Washington and many early presidents and founding fathers, etc.
Comment by Anon Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:02 pm
Once I found out how Rauner made his fortune, I was appalled. And the statements he has made BEFORE he was a candidate for office paint a picture of a man that I want no part of in office. He is only saying things that uninformed voters want to hear. Sure, there are problems in our state, but Rauner doesn’t know how to legally solve them.
Comment by Big Joe Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:04 pm
4, mainly because it nor only answers the absurdity of the idea, but it then turns on message and sets up a comparison to the other guy.
Could have been better if he’d worked in something about Quinn has been a failure so he resents anyone else’s success or doesn;t know anything about success or something like that.
Comment by mcb Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:04 pm
I, for one, am ready to try someone who has a demonstrated ability to make money than the one we already have with a lengthy track record of fiscal failure.
It’s like having a losing stock…how long after it starts losing money before you get the “courage” to dump it?
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:06 pm
Best answer from Vallas would have been to shrug the question off with an “I don’t know that I’d say that..” and move to next question.
So does the absurdity come from the reporter who posed the question?
Or was the reporter simply trying to take the Quinn campaign’s message to the logical next step?
Comment by mcb Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:07 pm
Whoop dee do Rauner has money. I also see he gave $13 million to charities. Quinn gave $100 million tax dollars to non working anti violence programs.
Ok let’s review one man gives from his own checkbook and another man gives from taxpayer check book. Man this is a tough one. Geesh
Comment by Empty Suit Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:08 pm
Vallas is a naif baited into answering a dumb question by a tricky reporter. Rauner campaign’s “nyah, nyah” middle-school playground retorts typical.
Comment by Ray del Camino Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:08 pm
A stick in Quinn’s eye. I gave it a 4.
Comment by Sunshine Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:08 pm
I voted a three. The best response would be ” should people who run failed public school districts be allowed to run for political office or subjects of investigation for the U.S. Attorney’s Office?” Because we all know Paul Vallas was such a success at going public school districts!
Comment by Steve Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:09 pm
I gave it a 2. The 4 level would be the Reagan “there you go again” style answer.
Comment by 100 Miles West Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:11 pm
Vallas gave a “decent” walk back…
…as the #2, you shouldn’t at any point, be walking back anything that could’ve been avoided.
If you ain’t helping, you’re hurting, if you aren’t hurting, you’re helping, Paul…
…unless you can do “Magic”, then all bets are off.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:11 pm
I went 3 - though agree they could have done better with less.
Not sure why Vallas let himself be baited into that. His first answer - about Rauner being out of touch with regular people - was spot on and said the same thing without actually being so blunt.
Because, of course, the problem with Rauner isn’t actually that he has a lot of money - it’s that he seems completely callous to the issues of people who don’t have the same kind of lifestyle. You can have money AND empathy. Rauner just doesn’t.
Vallas should have just moved on - because now Rauner’s team has a distracting counterpoint to the minimum wage story.
Comment by haverford Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:12 pm
Seriously…both these goofs are out of touch with reality. This will be another election with low voter turn-out due to apathy and disgust. And for those that vote - they have to vote for the lesser of two evils…a Corrupt system and clueless incumbent or an out of touch billionaire who’s $$$ has helped Corrupt the system… priceless!
Comment by Priceless! Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:13 pm
===Because we all know Paul Vallas was such a success at going public school districts!===
…unless you called Arne Duncan to get your NOT “perfect score” denied Winnetka-living Daughter clouted into Payton Prep, denying a worthy child a chance, then you just stay away from public schools.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:14 pm
Voted 1. “We didn’t know a person’s income level was a qualification for office”. Hmm. I have to agree that it is not a qualifying or a disqualifying factor. However, Rauner’s going around the state telling people he’s well off enough financially that he won’t take a salary if elected. I would prefer he take a salary. He uses his wealth as his way of saying he is incorruptible. I beg to differ with that. It isn’t just the possibility of personal enrichment that can make someone corruptible. It is the possibility that a “volunteer” Governor won’t have to answer to the taxpayers (because he doesn’t get a pay check) that scares me. Crony capitalism is the way most politicians corrupt the system these days. So, Rauner won’t take a salary because he’s rich enough? I wonder how many of his buddies or business partners from the past and present will say they won’t take the state’s business because of the same reason.
Comment by So. ILL Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:14 pm
“My problem isn’t the wealth, my problem is that his policies are being driven by his wealth and driven by his private business practices. That’s my fundamental problem with Bruce Rauner and the approach he is taking and it’s in stark contrast with what drives Pat Quinn.”
What does drive Pat Quinn? Self-preservation? A government paycheck? It’s clearly not reforming anything.
Comment by Ron Burgundy Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:16 pm
I think Rauner addressed Vallas’ incredible statement in a simple, straightforward and dispassionate manner. What else could he say? Really, really disappointed in Vallas. One expects this crazy foot-in-mouth stuff from Quinn and his staff but I used to respect Vallas. With his brainpower one would think Vallas could have come up with a better answer and, in fact, should have known enough to find a way to avoid answering that loaded question entirely.
Comment by Responsa Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:17 pm
It is a 1.
Could have praised leaders like Reagan who came from humble beginnings.
Instead went for the cheap, canned, knee-jerk response.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:20 pm
Gave it a 3. Might have gone 4 but Quinn-Vallas are such easy targets.
Comment by Keyser Soze Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:26 pm
3.
“His policies are driven by his wealth.” Yeah. Right. That’s no walk back. Did Vallas say that about the Kennedy clan? SOS Kerry?
Sometimes you have to admit you are wrong and move on. Vallas and Quinn have a hard time doing that.
Comment by Louis G Atsaves Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:28 pm
2
Too quick with the overused corruption stuff.
I would have responded with a Steve Martin WELL EXCUSE ME.
Comment by Sir Reel Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:28 pm
“It’s that his wealth and his experiences seem to be driving and seem to be informing his policies.”
LOL!
If that is a walk-back, he just went over a cliff.
There is a difference between “wealth”, and “greed” - those words are not interchangeable.
Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:29 pm
===Sometimes you have to admit you are wrong and move on. Vallas and Quinn have a hard time doing that.===
“Sometimes you have to admit you are wrong and move on. Vallas and Quinn, Rauner and Sanguinetti, they all have a hard time doing that.”
Better.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:30 pm
“It’s that his wealth and his experiences seem to be driving and seem to be informing his policies.”
Please tell me why that is a problem, Mr. Vallas.
Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:31 pm
Anything that elicits a walk back is a 4. If this effort keeps up, the only people left in the corral will be those who see raising the minimum wage as the biggest issue ever. That’s not the wage that brings Illinois back. Fix every level of wages.
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:31 pm
Clearly a mistake by Vallas. But any day dominated by more discussion of Rauner’s wealth/out of touch, rather than Quinn’s corruption might be a small victory for Quinn-Vallas.
Comment by Robert the Bruce Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:35 pm
== Pressed if his response was a “yes” to the question that Rauner was too rich to be governor, Vallas responded “That’s a yes. Yes.” ==
== Vallas has walked back his comment ==
Faster than a speeding bullet.
He took the “class warfare” mantra too far there, unless that was how he really feels. Too much the “loyal soldier”? Or too honest? That was a side of him I have not seen before.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:37 pm
4, but before Schrimpf lets all of this adulation go to his head, this was a pretty simple response. If you can’t hit that out of the park then you need to turn in your flack credentials and seek work in another field.
Vallas gave them exactly what they needed. Responding to Vallas was too easy. Hopefully Paul won’t take the bait so easily next time.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:51 pm
Gave it a 4 but as others have said Vallas lobbed this one over the plate. As odd as it sounds there’s a right and wrong way to demonize Rauner’s wealth. And unfortunately Vallas swung and missed with both comments as it could easily be said corruption is informing Quinn’s policies.
Comment by pundent Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 12:59 pm
Anonymous 12:51pm is me.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 1:01 pm
Rauner would have been perfectly fine with the “we didn’t know there was an income qualification” line. When he had to go and put that dig in about Quinn and corrupt politicians, he blew it. Maybe if it had been something about selling out and appointing corrupt and incompetent bureaucrats . . .
But from what I can see most super-rich pols have an entitlement problem. It ranges from Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg thinking she was entitled to the NY Senate seat that went to Gillibrand, to Mike Bloomberg thinking he was entitled to run New York more or less as he pleased even to the point of his Putinesque extension of his mandate, to Rauner threatening government shutdowns if he doesn’t get his way. Public office shouldn’t be a plaything that you buy, much like a yacht or a fifth home . . . it should be a valuable thing that you earn. And remarkably few of them seem to get it. And I think that’s sort of a generational change among the rich; I really don’t think FDR, Nelson and Winthrop Rockefeller, or a great many of the original Founders acted like this.
Too much entitlement by the rich and the rest of us are going to start growing European-sized chips on our shoulders about money and class. It works both ways, you know.
Comment by Angry Chicagoan Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 1:01 pm
Vallas missed an opportunity. The better answer would have been focused on what a person does with that wealth. Do they evade US taxes by hiding money in the Caymans? Do they run nursing homes into the ground for profit at the expense of the quality of care for the residents?
Vallas blew that one. Rauner’s response was ho hum.
Comment by Siriusly Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 1:07 pm
== 47th Ward - Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 1:01 pm:
Anonymous 12:51pm is me.===
Believe it or not, I knew it was.
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 1:12 pm
3, easy response, but somewhat effective. Rauner wants to slash funding for public schools? Has he met his potential boss?
Comment by Wumpus Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 1:18 pm
3, dumb answer by Vallas- he is sharper than that. I do not care about the wealth of the candidate. The “corrupt career politicians” line is as worn out as “Bruce Rauner is rich”.
Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 1:24 pm
@OW =…unless you called Arne Duncan to get your NOT “perfect score” denied Winnetka-living Daughter clouted into Payton Prep, denying a worthy child a chance, then you just stay away from public schools.= They made some hay with that one earlier but the more they hammer PQ on corruption I wonder if that comes back again? It was a corrupt act by Rauner.
Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 1:29 pm
2. I wouldn’t have said anything. Vallas was doing fine tying himself in knots on his own.
You really don’t want to issue a statement playing the victim because you’re rich.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 1:30 pm
rated it a 4. Desperation is setting in at the Quinn/Vallas campaign. That usually means desperate comments, but would expect it closer to the election.
Comment by Apocalypse Now Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 1:31 pm
Dumb dumb dumb. I’m sure some of PQ’s wealthy supporters will be unhappy to know that their wealth in and of itself disqualifies them. And his “walking back” was super lame too. This is easy to answer.
Surprised Vallas blew it this badly, but that’s what happens when your candidate is running a “don’t vote for the other guy because he’s rich.
Comment by Chicago Cynic Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 1:35 pm
== Vallas should have just moved on - because now Rauner’s team has a distracting counterpoint to the minimum wage story. ==
They do. That is all either campaign seems to need in this race. “Just enough” has proven “more than enough” for both to create distractions and go back on the attack.
And, as we have learned today from the Quinn campaign, you can never really be allowed to “walk back” old comments or “evolve” on issues like the minimum wage or personal wealth.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 1:36 pm
I voted best for Rauner for once. You knew Vallas would step in it. I don’t know what, if any, added value Vallas brings to the campaign. Curious choice.
Comment by Da Moat Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 1:37 pm
Gave it a 3. OW nailed it at 11:57 am. Vallas knows better than that.
Comment by Toure's Latte Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 1:40 pm
I always admired Paul. But get real dude. That was really a dumb dumb thing to say. I gave the response a 4. Rauner and his team seem to know how to run a campaign.
Comment by Downstate Dem Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 1:43 pm
I voted with a 2 and a 3, (used different devices so I can give a middle of the road response). I think the response and the original statements were childish. People are going to tune out and stay home on election day
Comment by Modest proposal Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 2:01 pm
Stupid comment by Vallas. Let’s look at it from another view - using Vallas’ logic, low income individuals should not be Governor because their “perspective” would lead to wanting higher taxes and more spending.
Comment by 4 percent Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 2:12 pm
When the first three words of your response is “We don’t know …” why read any further? Passive-aggressive or just 6th grade phrasing. Either way, the response is weak, no better than a 2.
Comment by Springfieldish Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 2:19 pm
I suspect the use of the word “eventually” in the tweet means Vallas provided a much more verbose response, which was truncated by the tweeter to “yes”
Comment by drew Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 2:24 pm
Rated 2. “We didn’t know a person’s income level was a qualification for office.” Stop and shut up. All the rest (corruption, screwed up, know better) may seem cute/smart but the extra stuff comes across like bush league nonsense. that just shovels more stuff into the fan, gaining nothing. Start showing adult behavior.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 2:29 pm
Rated 2. “We didn’t know a person’s income level was a qualification for office.” Stop and shut up. All the rest (corruption, screwed up, know better) may seem cute/smart but the extra stuff comes across like bush league nonsense. that just shovels more stuff into the fan, gaining nothing. Start showing adult behavior.
Comment by zatoichi Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 2:30 pm
Gave it a 2. A career politician Pat Quinn may be, but has anybody proven he is corrupt? Not so far.
Comment by Streator Curmudgeon Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 2:38 pm
well it’s not like Vallas said there should not be a minimum wage.
Comment by Amalia Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 2:38 pm
#3
Said too much, could have ended with the 1st sentence.
Quinn didn’t say it.
Comment by Belle Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 2:59 pm
Paul was making over $230,000 a year in Connecticut. That places him in the top 2% income bracket.
Some might say that is a rich man. Exactly how rich is “too rich” or “too poor” to run for office? Good thing someone hit the alarm button and he tried walking this back almost immediately.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 3:03 pm
I gave the Rauner response a 2. It was just too vehement and sounded too much like what the campaign is saying all the time anyway rather than a response to a gaffe. A much better response would have been to say something like, “Under my leadership, the State will not disparage success but rather create an environment where everybody has the chance to be successful.” Turn it into a positive statement and only attack by contrast rather than head on.
Comment by jake Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 3:18 pm
I gave him a 2. He lost me at “Pat Quinn…” Had he stopped before that, I’d have given him a 4.
Comment by Cheswick Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 4:06 pm
I gave it a 1. I read it twice, but I don’t remember it.
There is, in fact, a clean, smart, memorable response that would knock it out of the park and position the GOP candidate beautifully. But I am not going to write it here, because I have no desire to help a vain overpaid buffoon become governor of the state I love.
Comment by Soccermom Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 4:23 pm
S-mom, I’m gonna look harder for that wine. He’s gotta get that answer. lol.
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 4:32 pm
A guy — it would take a very nice wine to unlock this particular vault. As far as I’m concerned, Schrimpff was served a sweet fastball right down the middle of the plate, and he knocked it right into the stands — this side of the third base line. Hardly a major league performance
Comment by Soccermom Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 4:56 pm
2 because zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Comment by bored to zzzzz Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 5:15 pm
If it’s about policies and not riches why is Team Quinn making issues over number of houses, wine clubs, etc., etc.?
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 5:23 pm
But Soccermom, there is a buffoon in the governors chair right now. Guess he is your buffoon, so that is ok.
Comment by Wally Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 6:34 pm
Vallas talks too much. Schrimpf too.
Comment by walker Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 7:30 pm
When Vallas talks too much he makes Quinn look better–hey…
Comment by .IEC Gal Thursday, Sep 4, 14 @ 8:37 pm