Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: More spending
Next Post: Chief Procurement Office says Rauner owes state $250
Posted in:
* These are some surprising remarks from a stalwart Republican…
“Everybody’s angry and fed up with the negative commercials,” Moraine Township Republican Chair Lou Atsaves of Lake Forest said. “People want [the candidates] to concentrate on the issues and grow up.”
Atsaves says voters bristle over commercials put out by the campaign of Republican gubernatorial candidate Bruce Rauner attacking his Democratic rival Gov. Pat Quinn, as well as Quinn’s ads criticizing Rauner.
“They’re upset about ads which call Quinn a felon and keep calling Rauner ‘Billionaire Bruce,’” Atsaves said.
Though he talks to more Republicans than Democrats, the criticism of the ads comes from all, he says.
* From Bernie’s column today…
Chris Mooney, director of the Institute of Government and Public Affairs at the University of Illinois, said he believes it is easier to change public perception of a candidate with a short public history than one with a long public career, like Quinn’s.
“Another piece of information about Pat Quinn is one of thousands of pieces we’ve gotten over the years,” Mooney said. “With Bruce Rauner, we don’t have that many pieces of information about him, so another piece that comes in is a higher proportion of everything we know.”
Mooney said corruption hasn’t been part of Quinn’s long-term image, so he questions the “strategic decision” of the Rauner campaign to “try to paint Pat Quinn as a gangster.”
He said it might have been easier to try to put a negative spin on a more familiar image of Quinn, as perhaps an anti-establishment reformer who is “just bumbling along … he’s a good guy but he’s not getting the job done.”
* OK, I know the setup leans against Rauner, but I’m not yet convinced that either analysis is necessarily correct.
I think there’s some needless panic among Republicans as this race has naturally tightened, and I also think there’s a bit of irrational exuberance at this moment among Democrats, whose candidate is still polling around 40 percent in every poll and faces a Republican like no other in this state’s modern history.
* The Question: Whose negative attacks are more effective? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:16 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: More spending
Next Post: Chief Procurement Office says Rauner owes state $250
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Quinn’s are clearly more effective because they are driving Rauner’s numbers down. I think they’re also more effective for reasons Mooney stated, it’s harder to make a caricature of Quinn given his long history in Illinois. Most people feel like they know him, and trying to turn him into something he’s not isn’t going to work.
===They’re upset about ads which call Quinn a felon and keep calling Rauner ‘Billionaire Bruce===
Yes, except one of those statements is accurate. The other is slanderous and I’m pretty sure voters understand the difference.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:23 pm
Well of course Atsaves hates the ads Quinn’s running. The exposure is devastating to the chances of his guy Rauner.
Comment by too obvious Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:26 pm
No question that Quinn’s are more effective. They’ve told me things about Rauner that I didn’t know - -things that make me dislike him more every day.
Rauner is just re-running old stuff that didn’t work the first time. No impact whatsoever, except maybe with people who have moved to Illinois in the past four years…
Comment by Soccermom Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:27 pm
Rauner’s Ads are very effective due to the frequency of his Ads, and staying part of an ongoing single thought that Quinn “is the worst governor in America”
Quinn’s Ads, they are very effective because Rauner’s lack of vetting in the Primary make the attacks “fresher” in the mindset, and actually, by the mere fact they are “new news” the message doesn’t need to be as crisp or sharp; it’s new.
I voted “Quinn” solely on the freshness and newness factor if Ads against Rauner.
New is new. Had Rauner been vetted and bruised as he is now, and then won, where we are today, I would have voted “Rauner”, easily, in that prism.
Really thought-provoking question…
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:27 pm
The research is overwhelming that the more you try to pry people away from a long held belief, the more tightly they will cling to it.
Probably the craziest thing Rauner has tried to do in recent weeks is convince voters that Quinn is no bumbling idiot, but rather some sort of sly, evil genius who dons a bathrobe and mumbles to himself to try to pull one over on us.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:27 pm
I agree with 47th ward. Quinn attacking Rauner as Billionaire Bruce is more effective because its closer to the truth and the pivot that he is out of touch.
Well Quinn has negatives he doesn’t come anywhere close to being a felon.
So Quinn is reinforcing what folks know about Rauner and using it to paint him through a negative lens, but Rauner is having a hard time convincing folks that Quinn is a felon.
Comment by wndycty Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:28 pm
Rauner’s ads are hackneyed.
Quinn’s ads give concrete examples of the culture where Rauner “was successful in every endeavor.”
Game. Set. Quinn.
Comment by Come on man! Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:30 pm
Quinn’s. He has run more purely negative spots, not mixed but pure negative, than Rauner.
Academic research shows these pure negative spots provoke a stronger reaction in human beings than mixed or even positive spots. Quinn is running more powerful stuff more often than Rauner, and it is more effective as a consequence.
This is evident via the drop in Rauner’s numbers while Quinn’s number fail to get much better. Rauner didn’t drop because Quinn became more popular. Rauner dropped because Quinn hit him, and hit him hard.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:31 pm
Quinn’s are more effective because he is starting with a relatively blank palette. Additionally, Rauner has practically nothing positive that is concrete to say about his record/past performance as a balance.
Comment by Bobbysox Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:32 pm
It must be incredibly painful to be called a billionaire in public.
Comment by MikeMacD Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:32 pm
Rauner is a relative clean slate previously unknown to a general public which–especially in Illinois the last two years–dislikes billionaire venture/vulture capitalists running for high office like Bruce and Mitt.
Comment by Down Here Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:36 pm
I was asked to report on the door-to-door responses I am receiving in my area, which is primarily Highland Park, Highwood and one precinct in Lake Forest.
That’s my report on what folks are telling me to date. Whether I liked the responses received or hated them was irrelevant to the interview and conversation.
Comment by Louis G Atsaves Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:36 pm
Agree’d, everything good or bad is highlighted ab out Rauner because he is the unknown.
With Quinn, good news takes immediate hold because the general public has accepted him as a bad governor for a long time now and want to hear good things to justify them re-electing him.
Comment by THEGUN Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:38 pm
I think the proof is in the pudding - Rauner’s numbers are going down with the attacks while Quinn’s are staying relatively static through the attacks. That’s not hypothesis, that’s fact.
I can’t say I agree with Mooney much generally, but his point here is salient. The public knows less about Rauner so each piece of new information is more impactful than if he had a long public record. I think that’s part of it. YDD is right that part of it is that people feel they know Quinn (whether they like him or not) and it’s incredibly difficult to move people off of a belief once it’s established - that’s part of it. And the information about Rauner is essentially “new” while most of the negative attacks on Quinn have been seen and don’t move the needle as much - that’s part of it.
Comment by Joe Bidenopolous Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:38 pm
– convince voters that Quinn is no bumbling idiot, but rather some sort of sly, evil genius who dons a bathrobe and mumbles to himself to try to pull one over on us. –
Like Vincent “The Quinn” (The Chin) Gigante?
I voted Rauner’s ads, because they reinforce the frustration almost all Illinoisans have with state government. The trouble, as we’ve seen in the past, is that even with a change, our state government doesn’t seem to improve.
I suspect a lot of voters will hold their nose and vote for Rauner, thinking, “ANYTHING is better than what we’ve got now.”
Comment by Streator Curmudgeon Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:39 pm
== except one of those statements is accurate ==
This is either a lie or a misinformed statement. We don’t want any ==lemmings== following 47th off the cliff now, do we? http://politics.suntimes.com/article/springfield/bruce-rauners-billionaire-bind/thu-04242014-633pm
Comment by Formerly Known As... Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:40 pm
I’m a diehard Republican and have come to the realization that Illinois can’t take the chance on an unknown that is Bruce Rauner and potentially become another Wisconsin like it’s become under Scott Walker. Four more years of Pat Quinn, we all know what we’re going to get. It might not be appetizing but at least it’s not frightening.
Comment by Darin Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:40 pm
Mr. Mooney is not correct.
Pat Quinn isn’t just a long-toothed politician with a long history - importantly - Pat Quinn is the incumbent. It is always easier to run negatives effectively against an incumbent than it is against another candidate, even one with a long public history like Quinn.
This election is between an incumbent and a challenger. That isn’t always the situation. It is in 2014. What does a challenger do? A challenger reminds voters of what is going wrong in their lives. A challenger always goes negative. While there is a limit as to what a challenger can actually claim, that is, if the economy is robust and the claim is made that it isn’t - there really is easy to prove a negative case against an incumbent.
Challengers run negative campaigns. If there is negative news regarding crime, jobs, scandals, schools or even weather, (how well the incumbent handles disasters) - it is fodder for a negative campaign against the incumbent. The only thing voters need to know is if that news is bad. Then accept the challenger’s claim that it is the incumbent’s fault. Easy!
What we’ve witnessed in Illinois is the worse kind of reelection campaigns. Rod Blagojevich and Pat Quinn don’t tell us what has gone right when the news is bad - they just smear their challengers. Instead of reminding voters what they liked about them, they make up crap about what they shouldn’t like about their opponents.
Worse - Rod Blagojevich got reelected doing this. That tattooed a bad trend upon Illinois politics that we are seeing today. Had Blagojevich lost reelection running his attacks against Topinka, we wouldn’t have the craptastic stupid campaign we are enduring now. If Rod Blagojevich could defeat Topinka while practically wearing an orange jump suit, and paint Topinka, who most Democrats have since fallen in love with, successfully, then a case for negative smear attacks gained credibility - at our expense.
Voters know what they are doing. They don’t like it. They recognize that neither candidate is building a governing coalition of bipartisan support. They know this is what is wrong in Illinois. Voters are smarter than the political pundits who don’t care about governing, because they are fixated over winning an election, regardless of societal or governmental damage.
Rauner is the challenger. He has the edge on the negative campaigning. Naturally. This race wouldn’t even be close if he didn’t challenge the incumbent. He wouldn’t be this close if the negative claims he has made weren’t obvious to voters.
Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:43 pm
I think Rauner realized that portraying Quinn as a mastermind of evil wasn’t working when he dragged Blagojevich into the accusations, so now we have guilt by association. He’s backpedaling while Quinn is hitting hard on every new negative revelation about Rauner.
It’s working; Rauner’s numbers are coming down. His lack of a plan and positive message doesn’t help him either.
Comment by Wensicia Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:44 pm
Every election people complain about all the negative ads…and every election negative ads work.
Comment by Anonymoiis Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:45 pm
Rauner’s attacks seem a bit self-serving.
Rauner lumps Quinn with a bunch of people who aren’t especially Quinn people.
If Quinn lost the 2002 Democratic primary to Mike Kelleher or Joyce Washington, would the Illinois pension debt be better or worse?
Quinn is not driving the problem.
If Rauner really wanted to shake-up the Illinois General Assembly he’d put time and money into getting a better legislature.
But, Rauner is running for Governor b/c he’s got an insatiable ego.
What has Rauner advocated? Is any of it realistic? Or is it just a rich guy imitating the type of pandering that he claims to have contempt for?
Quinn might not be a driving force to get something new out of Springfield, but let’s be honest about Rauner.
What are Rauner’s two priorities going to be?
1. Set himself up to run for POTUS, a la Mitt Romney.
2. Protect Ken Griffin’s flash trading from regulation and taxation.
If Rauner was going to fix something, he’d have a plan. He doesn’t have a plan. It’s just pandering for votes while telling people he’s different. He’s not.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:46 pm
FKA, dude, you’re blinded with rage. Quinn has the commercial with the car (Ford). He’s got the two tornado commercials.
To say Quinn has no positive commercials impugns your ability to perceive reality, not Quinn’s ad campaign.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:49 pm
Rauner’s approach to problems is to bludgeon others into submission.
Rauner lacks finesse and charm.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:51 pm
I’m sick of both. It seems that no matter who wins in November, the citizens of Illinois lose.
Comment by Old Sarge Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:57 pm
Unless one of them comes up with a whizbang, never-knew-that! kind of negative ad, I am withholding my vote.
Rauner’s negative ads cast Governor Quinn as a bumbling doofus who wears the same striped purple tie every day, runs around telling people always does the right thing and always finds himself embroiled in a scandal/investigation/problem that he never caused or had any part in. What else is new?
Quinn’s negative ads paint Bruce Rauner as an evil businessman who defrauds Medicaid and gives people gift cards as they exit through the back. Again - what else is new? That fits the narrative pushed through the primary (albeit fairly quietly) and in the immediate aftermath of Rauner’s closer-than-expected primary win.
The band Drowning Pool sang the phrase “Something’s got to give!” in the chorus of their song “bodies”. Along the same vain, something’s got to give. This is all the same crap.
Comment by Team Sleep Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:58 pm
==Quinn attacking Rauner as Billionaire Bruce is more effective because its closer to the truth and the pivot that he is out of touch.==
Here’s the beautiful thing from Quinn’s point of view.
Rauner largely set-up the attacks on Rauner with Rauner’s early ads.
Rauner spent millions claiming he was a regular guy.
What’s the subtext?
a. Voters should vote for the regular guy candidate.
b. Rauner is a rich guy with something to hide b/c he’s spending millions claiming to be a regular guy when he’s a rich guy who spends lots of money to get his way.
If voters should be choosing who’s more of a regular guy, who gets the vote Quinn or Rauner?
And once Rauner planted the seed that he had something to hide in how he got rich, it was easier for the Quinn campaign to tarnish Rauner as a dishonest businessman. Rauner pretty much implied it in his “regular guy” ads.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:59 pm
Carl
Sorry but this cracked me up.
-Rauner’s approach to problems is to bludgeon others into submission.
Rauner lacks finesse and charm.–
So withholding lawmakers paychecks was finesse and charm?
Always amazes me how staunch D and R’s suddenly love bad politicians because they are theirs.
Comment by Mason born Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:00 pm
If Rauner is lying about being a regular guy, what else is he lying about?
Comment by Carl Nyberg Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:00 pm
Rauner’s seems to have little more substance. I think Rauner has a little more in the tank for a stretch run.
Quinn has given his best shot. However I’m surprised on how many people don’t know an election is coming up.
Comment by Mokenavince Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:01 pm
Sarge
– It seems that no matter who wins in November, the citizens of Illinois lose. –
That is the understatement. Although here in IL it’s the typical SNAFU.
Comment by Mason born Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:02 pm
Voted Quinn. He still has room to pivot and add all of the points Rich makes well here about the numbers not adding up. Bankrupt businesses will transition in a couple weeks into bankrupting the state with plans that don’t add up.
The Rauner stuff just doesn’t fit with the personality we know of Quinn. Asleep at the switch during corrupt or corrupting activity would resonate more with the existing Quinn brand
Comment by vibes Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:03 pm
Withholding paychecks was classic Quinn grandstanding, showmanship over substance.
But Rauner’s ads are linking Quinn to Blagojevich, Madigan and Cullerton. Rauner’s attacks on Quinn are as light on substance as Rauner’s policies on state spending.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:05 pm
What virtually everyone else said. Rauner’s an unknown, Quinn’s been around forever. Negative spots have a better chance of moving the needle against someone you haven’t already made up your mind about.
I’d add that Rauner erred by trying to paint himself as a some s-kickin’ huckleberry driving around in a filthy garbage-strewn fan. It harmed his credibility simply because if was not believable. It’s easier to believe the worst of some guy who’s working so hard to b-s you.
Also, besides the flawed strategy, the spots Rauner’s spots just haven’t been as good as Quinn’s. That’s been surprising. For some reason, he didn’t get top talent.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:08 pm
Playing the “Billionaire Bruce” approach led me to vote for Quinn’s ads to be more effective. It worked for Obama in Illinois in 2012. However, I believe Rauner’s ads which focus on the ineffectiveness of Illinois government and its poor financial position are his most promising approach. At least in that, his “negativity” would be truthful — and serve Illinoisans notice that they risk more of the same under same party government.
Comment by Diogenes in DuPage Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:14 pm
Carl Nyberg - You read things in my comment that are not there. I am not saying Quinn has no positive commercials.
Quinn’s Ford spot is in contention with Schilling’s Motorcycle spot as two of the best ads this cycle, imho. I am referencing the numbers from Pew and here showing Quinn has run many more negative spots than Rauner while Rauner has run more mixed and positive spots than Quinn, as well as recent research from a variety of objective institutions. No one is saying Quinn is running a ==dirty== campaign.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:15 pm
I voted Quinn’s ads more effective, simply because the polls have moved. I continue to think Quinn’s ads could be even more effective if he does a better job of finding real people affected by Rauner’s companies.
Comment by Robert the Bruce Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:16 pm
After all the negatie ads, in the end I think this one is going to come down to whom John and Jane Q Public can envision themselves sitting down in their back yard and having a discussion / drink with, fast talking Bruce or bumbling Pat.
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:18 pm
=== Darin - Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 12:40 pm: — I’m a diehard Republican and have come to the realization that Illinois can’t take the chance on an unknown that is Bruce Rauner and potentially become another Wisconsin like it’s become under Scott Walker ===
You are a die hard Republican and you think Scott Walker is bad?
Comment by dupage dan Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:19 pm
Mooney is absolutely correct. Think of each candidate as a product. Quinn has been in the marketplace for years and has established a reputation. Regardless of his job performance plusses or minuses people have a perception of the kind of individual he is. It’s difficult for Rauner’s negative ads to pierce that perception. People just don’t think that Quinn would purposely release violent criminals.
Rauner, on the other hand, is a new product and as such has no established perception in the minds of voters. He is definable which is what the Quinn forces are attempting to help do, and somewhat well so far. Rauner wants the canvass he paints to be of himself to be the Mona Lisa; Quinn wants to paint Rauner as “The Scream”.
Comment by Great Caesar's Ghost Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:20 pm
I voted Quinn: There is a negative associated with the “rich” especially if they are Republican. Whether it is true or not most people feel the rich are keeping them poor. So portraying your opponent as a evil rich guy keeps those perceptions in play.
Neither has a platform to run on except portraying the other as the worst choice. I am waiting for photos of Rainer having dinner with Satan in an ad.
Comment by FormerParatrooper Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:20 pm
Rauner has spent the entire primary and regular election season being vague about what he would do as governor.
Quinn’s negative attacks are filling in the blanks for people so they are much more effective.
Quinn on the other hand, has spent his entire professional life in politics. There aren’t many surprises out there so you tend to discount the negative attacks a bit.
Comment by Nonplussed Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:22 pm
I would add to mooney’s point that each new ad is new info on a previously unknown person. Each new ad is another grain of sand on the e er growing sand pile of bad things Bruce has been involved in and continues to be involved in. As these stories roll out, I have to imagine that people wonder how long into his tenure as governor would we be hearing about his billionaire bust out company laying off employees, shipping jobs overseas, neglecting seniors in nursing homes, and engaging in pay to play with convicted felons! Seriously, if we were all equal under the law, wouldn’t Rauner have been indicted by now? I think its a plausible question that voters will continue asking with each ad quinn releases. My vote goes to Quinn for better ads.
Comment by anon Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:22 pm
Robert the Bruce I agree. However If Rauner finds one person who lost a family member because NRI money wasn’t spent for its purpose, that also could be powerful.
Comment by In the past Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:24 pm
Billionaire Brucie has not established any positive baseline image or brand that people see or think of or associate w/ him, and that’s his fault. But that enables Quinn’s ads to be more effective cuz he can influence that image. Further, Brucie is inconsistent w/ his attacks on Quinn.
Comment by D.P.Gumby Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:24 pm
Quinn’s are more effective
As bad as Quinn is, people would rather go with the devil they know than the one hey don’t.
train111
Comment by train111 Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:25 pm
Rauner makes himself ever the easy target…after a career in the private corporate raider sector, there’s just so much to choose from…
Comment by Loop Lady Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:27 pm
Nice comeback Formerly Known As. Except even Bruce doesn’t know his exact worth. It fluctuates, according to Schrimpf, but their best guess is “middle nine figures.” So he’s half a billionaire. But who knows, if the market goes on a run, he could be a billionaire by week’s end.
I bet you’re kid in your dorm FKA.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:27 pm
“Bruce Rauner… If he can’t run a competent negative ad campaign against Pat Quinn, is he really up to negotiating with Speaker Madigan?”
Comment by Carl Nyberg Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:28 pm
Carl Nyberg has a good take:
Rauner’s regular guy commercials presume that being a regular guy is good, being not a regular guy is bad. The public perceives Quinn as a regular guy, maybe too regular… But anyway, Bruce painted himself into a corner here. He’s so obviously not the regular guy in this race, but that’s who he thinks we should vote for. Ergo, vote for Quinn.
Comment by chi Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:29 pm
Darin four more years is less frightening ?
What’s frightening is your logic….
Comment by In the past Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:31 pm
if going negative is a release of information that i don`t have (knowlege is power)give me more feelgood knowlege that i can base my vote on,it`s all good(undecided)
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:32 pm
One anti-Quinn ad had me thinking…either it is Quinn’s intentional bad conduct or Quinn’s incompetence. Take your pick. Regardless of the outcome of the Quinn investigations, neither his alleged intentional bad conduct nor incompetence has been good for the State of Illinois. Quinn argues by extrapolation any Rauner business malfeasance must correlate to taking the State of Illinois down the wrong road. I don’t buy that.
Comment by anonymoose Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:33 pm
Darin: If you were a “diehard” republican you would vote for Rauner and not make excuses not too
Comment by THEGUN Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:33 pm
=== Probably the craziest thing Rauner has tried to do in recent weeks is convince voters that Quinn is no bumbling idiot, but rather some sort of sly, evil genius who dons a bathrobe and mumbles to himself to try to pull one over on us. ===
Well said YDD.
Comment by Norseman Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:34 pm
Rauner’s team is having a hard time responding to Quinn’s negative ads because Rauner didn’t/doesn’t see his actions as negative. His “successes” being portrayed negatively have totally blindsided him. I think it highlights just how different he is from us 99%ers.
Comment by Namaste Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:39 pm
–Darin: If you were a “diehard” republican you would vote for Rauner and not make excuses not too–
Why is that?
Do you think if Rauner had seen an easier path to the Big Chair as a Democrat he wouldn’t have taken it?
The guy has spent big money on Democrats and Republicans over the years.
If you just want the gig as a status symbol, the obviously easier path this year was as a Republican.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:39 pm
Rauner was the unknown, until we started to see him ad nauseum on our TV screens so many times a day. He’s a billionaire that is detached from anyone that is not rich. To think that he has ANY idea how people that are not rich feel about things in our state is truly hard to believe. His attempts to paint him as a “regular” guy fall way short of believable. Compound that with all the legal stuff that GTCR has been involved in and you have someone that never can be trusted. A candidate should not try to convince people that he is something that he is not. Intelligent voters can see right through his rhetoric. Simply an ultra-rich guy that wants to take over a state, just like he takes over companies in his business dealings.
Comment by Big Joe Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:40 pm
Identify myself as an Independent republican; did not vote until I read the comments so far, because I felt that I was prejudiced against Rauner (mainly as a result of what I have read on this blog). But I agree with most of the comments here so I voted Quinn-was shocked at how many people agree with me.
To take the familiarity concept further- Quinn’s “I’m driving” is great-think about this- He might get a lost a couple of times, but the riders will probably get there safely. Rauner would probably drive the wrong way on a one-way street…
Comment by downstate commissioner Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:41 pm
47th Ward - There are ways to highlight his wealth, and the potentially despicable ways he generated some of that wealth, without being duplicitous. The Sun-Times is considerably more accurate than unsourced campaign sound bites, and his wealth is plainly not $1 Billion as the story notes.
Likewise, your dignified response is reminiscent of Rousseau == Insults are the arguments employed by those who are in the wrong. ==
Pat Quinn, is that you?
Comment by Formerly Known As... Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:50 pm
Free advice for Mr. Rauner’s Campaign. Here is the message they should have used:
“Time and time again, we elect the same people, and expect a different result. We need to change the way we think in Illinois. I’m a doer. I get things done. Here are the three things I’ll do from day one to change the way Illinois conducts its business. 1.) 2.) 3.)”
I don’t care what those tree things are, just that they are doable and understandable. Rauner’s group has been very undisciplined. Quinn, on the other hand has had his poop together. Quinn has clearly been more effective. This race shouldn’t even be close, let a lone Quinn being up.
Comment by Try-4-Truth Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:51 pm
Quinn’s ads have effectively taken away Rauner’s position as a job creator who’s business experience will save Illinois from ruin. Rauner’s ads just seem like he’s grasping for straws and don’t appear to erode any of Quinn’s strengths.
Comment by Bluefish Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:55 pm
FKA, you argue like an undergrad and I was trying to pay you a compliment.
What do you think “middle nine figures” means Einstein? I’ll put it this way, is it more accurate to say Rauner is a billionaire when he may have a net worth of “only” $500 million, or calling Quinn a felon when he’s never been charged with so much as a misdemeanor?
Why don’t you check the academic journals and get back to us on that?
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:57 pm
FKA, Rauner’s not complaining about being called a billionaire.
If he starts complaining, the conversation turns to how much he’s worth, what are his holdings, where he’s stashed his money, etc.
Plus, how ridiculous in a political campaign would it be to complain about only being worth $500 million?
Give Rauner credit for not taking the bait.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:58 pm
the ultimate negative ad would be chad grimm saying~”i`m neither one of these guys~
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 2:00 pm
I miss the days when pollsters didn’t run campaigns.
Comment by Liberty Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 2:05 pm
47th Ward - there is no need to check any academic journals, only your opening comment. The one that states
= They’re upset about ads which call Quinn a felon and keep calling Rauner ‘Billionaire Bruce =
== Yes, except one of those statements is accurate. The other is slanderous and I’m pretty sure voters understand the difference. ==
Facts are your friend, 47th. Try to keep them straight, at least in the same thread. Dude is not a billionaire, no matter how convoluted your “if we round up then we can kind of sort of get there because ‘Billionaire Bruce’ sounds much better then anything else we can come up with” logic may be.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 2:07 pm
As a voter, I can identify with Quinn and disagree; I can’t identify at all with Rauner on a personal level. Regarding the political implications, Quinn is moving Rauner’s favorable downward, which is second best to moving his own upward. Quinn has succeeded at negating Rauner’s runaway lead via negative spots. Quinn has also injected what I believe are very good positive spots recently. By first negating the opposition advantage, Quinn will have far less ground to cover to raise his own polling by 2-3 points with the positive ads, which could solidify the margin in Quinn’s favor on 11/4.
Comment by Midstate Indy Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 2:09 pm
- Try-4-Truth - Thursday, Oct 2, 14
Right On The Money!!!
Race SHOULD not even be close…….
Comment by THEGUN Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 2:10 pm
wordslinger - well said. And he is right for not doing so, as you describe so well.
Engaging in that sort of campaign debate would be a death knell for Rauner. “But I’m only a multi-hundred-millionaire” doesn’t garner much sympathy lol.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 2:10 pm
Thanks Norseman.
Look, I am not saying Quinn is teflon.
I just think it is pretty hard to convince voters that he is corrupt, or that he is pals with Mike Madigan, or that he wants to cut education.
Trying to convince voters a Democrat cut spending is about as hard as trying to convince voters a Republican wants to raise your taxes.
Both might be true. But it is a hard sell.
Read all the research on trying to overcome archetypes.
I think that is why Quinn’s attacks are more efficient. The Archetype of billionaire businessmen is not good. And although Rauner has done a masterful job of trying to alter that image, the archetype is the default position.
As I said before, I think Rauner has also worn out his outsider message. He has been behaving just as all other politicians do for nearly a year now. Every campaign ad airs a positive message, but it also reminds people he is a politician….something the gurus usually forget to factor into the equation.
That said, on sheer volume of advertising, he still might win…but you get a declining margin of utility.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 2:20 pm
I’ll bet Bruce is a billionaire if you count his off-shore tax shelters.
Comment by my two cents Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 2:23 pm
Do effective negative ads drive turnout or reduce it?
Whom would lower turnout help? The GOP challenger in a leaning-Dem state? Is that part of Rauner’s strategy?
The surprise so far, is that Quinn has had a couple of good positive ads, while Rauner’s only really good positive was with his wife.
Will Rauner run the bad news train to victory?
Comment by walker Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 2:26 pm
I wish most of the negative stuff would stop. Most commercials simply say what a liar the other candidate while ‘I am fighting for (pick your favorite topic)’. It borders on the irritating portion of ‘that’s all you got?’.
Rauner: put the same detailed effort into some plans as they have to identify something that happened Sept 13 at 2:30pm 3 years ago. He really needs to show some successes with his companies. I have not seen a single one.
Quinn: He should keep pushing the Ford, grass cutting, and Mayor spots. Throw in a couple of the ‘he didn’t think we’d find out?’.
The local Reps and Senator spots are almost immediate turnoffs. Just unrelenting negative, even if the candidate approved the message. Don’t care who joined a health club or flew first class, what are you going to do?
Comment by zatoichi Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 2:33 pm
Quinn’s negative ads are more effective because they are actually interesting. We are learning major new information about Rauner’s business practices every day. Thanks to Rauner’s willingness to leave himself vulnerable through his high profile candidacy, this is one of the very few times since the top 0.01% club nearly tanked the U.S. economy in 2008 that we are really getting the inside scoop about one of their members. Even Mitt Romney presidential campaign in 2012 did not produce nearly such a profusion of juicy information.
Comment by Quiet Sage Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 2:45 pm
Quinn’s ads are FAR MORE negative,
Comment by Fair & Balanced Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 2:49 pm
I voted Quinn, because more and more folks are bringing up the attacks against Rauner to me.
I do think the anti-Quinn ads that I’ve seen (Chicago area) are just efforts to drive down turnout more than define Quinn. So the fairest comparison is probably does this ad make me want to vote for someone other than Rauner vs. does this ad make me want to sleep in on election day.
Comment by Century Club Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 2:56 pm
Quite Sage:
this is one of the very few times since the top 0.01% club nearly tanked the U.S. economy in 2008
Really??…..
Comment by THEGUN Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 2:57 pm
Let’s face it: thoughtful, informed voters are a small minority of the electorate. Those are the ones repulsed by the stupid ads being aired by both sides. Most superficial voters believe most of what they hear on tv, and their votes are influenced more by the groups they affiliate with rather than by studying the issues, which is hard. The same people will buy a product just because some football coach endorses it, or because the product appears to work on those late night tv ads. That’s why negative ads are used, even tho they turn off big time the thoughtful voters, who will still vote on the merits as they see them.
Comment by Formerpol Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 2:58 pm
Check Sept 25th posting, “Todays Numbers 29,228″
If you want to know who is running the most Negative Ads
Quninn by a LANDSLIDE
Comment by THEGUN Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 3:00 pm
- Namaste - Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:39 pm:
Rauner’s team is having a hard time responding to Quinn’s negative ads because Rauner didn’t/doesn’t see his actions as negative. His “successes” being portrayed negatively have totally blindsided him. I think it highlights just how different he is from us 99%ers.
Well said, Rauner still probably doesn’t get it.
Comment by nicky Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 3:06 pm
- THEGUN - Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 1:33 pm:
Darin: If you were a “diehard” republican you would vote for Rauner and not make excuses not too
I understand what you are saying with this coimment. The mistake the other poster made was using the term “diehard”.
So let me give you my perspective.
I have voted in the republican primary since 1980, the first year I was old enough to vote. I have voted for a few R’s thru the years that I didn’t totally agree with, but I’ll be damned if someone thinks I should ALWAYS vote for someone just because they have a “R” next to their name on the ballot. If you have decided (in your own mind) that everything Rauner has supported/paid for in the past doesn’t matter, and that even though he has vilified other good R’s (those 1/3rd of the house and senate R’s he was bringing up until recently come to mind)as “corrupt” , and even though he has paid politicians FROM BOTH PARTIES to get business from the government feed trough, but you don’t care because you vote for ANYONE who runs under the Republican brand name?
Then you can own him.
I don’t want my state and its citizens to go through another Blago circus for the next four years. I planed on keeping my ballot blank on the governor line, but the more I hear about Rauner’s past? Well..that might change too.
Comment by Roadiepig Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 3:09 pm
–Rauner’s negative ads cast Governor Quinn as a bumbling doofus who wears the same striped purple tie every day, runs around telling people always does the right thing and always finds himself embroiled in a scandal/investigation/problem that he never caused or had any part in.–
Actually, Rauner’s negative spots portray Quinn as corrupt.
Rauner had that press conference where he read from the prepared text and claimed Quinn was some sinister crime lord, and “ran the whole Outfit” (that word has a special meaning in Illinois).
–”This scam, perpetrated by Pat Quinn has got to end,” Rauner said. “Pat Quinn is not the folksy, bumbling fool he’d like us to think he is. He knows what he’s doing. He knows what he’s done.”–
Still, you’ll notice in Rauner’s negative spot “Jobs Governor” he can’t decide if Quinn is corrupt or incompetent, so he goes with both, lol.
http://politics.suntimes.com/article/springfield/rauner-quinn-pretending-be-folksy-bumbling-fool/mon-09152014-1242pm
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 3:10 pm
I voted Quinn’s. The proof may be in the polling pudding, since we are seeing polls now in which he’s in the lead, when before he was trailing significantly.
This seems to have started when Quinn ran negative ads about outsourcing and the Cayman Islands tax shelter. Rauner also handed Quinn a gift with the van commercial.
We have to remember that Rauner started all this negativity in the primary, when he repeatedly attacked unions and politicians and called them corrupt.
There is a lot of ammo that Rauner gave Quinn in the primary and before, like when Rauner was dead-set against a minimum wage increase, wanted to do right to work, would have vetoed Medicaid expansion, etc.
Rauner is an unknown, and there are a lot of vulture capitalism stories that may be defining him.
Quinn has a very serious scandal, the NRI. That could do major damage but hasn’t yet.
I wonder how many Rauner supporters who are weeping about negativity now were crying when he was ripping apart other candidates and people?
Comment by Grandson of Man Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 3:13 pm
–If you want to know who is running the most Negative Ads
Quninn by a LANDSLIDE–
Only if you buy the idea that so-called “mixed” ads are not negative.
Still, what’s your point? Rauner obviously has no problem running negative ads. No candidate anywhere does.
If he’s not running as many as you like, it must be because his peeps consider it the path to victory. His campaign, his choice.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 3:15 pm
I initially was excited to support Bruce Rauner but as more and more information comes out and you see Bruce’s style, I sense that if Rauner was able to pull out a win, he’d never be able to effectively work with the House or Senate and that it would create a contentious and unhealthy environment. A consensus builder is needed and so far it doesn’t appear that’s Bruce Rauner.
Comment by Darin Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 4:09 pm
===I have voted in the republican primary since 1980, the first year I was old enough to vote. I have voted for a few R’s thru the years that I didn’t totally agree with, but I’ll be damned if someone thinks I should ALWAYS vote for someone just because they have a “R” next to their name on the ballot. If you have decided (in your own mind) that everything Rauner has supported/paid for in the past doesn’t matter, and that even though he has vilified other good R’s (those 1/3rd of the house and senate R’s he was bringing up until recently come to mind)as “corrupt” , and even though he has paid politicians FROM BOTH PARTIES to get business from the government feed trough, but you don’t care because you vote for ANYONE who runs under the Republican brand name?
Then you can own him.
I don’t want my state and its citizens to go through another Blago circus for the next four years. I planed on keeping my ballot blank on the governor line, but the more I hear about Rauner’s past? Well..that might change too.===
That is as clear as can be.
Very well said. As you know, I can’t agree more.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 7:28 pm
Thanks OW . I just don’t understand how I could vote for someone (who goes against my personal belief system) just because he is running for my party. Can’t do it…
Comment by Roadiepig Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 8:42 pm
there must be someone who had there wealth unlocked,and are better off today than before bruce?
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Oct 2, 14 @ 9:00 pm
FKA, you reference an article where Rauner’s campaign manager says he not worth a billion, and cite that as some sort of proof that Quinn is lying? Why am I not convinced that mid 9 figures is, in any way, believable? 47th is spot on.
Comment by PublicServant Friday, Oct 3, 14 @ 5:55 am
Rauner should just run ads on Quinn as a well-meaning but woefully inept bungler. That would be more appropriate than anything else. People dislike exaggeration and both Rauner and Quinn take things out of context and exaggerate them beyond belief. Perhaps a commercial showing Quinn as Goober or Gomer Pyle running a filling station in Mayberry and then suddenly in a surreal dream being put in charge of running a Fortune 500 corporation and running it into bankruptcy? Or perhaps Gomer Pyle being suddenly put into a surgical gown and placed in an operating room scenario. Then have a nurse say to Gomer, “Doctor, will the patient survive the heart surgery?” Then a close up of Pat Quinn taking off the surgical mask and saying Gooolllly, I don’t really know because I had no idea what I was doing.” That might be more to the point as to what has happened to our state of Illinois over the last 4 years of Pat Quinn “doing the surgery” that was required.
Comment by Coffee Cup Friday, Oct 3, 14 @ 7:42 am
Better Pat Quinn trying to save the patient, Coffee Cup, than Rauner, in response to the nurse’s question saying, “It’s not my problem.”, just sayin.
Comment by PublicServant Friday, Oct 3, 14 @ 9:07 am