Do we really like Rauner more? Or can he drop below Christie in the rankings?

Is Bruce Rauner’s favorability amongst Illinoisans really on the rise? Or are we just moving on to other people we despise a little bit more we do our state’s illustrious governor?
 

RAUNER: Can he rise to middle-of-the-pack?

The Morning Consult group came out with their latest survey – one that ranked all of the nation’s governors and senators based on how well they’re liked by their constituents.

THE BIG NEWS of their survey is that Chris Christie of New Jersey, who at various times in the past was supposed to be a presidential favorite AND someone that Donald Trump should consider for vice president or a prominent cabinet post, is now the most unpopular governor in the country.

Which probably shows how rankings such as these don’t mean a whole lot. It’s not like there’s anything about Christie’s underlying persona that has changed significantly. It’s just that we’ve now decided we want to think more negatively about him.

So what does it say about their ranking for Rauner – who supposedly is the 44^th most popular (out of 50) governor in the nation. He’s one notch ahead of Wisconsin’s nationally-known governor, Scott Walker.

Who there was a time way back when he was going out of his way to provoke labor unions in his state when HE would have been the most unpopular, and people likely would have thought Christie was “cool.”

TO GET MORE specific about Rauner, the Morning Consult group says his approval rating has gone up significantly (from 33 percent back September to 42 percent now) while his disapproval rating went from 56 percent then to 49 percent now.

 

CHRISTIE: Can he rise above Rauner?

It’s not that Rauner has done anything differently in recent months to make people like him any more than they did before. If anything, Illinois’ governor has shown himself to be terminally stubborn – digging in his heels with his desire to have a legacy as the governor who undermined organized labor’s influence within state government.

We’re no closer to a budget. Rauner seems determined to believe he can prevail because everyone will “Blame Madigan!” Perhaps he envisions a “South Park”-like song (“Blame Canada”) with Illinoisans singing as they venture to the polling places come the 2018 election cycle?

What will really determine things is whether the cycle shifts that people go back to blaming Bruce, or if that just gets old for would-be voters.

 

Are Richard  Durbin and ...

WILL PEOPLE LISTEN to messages like the one from gubernatorial candidate Ameya Pawar, who on Tuesday blamed Rauner for program cuts to senior citizens, college students, child health care and the mentally ill.

Will we be outraged a little more than a year-and-a-half from now? Or will we get tired of hearing such talk and move on?

He won’t be helped by the fact that this does essentially remain a Democratic-leaning state; even though Rauner’s rhetoric would have you think his 2014 election converted us to being lovers of the GOP elephant – even though many modern-day Republicans seem embarrassed by the fact that Abraham Lincoln was ever one of them.

The same Morning Consult study showed Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., with a 52 percent approval rating, and 50 percent for Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill. His having been around longer (more than two decades in the Senate and close to four decades in D.C. overall) does give him a certain ignomy (34 percent disapproval).

BUT HIS APPROVAL is identical to that of Cory Booker of New Jersey (whom some are contemplating as a ’20 presidential hopeful) and Timothy Kaine of Virginia (remember him, he could have been our vice president now).

 

... Tammy Duckworth more like Ill.?

Does that make Illinois a place inclined to see Rauner continue to plummet in the future. Or can he stabilize himself during the next year into an unmemorable governor?

Will Rauner continue to move up the popularity polls to the middle of the gubernatorial pack? Or will the coming of Election Day next year be the factor that puts more heat on him, causing Rauner to drop to the Number 50 slot (being the governor who couldn’t get a budget passed ever during his four-year term is a pretty nasty legacy to have)?

I’m sure Chris Christie himself wouldn’t be bothered in the least to be deposed as the possessor of the bottom slot on the gubernatorial favorability rankings.

  -30-

A 'President' Clinton needs political allies if she’s to get anything done

I have lost track of the number of e-mail messages I have received in recent weeks from political operatives – all bearing the same message.
 

BOOKER: Will try to bolster Dem support in Ind.

Cough up some campaign cash to bolster the chances of Democrats taking control of the Senate and House of Representatives, or it won’t matter by how much Hillary Clinton beats up on Donald Trump come Nov. 8.

THEY’RE ALL WRITTEN in the same depressing tone of how we people who don’t want the conservative ideologue viewpoint rammed down our throats on every issue have already lost because Republicans will likely continue their obstructionist ways when it comes to governing.

Some of these e-mails go so far as to try to “guilt trip” me, by letting me know their records show I haven’t given a dime to any candidate or political cause. Mostly because I have never made a political contribution in an effort to maintain some sort of impartiality. The ones attributed to political operative James Carville are amongst the most over-the-top in their rhetoric.

Perhaps it’s good that the allegedly-liberal interests don’t think of me as some sort of lackey. Although I suspect the ideologues read what is written here, and have already written me off as incorrigible.

But someone is going to have to come up with the kind of cash to help support the kind of people who would be inclined to ally themselves with a second Clinton presidency.

WHICH IS WHY it was intriguing to read the Washington Post’s report how the Clinton campaign itself is coming up with $1 million to support Senate and gubernatorial candidates running in the neighboring states of Indiana and Missouri.

Both are states that often lean Republican, but in the case of Missouri has shown some support for Democrats. Particularly if St. Louis and Kansas City can band together to out-vote the rural parts of the state that lie in between.

 

CLINTON: Pitching in her own campaign cash

While in Indiana, Democrats there have expressed hope that the fact that Gov. Mike Pence gave up his post to try to bolster the Trump presidential dreams means that a non-incumbent Republican can actually be beaten by Democrat John Gregg.

While the potential comeback of Evan Bayh could shift the U.S. Senate seat up for grabs in the Hoosier state come next month.

CLINTON HERSELF IS seeing a need to do something to try to build up allies in places that might otherwise turn out to be hostile to her political desires. Which is good. Because if they’re counting entirely on $3 contributions from people solicited via the Internet, they’re going nowhere.

The Indiana elections are of particular interest because it will be that part of the Hoosier state that lies just across the state line from Chicago that will decide if Democrats can actually have any influence there.

Because I don’t doubt that in places like Fort Wayne or Terre Haute, there will be voters convinced of the dreadfulness of Hillary Clinton and/or the superiority of Donald Trump in the White House.

It will be people in places like Hammond (just across the state line) and Gary (a couple towns to the east) that will decide what happens.

WHICH IS WHY local Democrats have a rally planned for Tuesday in downtown Gary where Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., will try to inspire local residents to turn out to vote.

 

PENCE: Will absence from Indiana help Dems?

Booker, the former mayor of Newark, will try to inspire locals of the similarity of their depressed communities, and how a Clinton presidency could be the factor that makes a difference.

Because there have been countless tales in recent months of just how badly Trump flopped when he tried operating a riverboat casino in Gary. Stories that may have a more negative effect in Indiana than any tale of Trump thinking he can grope any babe who happens to catch his eye.

Although it does come off as a bit depressing that we in Illinois, who will wind up providing our Electoral College votes to Clinton in a landslide, will have to rely so heavily on our neighbor states to influence the future direction of our government. Pro-Hillary, or continued obstruction!

  -30-

Well, duh! Who’d you think Ted Cruz would wind up casting a ballot for?

One of the drawbacks to being a part of the newsgathering racket is that there are times you can see the way stories get reported and you know it’s nonsense. Yet it still winds up turning out that way.
 

Mission Accomplished - name is in the papers

I couldn’t help but think that about the news reports that went out Friday that tried to make it seem like a dramatic moment in the story of Election ’16 – former presidential hopeful Ted Cruz will vote for Donald Trump for president.

IF YOU THINK about it seriously, who’s he really going to vote for?

This is one of those tea party-type dinks whose political philosophy is based so heavily on believing that Hillary Clinton (and her husband Bill) are exactly what is wrong with this country.

I’m sure that in the mind of the senator from Texas, his biggest regret is that it won’t be himself who gets to take on Hillary and drive a political stake through her heart. He probably would enjoy that image, and would love to go down in the history books as the guy who beat Clinton.

Of course, that’s not going to happen. Because Cruz wound up being a part of that mass of Republican candidates who couldn’t rise above the pack – resulting in the GOP giving its presidential nomination to Trump.

ADMITTEDLY, CRUZ WAS the last of all those 18 people to drop out. He was the final holdout. And some people who remember his performance at the Republican National Convention seriously wanted to believe that Ted was somehow acting on some sort of anti-Trump principle.

Which of these candidates ...

He wasn’t.

What bothered him was that he lost. History won’t record the concept of “President Rafael Edward ‘Ted’ Cruz,” at least not in this election cycle. He’s exactly the type who may try running again in future years.

For all we know, he may actually get the nomination. Or maybe he’s just destined to be a perennial joke – constantly appearing on the ballot and screeching to steadily declining crowds as the years pass by.

... makes your blood boil over?

HE’LL PROBABLY MAKE the focal point of his future campaigns the chance to rant and rage about all the actions that will be committed in the next few years by “President Hillary R. Clinton” – if that concept becomes a reality.

The idea that Cruz would ever back Clinton was an absurdity.

If anything, this election cycle is becoming one less about radical change. The idea that people would suddenly vote against their usual political interests isn’t going to happen.

Many Democrats are finding it in them to accept the idea of Clinton as president, while many Republicans (including the Ricketts family, although there’s evidence that daughter Laura thinks that father J. Joe can stick it) are finding it within themselves to back Donald.

THE BIG SHIFT may be those so-called “alt-right” (real people call them “white supremacist”) voters who usually think the Republicans are too wimpy to take seriously. Many of them think Trump has balls enough to stand up to the foreigners and perverts and racial mongrels (which they would phrase more crudely) and all other people who aren’t just like themselves.

 

Really??!?

Could they wind up giving Trump enough political support to win come Nov. 8? Particularly if combined with apathy from certain segments who theoretically should be Hillary-backers?

A lot of it will depend on the incumbent President, who according to the Gallup Organization had a 52 percent approval rating as of Friday. The more people like the idea of Obama, the more they will want to ensure his philosophies will be carried on by the next U.S. president.

That will wind up being what decides the upcoming election – not anything that Ted Cruz would have said or done as he tries to figure out how to remain politically relevant. Which really is the only reason he bothered to make a statement Friday to begin with.

  -30-