Is there enough “Tio love” for Hardiman to avoid embarrassing himself in ’16 campaign?

The lesson that most people got from the primary election cycle of 2014 was that then-Gov. Pat Quinn had some serious problems in getting voter support outside of Chicago and the inner suburbs.

He won the Democratic primary for the right to try to get re-elected, and he won it handily.

QUINN TOOK SOME 71.9 percent of the votes cast in the Democratic gubernatorial primary. But he managed to lose the vote in 30 of Illinois’ 102 counties.

Particularly in places south of Interstate 70 where the locals get their television news out of Paducah, Ky., and Cape Girardeau, Mo., and where Memphis is regarded as the nearest “big” city.

It would seem that Southern Illinois wanted nothing to do with Quinn. Not in the primary, and certainly not in the general election when Quinn ultimately lost to current Gov. Bruce Rauner.

Now why is remembering this fact at all notable on this day following Tax Day – when some of us might be plotting how to spend our income tax refunds while others (including myself) are decrying how strapped for cash we are now that we have squared away what we owe to Uncle Sam?

IT’S THAT IT seems not everybody got the proper lesson. Especially not Tio Hardiman, who was the one person willing to put his name on the Democratic Party ballot and try to challenge Quinn in the primary!

It seems that Hardiman, a suburban Hillside resident and former director of the CeaseFire group that tries to reduce urban violence, thinks people in some 30 counties wanted him, and that he has something significant in the way of support for a political career.

The Capitol Fax newsletter reported how Hardiman considered challenging Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., in next year’s election. Of course, that campaign will have several significant Democrats challenging the incumbent senator from Illinois.

It will have many well-funded operations, and will be something distinctly nasty to have to endure.

SO PERHAPS IT is a good thing that Hardiman was talked out of running for that office. Particularly since his campaign finances for that race likely would be about as pathetic as the few hundred bucks that at times was his campaign fund for governor in 2014.

But Hardiman seems determined to do his Sally Field “You really like me” impersonation on the political scene.

For it seems that the man who has never held political office wants to run for Congress – specifically for the seat held for more than two decades by Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill.

Does Hardiman think he gained some sort of experience with his non-campaign against Quinn that saw him take 28.1 percent of the vote statewide because there were that many Democrats determined not to vote for Quinn?

I REALLY WONDER how appalled many of those Southern Illinois voters who cast ballots for Hardiman because it was an anti-Quinn vote, only to learn that many of his own ideas about firearms and urban violence were counter to their own.

At least if he’s merely running in the Illinois First Congressional (South Side and surrounding suburbs), he’s more likely to be running for support of voters who bear a resemblance to himself.

Then again, Quinn whomped Hardiman’s butt in Cook County. Even Rauner and Kirk Dillard, both Republicans, got more votes in Chicago and the inner suburbs than did Hardiman in the 2014 primary elections that they all ran in.

Would it take another resounding defeat to Bobby Rush to teach Tio that he’s probably not candidate material? Or is he destined to become the urban version of “Spanky the Clown” with perennial political bids for higher office?

  -30-

ELECTION DAZE: How did gubernatorial dreamers ‘play’ in Peoria?

Personally, I thought the Thursday night debate between Gov. Pat Quinn and Republican challenger Bruce Rauner was rather “blah.” More a matter of scratching my head and wondering, “Do we really have to pick from these two guys for our state’s next governor?”

But I can think of one group of persons who probably were ecstatic with what they heard from the two – public educators.

SPECIFICALLY, I’M REFERRING to those schools superintendents all across Illinois who have been quaking in their pants for some time now concerning a measure pending in the Illinois General Assembly – the one that seeks to redo the way state aid is apportioned to school districts.

The bill in question, which has state Senate approval but still needs review by the Illinois House of Representatives, is meant to give more state funds to those school districts in areas where property values are on the decline.

But I have heard several superintendents and financial advisors say the bill’s specifics are so complex and convoluted that there aren’t any easy ‘winners’ and ‘losers.’ I have heard from district officials who are convinced they will lose money even though they technically are in areas where property taxes just don’t produce enough cash to keep the schools functioning at a respectable level.

During the debate, both candidates were asked whether they’d support the bill.

QUINN SAID HE hates it because he doesn’t like the idea of any school district losing state funds. He wants to find a way to increase the state’s share of money for all districts.

Whereas Rauner admitted he hadn’t studied the bill in great detail, but said that from what he had heard, he’d be inclined to oppose it.

Does this mean the sudden “whoosh” we heard Thursday night was the sound of superintendents across Illinois exhaling at the prospect that this reform measure may eventually wither away?

What else should we think of what was the first of three formal debates between Quinn and Rauner prior to the Nov. 4 general election?

LEGISLATORS GET ENDORSEMENTS THEY MAY NOT WANT: At one point, Bruce Rauner confessed to having respect for state Rep. Jack Franks, D-Woodstock, and state Sen. Toi Hutchinson, D-Olympia Fields.

While Pat Quinn said he respects Illinois House Minority Leader Jim Durkin, R-Western Springs, and former state Sen. Kirk Dillard of Hinsdale – who now is in charge of running the Regional Transportation Authority.

The question was meant to give the two gubernatorial hopefuls a chance to express some bipartisan support.

But how long will it be until those people named wind up wishing that the candidates had kept their mouths shut and not singled them out? Because we do have way too many people who view “bipartisan” as the ultimate dirty word.

POLITICAL ‘LOVE’ BY ASSOCIATION?: Bruce Rauner offered up Michigan Gov. Rick Scott, Florida Gov. Rick Scott and one-time New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg as examples of business-oriented people who achieved government office.

He tried to claim them as examples of why he should not be regarded as too inexperienced to hold Illinois government’s top political post. But I can think of many people who would view those examples as proof of why we should vote for Pat Quinn.

As for the Mighty Quinn? He tried at one point to gain some goodwill by touting the accomplishments of that Jackie Robinson West Little League team from the Roseland neighborhood that almost won the Little League World Series this year.

It makes me wonder if, on that date sometime in the future when Quinn has to appear before St. Peter and justify his admission to ‘Heaven,” will he try trotting those youngsters out as an example of something positive that happened on his watch?

GO AWAY!!!!: Chad Grimm is a 33-year-old gym manager who has the Libertarian Party nomination for governor. He also happens to live in Peoria, which would have made him the lone candidate who didn’t have to travel a great distance to partake in the debate at WTPV-TV studios in that central Illinois city.

But we didn’t get to see or hear from him, because the debate organizers wanted only candidates who register 10 percent or more in polls to participate. Various polls that have included Grimm put him at about 5 percent backing.

I know the rationale from TV types; they don’t want the stage cluttered with candidates who can’t win. But I have never bought that – I have always thought anyone who can actually beat the legal challenges and get their names on the Election Day ballot ought to be included.

So that the voters know for sure just who that otherwise-anonymous knucklehead is when they show up at a polling place to cast their ballots.

  -30-

EXTRA: Rauner wins – does this mean the Cubs will narrowly lose in ’14?

I made the wisecrack recently that the people who expected Kirk Dillard to do a political comeback and win the Republican primary for governor are the same kind who expect the Chicago Cubs to win the National League pennant in the near future.

Would Bruce Rauner actually move into the Executive Mansion in Springfield? It's not like the Winnetka resident with a Chicago high-rise condo and seven other residences across the country needs another place to live.

So does the close campaign we appear to have got this election cycle mean that the Cubs will not be quite so awful, and may actually finish a close second place?

CUBS FANS MAY well be satisfied with that. But for those who detest the concept of venture capitalist Bruce Rauner as governor, his apparent victory over all his GOP challengers is still bound to sting.

With about 10 percent of precincts still to be counted late Tuesday, it seems that Rauner got 40.8 percent of the vote, compared to 37.2 percent for the state senator from Hinsdale who in conceding defeat showed he could duplicate former Gov. Jim Edgar’s deadly-dull monotone-style of speaking.

Other candidates William Brady (14.8 percent) and Dan Rutherford (7.3 percent – and conceding defeat even while some polls in Chicago were kept open late because of morning delays in getting them open) also ran.

I really suspect that Rauner, with his personal ties to Mayor Rahm Emanuel, will be a turn-off in the rural parts of the state, where there are those who want a governor who will put a leash on Chicago’s desires, and not cuddle up to the current version of Hizzoner.

ALTHOUGH IN CHICAGO, Rauner had a 52.43 percent majority among those city dwellers who chose to cast a GOP ballot. And no, hearing Rauner’s lieutenant governor running mate mix a little Spanish into her introduction Tuesday night isn’t going to sway many people to change their vote.

What about the incumbent?

Gov. Pat Quinn seems to have a 71.9 percent share of the vote, compared to 28.1 percent for the soon-to-be forgotten Tio Hardiman.

In Chicago, Quinn got 79.07 percent of the vote, and the Cook County suburbs gave the guv a 79.62 percent share. In short, Quinn did better than that poll that said Hardiman would get a miraculous 36 percent share of the vote.

WHAT ELSE WAS notable about the results that are still straggling in from this Election Day?

Will Guzzardi seems to have succeeded in dumping state Rep. Toni Berrios, D-Chicago, from her Northwest Side legislative district. Some see this as taking a political post from a Latina and life-long Chicagoan, and find some offense in the fact that it was taken by an alleged “hipster’ who has only lived in Chicago a few years.

Personally, I’m more inclined to think this was a vote against her father – Cook County Assessor and county Democratic Chairman Joe Berrios and his policies of putting assorted relatives on government payrolls.

Not that those people have ever been capable of beating Joe at the polling place. So they took it out on his daughter. Not exactly something to boast about!

I HAVE MORE respect for the electoral victory Tuesday of Illinois Comptroller Judy Baar Topinka, who ran unopposed in the Republican primary and is now boasting of her “Soviet-style victory” that got her the 100 percent vote tally.

There’s also the fact that the Republican Party already is blasting Gov. Pat Quinn for the campaign ads he aired Tuesday night while votes were being counted that remind us of Rauner’s weaselly ways when it comes to the minimum wage.

Personally, I thought Quinn’s initial attack could have been harsher. It certainly wasn’t as critical as the remarks that newly-nominated U.S. Senate candidate James Oberweis made against incumbent Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., Tuesday night.

Which makes me wonder if this year’s gubernatorial campaign is going to be between a wimp and a whiner?

  -30-

Will Oberweis gaffes impact GOP? Will Rauner hurt self more than gov?

I'm sure the official spin we're going to get in coming days (in about 36 hours, once the primary election cycle is complete) is that the political momentum leans toward the Republicans.

Who will rule here? A long ways to go!

After all, it is likely that Bruce Rauner will be the GOP nominee for governor (the only real question is whether Kirk Dillard will finish a close second place, or somewhat distant). He will have all the public attention on him come Wednesday morning.

WHILE NO ONE will have been paying attention to Gov. Pat Quinn, because he didn't have to put any effort into winning his primary bid for re-nomination.

We're going to hear tales about how Rauner (or Dillard, if he really does pull off the political comeback he's been fantasizing about for the past week) is the "It" girl of Illinois politics -- while Quinn is just deadly dull. Nobody will care. How can he top the excitement being generated by the GOP nominee?

If it reads like I'm writing that with a semi-sarcastic tone, I'd say "no." I'm being fully sarcastic.

Because I wonder if we're about to approach the high point of the Republican Party's dreams of returning to relevance in Illinois. I expect it will occur someday. I'm just not sure it's going to be this year.

WHICH IS A shame. Having Quinn and Richard Durbin at the top of the Democratic ticket creates the image of the "same ol' stuff." If Republican operatives had any sense, they'd try to claim to be the political party of "change."

Instead, they seem to be determined to give us the same old stuff. Which is why I'm inclined this election cycle will wind up giving us maintenance of the political status quo.

And that, in large part, is because of the man who really will be at the top of the Republican ticket. It won't be Rauner/Dillard/whoever. It will be James Oberweis, the state senator from Sugar Grove who wants to take on Durbin.

He's also the business executive who has made so many political gaffes in his multiple bids for electoral offices (he's tried running for governor, member of Congress and U.S. senator -- before finally winning an Illinois Senate seat).

I REALLY SEE a situation where he winds up doing something that ticks off the electorate to the point where Durbin will be able to count on a solid victory -- and return to a fourth six-year term in the U.S. Senate.

Already in this campaign cycle, he's getting hit about his residence status. Which is in Illinois, although his wife appears to be the type of person who would just as soon be rid of Illinois.

She lives in Florida, and the Oberweises are wealthy enough that they can actually afford to live in some style with two separate households. Not something the bulk of us could ever dream of doing.

It seems that when we all got hit with the most recent severe winter snowstorm, Oberweis wasn't here with us in Illinois. He was in Florida. He says he wanted to be with her for her birthday, and also told reporter-types how he lost his first wife (to divorce) because he spent too much time devoted to his "work."

OBERWEIS AS A devoted husband? Or just somebody who's sticking with us in the Midwestern U.S. because he sees us as a potential electoral opportunity?

I don't consider this gaffe as severe as the one from campaigns past where he flew around Soldier Field in a helicopter, reminding us that "illegal aliens" slipping into the United States could fill up the Chicago Bears' home stadium with a new crowd each and every day.

But these things do pile on to the degree that Republicans don't really seem to think much of their chances of beating Durbin. They're focusing attention on dumping Quinn.

Yet to what degree does the "top of the ticket" harm the rest of the Republicans?

PARTICULARLY IF PEOPLE start viewing the GOP Top as one headed by two candidates who are rich guys who don't live like the rest of us. For Rauner, homes in Winnetka and a downtown Chicago high-rise, along with properties in other parts of the country?

How long until we get gags about the Illinois Republican big-wigs convening at Oberweis' Florida home? Or the ranch in Montana that Rauner owns? Not exactly the image for a political party that likes to brag of its direct ties to Abraham Lincoln and that house in downtown Springfield, Ill.

Plus, it's just a matter of time before one of the men -- if not both -- winds up saying or doing something that gets converted into the next big scandal.

The Rauner opposition during the primary election cycle was so underfunded, they couldn't come up with anything to make stick on him. Which gubernatorial hopeful William Brady seemed to allude to during last week's final City Club of Chicago debate when told Rauner that he'd probably be an unknown lingering in last place if NOT for all that personal money he spent on television advertising to tout himself in the most favorable way.

QUINN WON'T HAVE that same campaign finance problem. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the first negative attack ad (either from the Quinn camp or from Quinn sympathizers) were to come on Wednesday.

Start chipping away at the veneer he has erected, and see if it can start to stick. And if the GOP nature for gaffes continues, perhaps it really all will come tumbling down.

Now I'm not 100 percent sure what to think of the Quinn campaign. The man is more than capable of doing himself in politically. I'm just not convinced that people should get all arrogant about that "26 percent" approval rating we hear about over and over and pronounce him politically "dead."

Let's be honest. There will be at least a few body blows the Republican challengers will have to to cope with that will be completely self-inflicted!

-30-

A "miracle" comeback in final week?

We have a week until Election Day, and Republican gubernatorial hopeful (or is he a dreamer) Kirk Dillard is trying to create the perception that he's about to make political history in the next few days.

DILLARD: A miracle-man? Not likely

The Chicago Tribune's final campaign poll fits into his illusion, since it shows the state senator from Hinsdale in second place lagging 13 percent behind the support of venture capitalist Bruce Rauner.

IT ALSO SHOWS a 13 percent share of the likely electorate saying they haven't made up their minds yet who to vote for.

Could it be that all of the undecideds will decide in coming days that they despise Bruce and want Kirk to be the man who bears the Republican Party label in the Nov. 4 general election agaisnt Gov. Pat Quinn?

If this were mid-February instead of one week away from the election, I'd think there was a good chance for this to happen.

But there's only a few days, and there's also the reality that the Rauner campaign that is the well-financed one that can use its money to try to crush any momentum-gaining tactics that Dillard might try to use.

JUST A RANDOM thought -- Rauner uses his money to crush political opposition just as much as any of the "career politicians" whom Rauner claims to be an alternative to.

But back to the main point; does Dillard have it in him to thwart Rauner's desires to become an elected public official? Can he really gain so much support in seven days without anyone else getting anything?

It does seem possible, because it seems the various polls show Rauner with support from about 35-40 percent of the possible Republican electorate. That seems to be the extent of the number of people who want him.

Which means a majority of Republicans want somebody else. But the degree to which they want ANYONE ELSE? I don't know they care THAT much. Even if the Cook County clerk's office is reporting a record-high number of people who are registered to vote in this particular election cycle.

IT IS CLEAR that Republican voters will consider themselves completely successful if they can bring an end to the concept of Illinois being governed by a Democratic Party official who thinks that the Executive Mansion in Springfield isn't all that special a place to live in full-time.

They seem to have accepted the fact that they're not retaking control of the Illinois General Assembly, and probably won't do so well for the U.S. Senate seat from Illinois.

If they were interested, I doubt they'd be so willing to back a repeated general election loser like James Oberweis; as the polls indicate they're likely to do so on March 18.

But there isn't much time. Nor is there the unity. Because there are those who'd really like to have a rural presence as governor. I'm not convinced that the backers of Bill Brady (a long-time Bloomington resident who didn't even leave his home to attend college) are going to back away.

OR THAT THEY'D be satisfied with Dillard in any way.

One week is just too little of time for all this to be resolved in any way, other than the status quo somehow being maintained.

I suspect that most of the 13 percent undecided (if the Tribune poll is to be believed) will wind up deciding they don't care enough about any of the candidates. They will stay home. They won't bother to vote.

Of course, those people likely will be the loudest complainers when they wake up March 19 and see the primary election results. They'll find reasons to whine and shriek about how the "stupid voters" didn't pick the right person.

INSTEAD OF ACCEPTING that this most active of all the campaigns this election cycle just didn't have anyone thrilling enough to capture the mindset of the electorate.

Which means this upcoming week is likely to be just like the past few months. A big yawn!!!

-30-

Obama "respected" by Republicans? Dillard still condemned for saying so

It seems destined to become the campaign ad that will live on -- as in that moment in 2007 when Barack Obama tried to show he has bipartisan political tendencies by including state Sen. Kirk Dillard in a television spot touting himself.

It was brought up again Thursday night when three of the four gubernatorial candidates debated each other at Benedictine Univeristy in suburban Lisle.

CANDIDATE WILLIAM BRADY reminded everybody on hand that Dillard did that spot promoting the GOP's version of "The Great Satan" himself.

How dare he say that Obama, back when he was a state senator from the Hyde Park neighborhood, addressed "the deepest issues we had" and "Republican legislators respected Sen. Obama" and "his ability to understand both sides (of issues) would serve the country."

Who'd have thought that a 30-second spot from six years ago would still be talked about today? Who in their right mind would think this ad featuring Dillard and former state Sen. Larry Walsh (remember him?) would ever be interpreted as having much of significance?

But when you're in a campaign in which the front-runner thinks so highly of his chances that he didn't even bother to show up for the latest debate, then you take the chance to grab the moment -- even for something lame like this.

BRADY VS. DILLARD -- which some people thought was to be a rematch of 2010 -- has devolved to being the "Race for Second Place."

This is particularly pathetic because it comes at a time when Dillard finally came up with some campaign cash (less than two weeks before Election Day, compared to the Bruce Rauner campaign that has been inoculating us with its campaign ad propaganda for several months now) to get himself on the air.

Will Dillard ever live down his not-hostile ...

It was just this week that Camp Dillard came up with both television and radio spots that tell us just how wonder Kirk is and how much he cares about the people of Illinois.

While also tossing in a line saying, "Dillard's a conservative Republican who believes in traditional values."

MEANT FOR ALL those people who keep bringing up the Dillard appearance in an Obama ad and want to believe that he's somehow not "One of them."

Not only because it comes across as "Too little, too late," but I wonder how ineffectual these broadcast spots will turn out to be. Although it doesn't help Dillard any that he's all over the place about Obama these days. Who knows what he really thinks! When it comes to television, the president may have given us the image that will linger of Dillard -- even though he has spent every waking moment since then trying to make people believe he can be a "right-wing" as anybody else in politics.

... thoughts about Barack Obama?

Now for anyone who was paying attention to state government back in the 1990s, it isn't much of a shock that Obama and Dillard were friendly.

The future president and current gubernatorial dreamer were part of a group of legislators who spent their off-hours in Springfield playing poker (which is about as close to a sordid story as I know of about Obama's days at the Illinois Statehouse).

REMEMBER BACK TO 2008 when some black people questioned whether or not the biracial Obama was really "black enough" to be considered a black president? Part of the reason for this was because some of his legislative colleagues in the Black Caucus thought Obama was a bit too comfortable amongst white people.

Because he could bring himself to play cards on a regular basis with people like Dillard and state Sen. Terry Link, D-Waukegan. Writing it out like this makes it seem all the more trivial. But this is the kind of mentality that often determines what political people think of each other, which then spreads out to the electorate.

Obama seems to have overcome this -- he did win, after all. And now there are those who can't envision how anyone could ever have wanted to respect the future president.

Dillard becomes the devil incarnate. Which is just absurd. Although I'm sure he wishes people scouring YouTube these days for "moving pictures" of himself would focus on that tribute Dillard did to now-former Gov. Jim Edgar -- to whom he was once the equivalent of Rahm Emanuel to Barack Obama.

WHICH IS WHY this lame attempt at a campaign issue gets to linger on and on long after that television spot should have withered away into something that only the most pathetic of political geeks would ever bother to look up on YouTube.

Or are you the type more interested in checking out Obama Girl or will.i.am?
 

 

-30-

EXTRA: Now if Karen Lewis endorsed Dillard, then I’d be swayed something significant was happening here

I feel like I’ve already written this commentary. In fact, I have.


DILLARD: Teachers love him (not really

The fact that the Illinois Federation of Teachers formally decided to back the Republican primary candidacy of Kirk Dillard for governor doesn’t mean much. Certainly no more than when the Illinois Education Association gave Dillard their backing.

THE GOP FRONT-RUNNER for governor, Bruce Rauner, has made it clear that a major focal point of his campaign is to mess with organized labor. He wants to undo the influence they have with government.

So the fact that the teachers’ unions do not want Rauner to become governor next year means they want to undermine him now.

Hence, they’re backing the Rauner primary challenger whom they find least offensive.

It is telling that federation officials made it clear their endorsement – while one of the few times they have ever gotten involved in a GOP governor fight – is purely for the primary.

AFTER MARCH 18, all bets are off. In no way does this mean the teachers’ union would want Dillard to actually be governor. They’re just hoping that some of their influence can help undermine Rauner’s chances of winning the big political prize.

It’s not like this hurts Gov. Pat Quinn within the Democratic primary, because the challenger he has is one so weak that even all the endorsements in the world likely would not give him a credible chance of achieving victory two weeks from Tuesday.

LEWIS: Would Kirk want support?

The federation’s endorsement also isn’t all it could be because of the fact that the most significant local within that union – the Chicago Teachers’ Union – is separate from this action.

I suppose it is possible that union President Karen Lewis could decide to hold her own press conference in coming days to announce that she, too, is backing Dillard and is instructing the teachers of the Chicago Public Schools to do the same.

BUT I JUST don’t think that there will be such an action. Not the least of which because I suspect Lewis' mind is more preoccupied these days with thoughts of teachers boycotting the Illinois Standards Achievement Tests.

RAUNER: The primary favorite?

Because I suspect most Chicago teachers, along with teachers in school districts across the state, will just keep their mouths shut publicly and go into the polling place on March 18 (or sooner, if they use Early Voting) and vote the way they would have even if no endorsement had been made.

I also suspect that the last thing Dillard would want is any kind of public appearance by Lewis – whose gruff persona would probably scare away even more potential voters than it would attract.

Dillard already is having to live down the fact that he regarded Barack Obama as something of a friend when the two served (and occasionally played poker) together (1997-2004) in the Illinois Senate.

DILLARD MAY BE the guy who has gone out of his way to spew some right-wing rhetoric to make it appear he’s not really some sort of liberal-to-moderate guy (in hopes of gaining votes from the socially-conservative elements of our society), but he doesn’t have the campaign cash to try to buy that image amongst the electorate.

2014 is going to go into the books as an election cycle that was able to be bought.

QUINN: Does he have 'dirt' on Bruce?

Past candidates who tried to use their personal wealth wound up having some personal stink about their lives become known to the point where it became impossible for them to continue.

Ultimately, that is going to be what decides whether Rauner has a chance of actually winning. Will the Quinn camp succeed with its finances where the underfunded GOP-types could not in terms of staining the image that Rauner has bought for himself?

IT’S POSSIBLE. THERE will be another eight months to go before this is over. All it takes is one moment that we don’t yet know about.

Which means that in the end, all this babble about teachers’ union endorsements probably won’t factor into the end result one bit!

  -30-

What does it mean that a teachers’ union (allegedly) likes Dillard?

DILLARD: Do teachers really like him?

“Yawn!!!”

That’s about all the reaction I can generate from the word that the Illinois Education Association, whose locals represent schoolteachers throughout the suburbs and rest of the state, is telling its members they should support Kirk Dillard for governor in the upcoming Republican primary election.

IT WAS NEVER a secret that groups representing education interests don’t think much of the gubernatorial candidacy of Bruce Rauner – who is targeting his campaigning to reach out to the kinds of people who like to dump on organized labor any chance they get.

The various unions have said they are interested in trying to knock out Rauner now, so as to not have him gain any strength that might bolster him in the Nov. 4 general election cycle against Gov. Pat Quinn.

So the endorsement by this particular teachers’ union really means nothing more than that they find Dillard – the state senator from Hinsdale who thinks the fact that he was once chief of staff to Gov. Jim Edgar anoints him as the front-runner – less offensive than the other Republican candidates.

Yes, it’s true that the GOP political operatives are thinking that with the lack of a competitive primary fight for governor and other political posts (does anybody think Tio Hardiman can top 10 percent of the vote on March 18?), there may be many voters ideologically leaning toward Democrats who will shift political parties for the primary to cast a vote for Dillard.

I’M JUST NOT convinced that it will be all that many people. Heck, Hardiman could wind up getting more votes than does any Republican gubernatorial candidate from a voter who usually leans Democrat!

 

RAUNER: Labor's Public Enemy No. 1?

I am convinced this is a whole lot of blather. Dillard – whom that Tribune poll earlier this week showed running dead last in the GOP primary for governor – may well be too far down for this to make any difference.

And I really believe much of the vote influenced by organized labor interests is going to remain in line with its usual thought process.

So yes, I believe that Rauner’s camp is being absurd with its own attacks on Dillard – whom he is trying to lambast for having anything to do with labor unions in any form.

AS RAUNER POINTED out in a statement he released Friday, Dillard has received campaign contributions in excess of $500,000 from unions that deal with state government during his time as an elected official.



QUINN: Will labor come back to Pat?

Considering, however, that Dillard has been in elected office since 1995, that means a half million dollars during a nearly two-decade period. Which really isn’t that much – particularly since most of that sum came specifically for Dillard’s failed 2010 bid for governor.

It comes across less as an attack against Dillard and more like a whine by Rauner that he’s not the one who’s getting the money – and that someone would dare to differ with him!

That’s what happens when one flaunts their own money about for a political campaign and makes it clear they’re going to be immune to the thoughts of certain parts of the political spectrum. You gain an enemy on Election Day.

BESIDES, I THINK that when the general election comes about, many of the people who cross over to Dillard will wind up coming back to Quinn. This may well be just another reason why whoever does win the Republican primary will wind up too bloodied to wage a serious fight against Quinn.

Who’s going to be well-rested and flush with campaign cash!

This could wind up being the photographic negative image of the 1994 election cycle – where Dawn Clark Netsch blew her financial wad to win a gubernatorial primary, and Edgar wound up tagging her right away with a negative image – one that she didn’t have enough money on hand to counter.

Rauner won’t be that broke on March 19. But Quinn will launch his political attack probably at 12:01 a.m. that very day! Which may sound mean-spirited. Then again, who really roots for the rich guy to prevail on Election Day?

  -30-

FREHRICHS: The IFT-preferred pol

EDITOR’S NOTE: For what it’s worth, the Illinois Federation of Teachers (which includes the outspoken Chicago Teachers Union) isn’t backing anybody for governor on March 18. In fact, the only statewide election endorsement they have made is for Michael Frehrichs, the Democrat running unopposed for state treasurer. Which may be a bigger yawn than the IEA backing Dillard.

EXTRA: Is there enough Cook Co. GOP for its endorsement to matter?

The Republican Party organization for Cook County apparently is sick and tired of being thought of as the GOP’s weak spot in the Land of Lincoln.

They’re planning to make a public endorsement this weekend concerning who they’d like to be the Republican nominee for governor come the 2014 election cycle.

WHICH IN MOST election cycles wouldn’t mean much. Because the Republican Party in this part of Illinois has become less and less important in recent decades. The idea that state elections pit Democratic Chicago versus the Republican rest of the state just isn’t accurate any longer.

It’s now Democratic Cook County and portions of the five surrounding counties against the rest of Illinois – which is why this state has gone from the early 1990s when it was still an accurate bellwether of the nation to being solid Democrat nowadays.

So what really will be gained by whichever gubernatorial candidate gets the GOP backing to take on Gov. Pat Quinn come the November general election?

Bruce Rauner, the North Shore venture capitalist who has close personal ties to Mayor Rahm Emanuel, would like to have it. Other gubernatorial candidates don’t want him to have it.

THEY ARE TRYING to spin the possibility of Rauner gaining the endorsement by saying that a Cook endorsement could be harmful. Gubernatorial dreamer Kirk Dillard told the Associated Press that voters in the rest of Illinois are so determined to have someone with no Chicago ties that a county GOP endorsement. “could be a hindrance in a place like Peoria.”

Yet I have to confess to wondering if this isn’t so much spin as a realization of fact.

In the last election cycle for Illinois governor, some 765,534 people voted in the Republican primary – of which about 162,000 came from Cook County. Which translates into roughly four votes from other parts of the state for every vote that comes from Cook!

QUINN: Will Cook GOP boost him?

Unlike the Democratic Party primary where somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of the vote can come from Cook – and most of the rest comes from the few sort-of urbanized pockets of Illinois (such as the areas around Peoria, East St. Louis and Champaign-Urbana – those crazy college kids!).

MY POINT BEING that I also recall that 2010 election cycle as being one where eventual GOP nominee William Brady – who’s trying again this time – really did have the whole rest of the state wrapped up.

Yet he lost because Brady got tagged in Cook with the label as being too alien from our own experience. Cook voters overwhelmed his dominance in the rest of Illinois.

I don’t see that much has changed. I sense there are people in that “rest of Illinois” who have been gnashing their teeth the past four years who will try again to win political influence away from Chicago.

Why do I sense that the way to kill interest in rural Illinois in next year’s election cycle is to put Rauner in that “top” post on the ballot? Because the perception is out there that Emanuel himself would just as soon have a sympathetic Rauner even over someone of his own political party like Quinn!

COULD THE COOK County Republican Party’s attempt to make a statement and be relevant wind up being a factor in Quinn gaining re-election?

It might be the exact opposite of the party’s intention, and could be why some people are engaging in the incredibly premature speculation over whether the Mighty Quinn – the one-time political gadfly and pain in the establishment’s butt – could become the state’s longest serving governor.

  -30-

EXTRA: A pension reform party split

I got my chuckle from Tuesday’s vote on pension funding reform from the split in the Kirk Dillard/Jil Tracy vote.

DILLARD: A "no"

Dillard is a Republican from Hinsdale wishing to be governor, while Tracy is a GOPer from Quincy who is Dillard’s lieutenant governor running mate. They ought to be a team.

YET WHEN THE vote came up in the Illinois Senate, Dillard was amongst the people who voted “no.” While when it came up in the Illinois House of Representatives, Tracy voted “yes.”

For the record, this was an issue that seemed to ignore partisan political lines.

There were many Republican officials who voted “no” to the plan that was perceived by some as an Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan proposal that was desired by Gov. Pat Quinn.

Yet would-be Senate candidate James Oberweis voted for it, as did gubernatorial candidate William Brady and Darrin LaHood – the son of the former Republican congressman and Transportation secretary, Ray LaHood.

THE FINAL VOTE in the state Senate saw 20 Democrats and 10 Republicans vote “yes,” with 15 Democrats and 9 Republicans voting “no.” Three Democrats voted “present,” while two Dems (including Donne Trotter of Chicago, who likes to bill himself as a political powerbroker who does great things for his legislative district) did not vote.

In the Illinois House, there were 47 Democrats and 15 Republicans who voted “yes,” while 22 Democrats and 31 Republicans voted “no.”



TRACY: Didn't follow her leader

Although before you think that this issue was completely bipartisan, keep in mind that within minutes of the final votes being taken, Republican gubernatorial candidate Bruce Rauner was quick on the draw with a statement condemning the government activity that occurred Tuesday.

Calling the pension funding reform measure a “small bandage on an open wound” that would “help (legislators) temporarily feel better,” he said that if elected governor, he would “shake things up in Springfield and deliver results that will truly bring back Illinois.”



RAUNER: Destined to complain

WHICH MEANS WE'RE still going to have to endure several months of his cheap, anti-organized labor rhetoric on the issue.

Rauner is not about to let the Legislature’s actions take away his pet campaign issue, and all the rants that go along with it.

Let’s only hope that it’s a rant that comes to an end in March, rather than lasting all the way through nearly a full year and the November general election.

  -30-

It’s campaign time – ’14 cycle begins

I didn’t venture down to Springfield early Monday, although I wish I could have. For there was the occurrence of a key moment in an election cycle.

The ticket of Tio Hardiman/Brunell Donald-Kyei filed its nominating petitions Monday so it could challenge Pat Quinn/Paul Vallas come March 18. Photograph by The African Spectrum

 

The filing of nominating petitions; the documents required of any candidate to show that he has any kind of support that makes him (or her) worthy of a spot on the March 18 primary election ballot.

EVEN IN MY absence, however, the usual spectacle took place – hundreds of people lined up outside the offices of the Illinois State Board of Elections to submit their petitions in hopes that they can be the first to file for their desired office so as to qualify for the top slot on the ballot.

In some cases, the actual candidates came out to wait their turn in line. While others sent their political operatives to do the dirty work of bearing with wintry-like weather.

It seems this year, there were a few people who camped out beginning last week to ensure they were they absolute first people in line when the state Board of Elections offices opened at 8 a.m. Which is always the case. I’ve seen it in the past – only the names have changed, ever so slightly.

According to the Chicago Tribune, they were people who worked for Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago. Personally, I’d have been more impressed if Madigan himself had shown up to file his petitions.



William Brady gets credit for filing ...

INSOFAR AS THE Republican brawl for the gubernatorial nomination, it seems that William Brady and Kirk Dillard to file the petitions that their campaign aides put together for them.

While Bruce Rauner sent aides to do it for him, and Dan Rutherford sent Steve Kim – his running mate for lieutenant governor, to do the paperwork that gets the two of them on the ballot.

Since all were on hand when the Elections Board office opened, there will be the lottery sometime next month to determine who actually gets the top ballot spot (which according to political superstition can be worth as much as 5 percent of the vote).

Won’t it stink for the candidate who froze his tushie off on Monday, only to lose the lottery and wind up last or next to last?



... own petitions, as did Kirk Dillard

THERE’S ALSO THE Democratic Party brawl, so to speak, for governor.

Tio Hardiman filed his petitions to get on the ballot, meaning that Gov. Pat Quinn will have an actual challenger for the primary. But now we know the actual name of Hardiman’s lieutenant governor running mate.

She’s Brunell Donald-Kyei, an attorney who according to the Capitol Fax newsletter once worked in the Public Guardian’s office before going into private practice, where she was the attorney for Eugene Mullins – a friend of former Cook County Board President Todd Stroger who was found guilty of corruption charges for allegedly taking kickbacks related to county contracts.

We can joke about a possible Paul Vallas/Donald-Kyei debate, although it probably says a lot that the State Board of Elections website botched her name. We may have some voters searching for “Donald Brunell” on the ballot.

THAT IS IF they don’t just ignore the Hardiman/Donald-Kyei slot and cast their vote for Pat Quinn.

I’m focusing primarily on the governor’s races for now, because I suspect they’re about the extent that anybody is paying attention to political campaigns at this point.

Other elections will get their day in the sun, although it probably will be a cloudy, overcast day and few will pay attention. It always causes me to feel dismay the degree to which many people don’t pay attention to their elected officials – then want to rant and rage when their ineptitude comes through.

Although I found it intriguing to see state Rep. Derrick Smith, D-Chicago, filed his petitions Monday for re-election. Smith, of course, was the freshman legislator whose colleagues kicked him out of the Legislature when he was indicted on federal charges that amount to soliciting bribes.

SMITH: The political thing that won't go

BUT SMITH GOT himself re-elected in the very next election cycle. And it seems the U.S. Attorney’s office is taking so long to get around to Smith’s trial that he may well finish out his current term and get himself picked to another!

For those who are repulsed at the notion, his conviction would eventually remove him from office. But the Smith shadow will continue to cover the General Assembly.

It is why political observer geeks such as myself find days like Monday to be something special. It literally is a day when everybody who wants to run for office has to make their physical presence in Springfield – or at the County Building downtown if their desired dream post is a Cook County government position.

It’s not quite the same as those people who line up to ensure they get any seat for a rock concert or major sporting event. Even though it ought to be regarded as more important -- considering the influence these people have to dictate how the tax dollars generated from our incomes actually gets spent.

  -30-