After spending all that money, we got the predictable electoral outcome

The people of Illinois have voted and their votes are being tallied.

J.B. couldn't win a majority of Dems

And what’s the outcome of the 2018 primary election cycle, one in which some $120 million was spent on campaign tactics meant to besmirch the opposition?

WE’RE GOING TO get some seven more months of pricey, hostile tactics!

For it seems that the Illinois gubernatorial campaign that will come to a head on Nov. 6 will wind up being a battle of the rich guys.

Bruce Rauner and J.B. Pritzker, both of whom are independently wealthy enough that they can afford to finance their own campaigns for political office, appear to have won their political parties’ respective primary elections.

Both of these guys are in desperate need of a hobby. Instead, they have chosen to satisfy their need to do something worthwhile with their lives by running for political office.

IN THIS CASE, both want to be governor of Illinois.

Rauner already has had four years in office, and he wants four more. Only this time, he wants to not have to deal with the Democratic Party officials led by Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago – whom some can say earned his money the past four years by being the force that prevented Rauner from implementing what he wants to think of as “reform” but really are nothing more than union-busting tactics.

Rauner barely won a majority of GOPers

Pritzker, who for many years has been the rich guy whom Democrats turn to for financial donations in order to raise the money they need to pay for their political campaigns, has decided he’d like to be a political person in his own right.

Perhaps he saw the ego boost his sister, Penny, got from being a government official in her own right (she was U.S. Commerce secretary during the Barack Obama presidency) and thought it would be fun.

OR MAYBE HE just doesn’t want to be outdone politically by his sister? Who’s to say what made J.B. decide he’d like to be a politico.

Can J.B. top his sister, Penny, politically?

It certainly isn’t the money. For the just under $180,000 salary Illinois provides to its governor would be mere pocket change for Pritzker – whose family has an immense fortune that originated from the Hyatt Hotels chain.

Then again, money isn’t what entices Rauner.

This is the guy who’s paying to run a re-election bid AND also to fund several candidates for the General Assembly so that he might have a majority that would actually support him.

Ives sets her political legacy

IT’S NOT WRONG to say that Rauner has practically become the Republican Party in Illinois. A thought that offends the sensibilities of many of those individuals to whom ideology and social issue stances is their motivation for politics.

For Rauner is now a guy who took a significant financial advantage against a primary election opponent who borders on being a right-wing nutcase and barely won his primary by the skin of his teeth.

Jeanne Ives of Wheaton will be remembered for her whacked out stances on issues ranging from abortion to guns to gays and how she nearly won. Which already has many electoral observers saying Rauner ought to be ashamed politically and perhaps ought to begin preparing himself now for the big move out of the Statehouse Scene.

Then again, Pritzker is the guy whose overwhelming victory on Tuesday was less than a majority. Challengers Daniel Biss and Chris Kennedy combined were a majority. Most people who voted in a Democratic primary (myself included) wanted somebody other than J.B. to take on Rauner.

RAUNER’S GREATEST ASSET politically is that sense of apathy – if it lasts, the Democratic challenger will lag behind, while also getting smacked about with all the politically partisan attacks Rauner can come up with.

DAIBER: Couldn't even beat Tio Hardiman

For he has many millions more to spend as this election cycle likely tops 2010 in California as the most expensive gubernatorial campaign ever.

One final thought; I wonder what’s going through Bob Daiber’s mind right now. He’s the one-time Madison County regional schools superintendent who tried being the lone downstate Illinois candidate for governor and thought rural Illinois would turn out for him.

Instead, his 1.2 percent of the vote put him behind Tio Hardiman’s 1.7 percent. Talk about accomplishing nothing!

  -30-

Does Tio Hardiman think everybody should drop out of governor’s primary?

Now we’re moving into the segment of the primary election cycle in which everybody starts talking stupid.

KENNEDY: Wants Pritzker out

Perhaps it’s the fact that the nearly year-long time period during which they’ve been campaigning is making them feel touched in the head. They’re spewing silliness.

HOW ELSE TO explain Chris Kennedy’s rant Thursday that he thinks J.B. Pritzker, whom various polls have shown to be the front-runner, of sorts, for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination should withdraw from the race.

To which Daniel Biss, the state senator from Evanston who’d like to think he can play politics with the big boys, says Kennedy has no business making such a demand. He thinks both Kennedy and Pritzker ought to step aside to allow him to have the gubernatorial nomination.

I found one anonymous commenter on the Internet who says that Pritzker missed the perfect chance to complete the circle by issuing a statement calling for Biss to back away.

Although my reaction is to wonder if Tio Hardiman, the gun control activist who has a primary interest in the level of urban violence we’re confronted with in society, thinks everybody ought to get out of the race so that he might have a chance to win.

HARDIMAN IS THE guy whom the same gubernatorial polls show with about 1 percent support. That is, on the occasions when they even bother acknowledging his existence on the political scene.

PRITZKER: Trying to stay above fray

I did think of making a joke about Robert Marshall being the candidate who wanted everybody else to clear a path to victory for himself. But even that thought was just a tad too ridiculous.

I suspect if Marshall were to become the Democratic nominee for governor, that would drive swarms of people over to an effort to create a third political party, something along the lines of the 1986 election cycle when Adlai Stevenson III had to run a third-party campaign to try to fulfill his gubernatorial dreams.

Because Marshall just ain’t a Democrat, no matter what papers he filed in order to run in the primary.

BISS: Wants Kennedy/Pritzker out

I TAKE SUCH a light-hearted view on this issue, because I don’t expect anybody would seriously consider dropping out of the race for the benefit of someone whom they’ve been bad-mouthing for several months now as being totally unfit to serve.

But the fact that anybody would spew such rhetoric in any way other than as a tacky joke meant to be heard only by their hard-core supporters means, to me, that the wear-and-tear of the election cycle is getting to them.

Not that I can’t sympathize. As a reporter-type person, I have covered the day-to-day grind of a political campaign. I’ve been watching this election cycle from a distance, but it is still tiring.

Personally, I can’t wait for Tuesday night to come and go, and the unofficial election results to become public. I’ll be grateful for a time when I don’t even have to contemplate Marshall’s existence, at least until his next token campaign for office in 2020.

HARDIMAN: Could he win if everybody dropped out?

AND FOR A time when two out of the three of Biss, Kennedy and Pritzker will become ancient history. I’m sure the candidates are awaiting a rest period once the primary cycle is complete.

So what should we think of Kennedy saying, “If (Pritzker) believed in public service and sacrifice, he would sacrifice his own political career in service to the Democratic Party of Illinois and, frankly, to the people of Illinois by dropping out of the race.”

Or Biss saying, “Chris Kennedy and J.B. Pritzker are two sides of the same gold coin.”

If Kennedy and Pritzker are “gold coins,” does that make Biss a Lincoln-head penny of the sort that I have far too many of in my pants pocket’s spare change?

  -30-

A Kennedy for Illinois? At the very least, it would bring Joy to the state

I’m sure some political operatives are going to say I threw my vote away. They may argue I cost the Democratic Party in Illinois any chance the party had of deposing Bruce Rauner as governor.

Will Kennedy need more family help to win?

But I’m not going to regret that I went to an Early Voting Center on Monday and cast a Democratic ballot for the gubernatorial campaign of Chris Kennedy and his lieutenant governor running mate, Ra Joy.

I DIDN’T RULE out the possibility of backing the officially preferred candidate of the Democratic Party establishment, J.B. Pritzker, until the last minute. In fact, about the only Dem who I gave no consideration to is that of Robert Marshall – the perpetual fringe candidate who always finds something to run for.

All you’d have to do is get him an “Uncle Sam” suit and he could be Lar Daly – the perpetual candidate of the Chicago past who always ran for something so he could spout off his isolationist “America First” ideology.

But back to my choice of a gubernatorial candidate who will take on the winner of the Republican primary to be held March 20. Whether it be Rauner or Jeanne Ives, the state senator from Wheaton, my preference would be for a part of the Kennedy clan (the son of Bobby) to take a shot at living in the Executive Mansion in Springfield (which Rauner and first lady Diana have spent so much of recent years having remodeled).

It’s not that I’m enamored with the Kennedy “aura,” or that I feel some need for our political scene to become a part of the Kennedy legacy (there are several legislators and Congress members of the family who hold office in other parts of the country – along with the big three of JFK, RFK and Teddy).

Is Marshall the modern-day equivalent?

BUT MY ATTITUDE is the fact that a large part of why I never thought much of the prospect of Bruce Rauner as governor is that he is one of the “big money” interests to whom the political establishment turned to provide the campaign donations that enable people to run for office.

Much of what Rauner had in mind when he ran for governor in 2014 (taking advantage of a weak Republican primary with no real front runner) was that he was eliminating the middle-man, running for office himself so he could attempt to just bark out orders and impose policies that would benefit business interests.

PRITZKER: Too similar to Rauner?

In that sense, I see Pritzker as being the equivalent – even if his ideological leanings on social issues is such that he generally prefers Democratic candidates. I'm not swayed by the J.B. advertising spots showing people flashing "five" fingers (as in the number of tuition increases at the University of Illinois system that Kennedy was a part of approving).

I don’t know that I believe the “solution” to the “Rauner Years” in Illinois is to come up with a Dem version of Bruce.

LOOKING AT THE other candidates, I see in Daniel Biss, Bob Daiber and Tio Hardiman specific knowledge in a single area (Hardiman is most serious on issues related to urban violence), but not enough knowledge overall that I would think they could oversee all of state government.

Which leaves Kennedy, who has appropriate stands on the social issues for all except those deluded enough to think Ives is what Illinois is all about.

A 3-1 GOP ratio

I do see one potential problem – yes, I saw the Chicago Sun-Times’ front page Monday morning. The big story about “Illinois’ Big Spenders” who provide more than one-quarter of all the cash available to all candidates seeking political office.

Those four include Rauner and Pritzker themselves. With the other two being Illinois’ wealthiest resident, Ken Griffin, who will be a solid Rauner backer, and Richard Uihlein – who has had a political falling out with Rauner and is now focusing his attention on finding a conservative ideological replacement.

Can his son do the same for Illinois?

WHICH MEANS THAT a Kennedy campaign, if it were to prevail beyond the March 20 primary, likely would have all the big money going against it. He’d probably have to turn to Kennedy money in order to remain competitive – and I can already hear the “carpetbagger” allegations that will be tossed out against him (even though he has lived and worked in Illinois for more than three decades).

Since I doubt a defeated Pritzker would suddenly turn into an enthusiastic Kennedy backer willing to help fund him. And even if J.B. tried speaking out in favor of Kennedy, I can already hear the “hypocrite” allegations that would be used against him.

But as some have speculated, this may be an election cycle in which the incumbent is so deep in doo doo (because the ideological right is so rigid in its own attitudes) that this may be an election where Rauner’s financial edge (the roughly $50 million of his own money he’s promised to pledge) might not be enough to ensure his victory.

If that is the case, then perhaps a Rauner vs. Kennedy brawl for Illinois governor come the Nov. 6 general election will give the “Land of Lincoln” a real choice – rather than just a pick between two rich guys trying to buy a political post to assuage their egos.

  -30-

EDITOR'S NOTE: The Chicago Argus "management," which in reality is little more than me, myself and I, is under no delusion that this "endorsement," so to speak, will sway anyone's vote. It's more about explaining my own political leanings and biases so that one can place other commentary published here in a proper context. Although I doubt I'm alone in Chicago or Illinois in being wary of the thought of a Rauner/Pritzker political brawl.

EXTRA: $1,000 a bullet?

I had a friend who once joked (semi-seriously) about an alternative to gun control he believed would actually work.

DAVIS: Trying again on ammo tax hike

“Give guns away, but charge people exorbitant prices for ammunition,” he said “Charge $1,000 for every bullet, and people will think twice before firing a shot.

“IT WOULD BE too expensive to go around killing people,” he quipped.

Which makes me wonder if Rep. Danny Davis, D-Ill., has heard the same theory. He is sponsoring a bill (and has the support of Democratic gubernatorial Chris Kennedy) that calls for federal excise taxes on gun shells and cartridges from 11 percent to 50 percent.

Make it too costly to waste a shot on something stupid.

As to whether it has a chance of passing into law, one should keep in mind that this isn’t the first time Davis has touted this concept. He tried in 2014, and the bill never even came up for review.

WITH THE CURRENT partisan leanings of Congress, it’s not likely anybody cares what Davis would want on this issue.

But it is an issue to consider, particularly since Davis’ bill would use money from the tax to fund anti-violence programs.

And it probably will take some drastic, completely unheard of, action to break the cycle of violence which certain segments of our society seem to be determined to live.

While the $1,000 per round may not be realistic, it seems the actual cost ($149 for 1,000 9mm shells is one price I found Monday on the Internet) is way too accessible to the public.

  -30-

Kennedy wants racial/ethnic vote to turn Dem gubernatorial primary into a two-way campaign w/ Pritzker

Some may dismiss one-time Illinois Senate President Emil Jones as “crass,” but Democratic gubernatorial candidate Chris Kennedy is banking that he can turn the March 20 primary into a one-on-one fight with J.B. Pritzker – the man who has support from much of the Democratic establishment of Illinois.

 

KENNEDY: Can non-Anglo vote make him a winner?

For Kennedy, whom some polls indicate has been caught by third candidate Daniel Biss, is the guy using radio spots featuring the gravelly voice of Jones to appeal to the African-American portion of the electorate.

PRITZKER HAS BEEN ahead in various polls, indicating his self-provided millions have been effective in getting his name recognition out there. But he’s also made his share of gaffes indicating he may have offended potential black voters.

Which has Kennedy going in for the kill.

He’s hoping that becoming the gubernatorial candidate of choice for black people will put him back in the running against Pritzker. Because it could make Biss’ attempt to appeal to a certain segment of white people insufficient to win overall.

For what it’s worth, Jones uses his minute of time in the radio spot to remind an older generation of African-Americans just who Kennedy’s father (Bobby) and uncle (Jack) were.

 

JONES: Obama mentor boost Kennedy?

THE MAN WE recently learned was belittled by Pritzker (in private conversations a decade ago with then-Gov. Rod Blagojevich) tells us how the Kennedys, “fought and struggled and sacrificed alongside Dr. (Martin Luther) King (Jr.) in the civil rights movement,” and also tells us that Chris would continue on in “the Kennedy way.”

Indicating that Kennedy is banking on the black vote to turn out in strong enough force to enable him to overcome those polls of late that say Biss has actually overcome Kennedy to be the serious challenger to Pritzker.

Actually, what the polls say is that there remains a strong-enough share of people who are undecided in the Democratic primary, with Pritzker, Biss and Kennedy all following behind.

 

PRITZKER: Still leading, but can he hold it?

This primary may be just a month in the future, but it is far from settled.

PERHAPS THE KENNEDY campaign is influenced by that PPP poll (conducted for Our Revolution Illinois/Chicago) that shows amongst potential black voters, Kennedy is not only second behind Pritzker (38 percent to 31 percent), Biss is virtually irrelevant (7 percent).

And when it comes to the Latino vote, Kennedy is actually the leader (31 percent to 28 percent), with Biss only at 14 percent.

Perhaps it is the spirit of the Viva Kennedy clubs of old that enabled Chris’ uncle, Jack, to win the 1960 presidential bid, but it may well be a combination of the Latino and black vote that keeps the Kennedy gubernatorial dreams alive.

And ensures that the suburban white segment of the Democratic primary electorate that actually takes Biss seriously never grows into a larger coalition that could actually win the March 20 primary.

IT MAKES ME wonder if this campaign advertising spot (which is airing on the Chicago radio stations appealing to African-American listeners) is going to be the first of many the Kennedy campaign will issue.

 

Can Chris resurrect JFK's 'Viva Kennedy' spirit?

Will we see every ethnic and racial name dredged up to make endorsements in hopes they will sway more non-Anglo voters to turn out for the primary election – hoping they will be the kind of voters who will not easily be swayed by the millions of dollars that Pritzker could put into his own campaign for governor.

Which, to be honest, seems to be the primary factor that wins over the support of his political backers. They like the idea of someone who won’t be constantly hitting them up for more money in order to pay for his campaign.

Although it should be noted that with the dozens of millions of dollars that Gov. Bruce Rauner has committed to campaigns for himself and for allies in the General Assembly, even Pritzker will be grossly outspent in a campaign battle for the Nov. 6 general election.

  -30-

Who will we get to pick for Illinois governor – the all- nobody campaign?

A part of me wants to believe that Gov. Bruce Rauner has dug himself so deep into a partisan hole that there’s no way he can possibly prevail come the Nov. 6 general election, and that if the Republicans could have come up with a more rational candidate he probably couldn’t even win the March 20 GOP primary.

Which of these mediocrities ...

But then I look at the assortment of mediocrities that have cropped up on the Democratic Party side of the electoral equation and I honestly can’t help but think the 2018 election for Illinois governor is truly going to be a question of which candidate offends us the least.

IT’S ALMOST AS though Rauner hand-picked his opposition to provide as weak a challenger as he could face.

That was the reaction I had to learning of the We Ask America poll that asked people who amongst the six Democrats running in the primary would they vote for.

It truly was a choice of “None of the Above,” as “undecided” was the leading choice. Some 37.95 percent of those questioned said they hadn’t made up their mind yet. Amongst the actual choices, the so-called frontrunner, J.B. Pritzker, was in the lead with 29.79 percent support.

But considering that he’s the candidate with the personal fortune that he has shown a willingness to spend in order to campaign, you’d think he’d be the one so far ahead of the pack that the other candidates would be legitimately having thoughts of dropping out.

... actually stands a chance ...

NOT QUITE. IT seems that Pritzker’s millions haven’t been enough to sew up the primary election for him before serious campaigning began.

Which was supposedly the reason that Democratic Party leadership touted the Pritzker campaign to begin with – his money was supposed to make him unbeatable.

But it seems he can’t even dominate a political party fight. Which almost makes me wonder if it is time for Pritzker to give second thoughts to dropping out, on the grounds that he could save a lot of personal wealth from being expended on an ultimately unsuccessful electoral cause.

... of taking the oath of office ...

Now I know state Sen. Daniel Biss of Evanston has been crowing about this poll because it shows him in second place (third actually, behind Undecided and Pritzker). His 17.43 percent allows him to move ahead of Chris Kennedy, with 11.5 percent.

... to become Illinois' next governor?

NOT EXACTLY A high point for the Kennedy name, which I’m sure he got into this campaign thinking it alone would carry him to a Democratic primary victory. He could then step up the serious campaigning come the general election against Rauner.

Except that Rauner, during his limited appearances against GOP opponent, and state Sen. Jeanne Ives of Wheaton, has shown himself to be of limited ability.

IVES: Can she compete in GOP primary?

It’s as though he thinks he can get by with the same campaigning skills that allowed him to defeat Gov. Pat Quinn back in 2014. Quinn, of course, had enough people within his own political party willing to see him get knocked about that they didn’t care much if he lost.

He even had some rural Illinois counties with so much unrest that the ’14 primary challenge of Tio Hardiman managed to get some local victories. That’s the same Hardiman whose political dreams this year get him only a 1.73 percent level of support for governor.

YES, I'LL COME out and state at this time I won’t be surprised if – in the end – the primary winners turn out to be Rauner and Pritzker, and the 2018 gubernatorial election does turn out to be a battle of two rich guys willing to spend their own money to appease their egos with a government post. With Biss already pointing out that Pritzker is spending more on himself than Donald Trump spent of his own money to win the presidential election in 2016.

HARDIMAN: Can he do encore of '14?

But we’re definitely not in for any electoral cycle where the candidates will motivate us with rhetoric for the ages that will inspire us to want to reward them with our votes.

It’s more likely to turn out to be a campaign where we eagerly away the morning of Nov. 7, 2018 – the “Day After” Election Day so we can say to ourselves “Thank God It’s Over!”

Then, we can do the countdown to the 2019 brawl for Mayor of Chicago.

  -30-

Honesty during political debates? Or just more of the 2018 silly season!

First, a bit of disclosure – I didn’t actually watch the debate held Tuesday night between the various candidates seeking the Democratic nomination to challenge Gov. Bruce Rauner come November.

KENNEDY: Can't say something nice

So I’m relying on assorted news reports of the event that seem to focus on candidate Chris Kennedy’s moment of rudeness (or is it honesty?) when he couldn’t come up with anything nice to say about the front-running challenger, J.B. Pritzker.

ONE ACCOUNT I read literally noted the number of seconds of silence from Kennedy before he admitted he couldn’t say anything positive.

It has many political observers feeling like he violated one of the great unwritten rules of political debate – not to make the personal attacks such as the Kennedy comment that “J.B. emerges as the poster child of all that is wrong with the corrupt system in our state.”

I understand that after the debate, Kennedy felt compelled to apologize to Pritzker and even touted Pritzker’s “incredible record around providing early childhood education.” On some level, Kennedy had a talking point burned into his brain that he could easily have tossed out to answer the question.

So is Kennedy worthy of our hostility for not playing nice, or by the rules, so to speak?

PRITZKER: Feelings hurt? Or campaign bolstered

OR IS KENNEDY being truthful when he told reporter-type people that his political weakness is “my honesty.”

Now as a reporter-type myself who has covered many political debates throughout the years, I’m fully aware that this question about “saying something nice” about your opponents is a common one.

It always seems to be asked by TV-types who think that it somehow brings a humanizing moment about – one whose sound-bite they will make sure to use prominently in their broadcast reports.

Personally, I always ignored the question and any responses because I always felt they were trivial, and downright phony.

BISS: Says HE was the big winner

SOME PEOPLE CRITICIZING Kennedy these days are pointing out how even Hillary Clinton managed to say something nice about Donald Trump during their 2016 campaign for president against each other.

Specifically, that Hillary had respect for Trump’s family members. Which as far as I’m concerned is about as irrelevant as one can get.

The real news would have been if she had somehow attacked those people who happen to share genetics with Trump – and she likely would have been worthy of all the derision she would have received from people for taking personal cheap shots at people who aren’t on the ballot themselves.

As for Kennedy, perhaps we got a taste of the personal distaste the son of RFK and nephew of JFK feels for his opponent. Which I’m sure will translate into feels of incompetence in that he wonders how could he possibly be losing to this guy.

ALTHOUGH WE HAVEN’T had much in the way of extensive polling in this particular campaign, so whose to say who’s really getting their behind kicked. Except that now, we can claim it’s Chris (or should we call him CGK – it’s George) who’s getting his butt whomped because he didn’t think quickly enough on his feet Tuesday night.

DAIBER: Was he really big benefactor?

Which has already given another opponent, the little-known state senator from Evanston, Daniel Biss, the motivation to claim this campaign has become one between Pritzker and himself.

While I have heard some people claim they’re now going to pay attention to Bob Daiber, the regional school superintendent from the part of Illinois near St. Louis who also is the lone non-Chicago-area person seeking to challenge Rauner for governor.

All of which makes me think my time was better spent Tuesday doing work that helped to earn a living, rather than watching the latest episode of the silly season that other political geeks got worked up over.

  -30-

Is Ives the gubernatorial candidate nobody wants to be associated with?

Jeanne Ives, the state senator from Wheaton who wants to challenge Gov. Bruce Rauner in the Republican primary, is becoming the candidate whom nobody wants to be associated with.

IVES: Offends Kennedy, Rauner

Ives, the woman whose campaign is based on the notion that Rauner is too liberal for Illinois (the reality is that she’s too conservative, but that’s a topic for another day’s commentary), is the woman who was in a candidate forum this week where she managed to offend Democratic hopeful Chris Kennedy to the point where he walked out in mid-event.

ON TUESDAY, IVES’ perception suffered another blow when Rauner himself said he had no intention of participating in a Republican debate against her that would have been held in Springfield.

Considering that the bulk of any Republican candidate’s voter support will come from the part of the state outside the Chicago area, it could be seen as foolish for Rauner to pass up the chance to appeal to his likely backers.

But Ives managed to show on Monday that her rhetoric is likely to be over the top – perhaps just as much as trying to get people to think Rauner is a liberal, even though the bulk of the Chicago-area vote certainly will turn out against him.

Her campaign may well turn out to be the one of the malcontents of our state expressing their opposition to the concept that everybody does not agree with their ideologue hang-ups about life and our society.

WHY SHOULD RAUNER give Ives the public attention of a one-on-one debate between the two?

KENNEDY: Walked out on Ives

I know many conservative-leaning people want to believe that right-wing outrage against Rauner is so intense (he’s not anti-abortion enough to satisfy them) that anybody could beat him come the March 20 GOP primary.

They cite Steven Baer, an ideologue who took about one-third of the vote in the 1990 gubernatorial primary against Jim Edgar. I’d argue that Ives could get about one-third of the vote, which would still make her a loser. And how many real people (as in non-political geeks) have a clue who Baer was? Or will remember Ives 20 years from now?

For the record, Ives’ offensive act was trying to say that we have so much gun violence in our society because we have many fatherless families. Which Kennedy took offense to because he, himself, lost his father as a young child.

RAUNER: Won't give her that much attention

HIS UNCLE, TOO. Remember that? Both of those stories were in all the papers and usually warrant a couple of sentences in the history books.

Personally, I’m inclined to think this would be an ideal world (or as close as we’d ever come to one) if everybody had a set of two parents to help raise them as children. But not everybody does, and we ought to be focusing on trying to help those youth who don’t have such circumstances.

Rather than holding them up to blame for societal flaws, which is all Ives and people of her ilk really are interested in doing!

Make people think that everything that is wrong with life is somebody else’s fault, and maybe it makes them feel a little bit better about their lot in life. But it doesn’t do a thing to make things better for the masses.

I HAVE NO doubt that if Ives were to get a one-on-one forum with Rauner, she’d really let loose with the nonsense talk. She’d probably also have the crackpots all peeved about Rauner not being conservative enough for them ready to proclaim her the winner.

PRITZKER: Will get own share of nonsense

Which wouldn’t really be true. In fact, such a forum probably would add nothing to the public understanding of who either candidate is. Just as I’m sure the various Democratic candidate forums (the first of which will be held next Tuesday in Chicago) probably won’t go any further than candidate J.B. Pritzker being the rich guy trying to buy himself an ego-bloating political post.

It’s bound to be a lot of nonsense-talk. The rhetoric will flow with the sounds of silliness. In that regard, we’re better off without a Rauner/Ives debate.

I’m sure those who merely want to smack Bruce about will have plenty of opportunities between now and the Nov. 6 general election – to the point where he’ll have more than his share of rhetorical bruises.

  -30-

Does Kennedy have right to make same ol’ accusations against Joe Berrios?

I comprehend why Democratic gubernatorial hopeful Chris Kennedy feels compelled to do something to jump-start his campaign this electoral cycle.

KENNEDY: Will he gain from Berrios bashing?

The man who early on was supposed to be the one legitimate challenger to J.B. Pritzker and his millions is fizzling out to the point where he maybe as much a fringe candidate as Daniel Biss – who likely will win the vote in his home suburb of Evanston but will be unknown elsewhere in Illinois.

HE NEEDS TO do something drastic to draw attention to himself, although perhaps not as drastic as 2008 presidential hopeful John McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin as a running mate. That was just politically suicidal.

Although I’m wondering if Kennedy’s attempt at an attention-grabber this week is going to have a similar backfiring effect – did the man who can claim a senator for a father and a president and senator as uncles come across as some out-of-town goof who has the nerve to criticize our local political people?

I wonder if Kennedy’s attempt to call for the resignation of Cook County Assessor Joe Berrios will offend the local types who would figure this Kennedy kid (who has never held elective office before) ought to mind his own business.

Even though, to be honest, the accusations he made against Berrios are the same exact bad things that many local people say about Joe – he operates his office that assesses property tax rates for the benefit of people who make prominent financial donations to Democratic candidates. Oh yeah, he also stocks his government payroll with every relative and political friend he can find.

BERRIOS: Always under fire politically

KENNEDY, AFTER ALL, is a Boston-born type who was raised in the suburbs of the District of Columbia. He’s not native Midwestern by any means, let alone a life-long Chicagoan.

He did eventually get an MBA from Northwestern University, but his local tie is because of the fact the Kennedy family for many years owned the Merchandise Mart property. The family has since sold it, but during the time in the 1990s and 2000s that they owned it, Chris Kennedy was the family member they sent to Chicago to run it for them.

During those years, Chris Kennedy became the Chicago connection to the Kennedy political family and also a fairly solid financial contributor to our local politicos. He often talked about running for higher office himself, but always managed to find excuses for which to drop out.

MADIGAN: Will he back Berrios?

Giving some the impression of a political dreamer who doesn’t actually have the nerve to put his own name on the ballot for voter scrutiny.

HECK, THERE ARE some people who are still convinced he’ll find a reason to drop out of this election cycle – even though by filing nominating petitions, he’s already carried out more of a campaign than he’s ever done previously.

The point is I can envision local politically-interested types who will agree with Kennedy’s comments about Berrios running a “racket” in the way property values are assessed in Cook County. But perhaps by being a candidate for governor, it is questionable whether he’s the one who should be saying such things.

For the record, Kennedy responded to a report by the ProPublica.com study of the assessor’s office (which the Chicago Tribune says it will publish in the Sunday paper whose early editions will be for sale come Saturday) by issuing a critical statement.

“Berrios has used the property tax system that is defunding our public schools, defunding our social safety net, and defunding efforts to end gun violence as means to keep the political machine in power and enrich the entitled, politically connected few at everyone’s expense,” Kennedy said.

THOSE ARE FIGHTIN’ words, to some. Particularly to Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, who in his day job as a tax attorney downtown often gets his name dragged into any criticism of Berrios.

BISS: Has he become stronger fringe candidate?

After all, it is likely that Madigan’s support is the reason Berrios has been able to survive years of similar criticisms from local people. Now instead of inspiring Berrios critics to support him, Kennedy may have merely offended the powers-that-be (most of whom already are lining up behind Pritzker’s campaign) to make a special point of defeating him come the March 20 primary.

That is, if they don’t get all politically vindictive and try to have him knocked off the ballot before that date.

Because in the end, Chris Kennedy may well have a legitimate point to make. But he may not be strong-enough politically to be the one to make it.

  -30-

Whodathunkit? A Kennedy trying to act like he’s a true-blue political goo-goo

How free-thinking are the 177 individual members of the Illinois General Assembly? Do we really have expressions of multiple opinions on issues, or are they really just a batch of sheep awaiting orders from the leadership?

KENNEDY: Thinking for himself?

I’m sure the overly cynical among us will think it ridiculous to even ponder such a question. Of course, they’re a batch of hacks who do what they’re told – they’re politicians!

WOULD-BE GOVERNOR HOPEFUL Chris Kennedy has added his own thoughts to this issue – recently telling the State Journal-Register newspaper in Springfield that he thinks the Democratic majorities in both chambers of the state Legislature sometimes create bills on issues of concern to the public.

Not that they have any intent of actually addressing those issues. Instead, the bills are a promise of sorts – something the Democrats in charge will get to in some future year. Provided, of course, that they’re re-elected to their posts.

“I think that’s just emblematic of the inherent, well, corruption in our government there,” Kennedy said. “We’re more interested in keeping people in power and preserving power than actually passing legislation that’s helpful.”

A sentiment that, officially, is being debunked by Democratic leadership. An aide to Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, the guy whom many people want to believe is the ultimate political boss to be blamed for all that is wrong with Illinois, said of the statement, “Mr. Kennedy is not very well informed.” No wonder Madigan is in the camp of Democratic gubernatorial hopeful J.B. Pritzker.

THERE’S ALSO THE rule of thumb used throughout the years by many political reporters trying to figure out what will happen on the Statehouse Scene in Springfield – Nothing happens if the Speaker is opposed.

Meaning the legislative leadership, both in the Illinois House and state Senate, have a process by which they dictate which bills amongst the hundreds introduced each year actually get through committee review and get a final vote.

Or, actually, which ones get stalled without anything resembling a public review and are never heard from again. Which isn’t exactly what Kennedy is complaining about.

MADIGAN: All powerful and domineering?

For under Kennedy’s theory, a bill needs some sort of public attention paid to it – what good is it to claim you’ll do something in the future if you don’t tell anybody about it in the present?

CHRIS KENNEDY – WHO may be one of the few members of that political family that can claim Jack, Bobby and Ted as relatives who hasn’t actually held a political office in the past – is trying to create an image for himself with such statements that he’s not a political hack.

That even though he’s the son of Bobby and nephew to Jack and Ted, he’s not the ultimate political insider. Which may be true, but largely because he has never had the will power to follow through his past talk of running for office to actually campaign for the post.

Many people are going to try to tag the one-time boss of the Merchandise Mart (the Chicago property that the Kennedy family owned for decades) as nothing but a political insider. Hence, Chris is now eager to toss out the kind of talk that might appeal to the good-government types in our society.

As though he has high-minded ideals he wants to bring about for the betterment of all of us in our society.

AS FOR WHETHER our legislators are sheep who do what the leaders tell them to do, I know many have explained they rely on the legislative analyses put together by the leadership staffs. They’re told what to believe, then they act.

PHILIP: Was he really just taking orders?

While I know one former Illinois House member who told me that she was always permitted to vote on issues as she saw fit – other than the first vote of each legislative session to pick leadership. So long as she picked Madigan, she was allowed to decide things for herself.

Although I also remember one former Illinois Senate member who once ridiculed me when I suggested that then-Senate President James “Pate” Philip would tell him what to do. He insisted that the Senate Republican caucus was a batch of conservative-minded people who told their president what THEY would permit HIM to say and do.

Which may go a long way to explaining the level of nonsense that appears to pervade our state’s political structure – the one that Kennedy seems to think he wants to oversee, but may someday come to his senses and wish he never became involved with.

  -30-