Jump to content


Photo

What effect on concealed carry will we likely see with a Dem governor?


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 vito

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,558 posts
  • Joined: 30-October 04

Posted 11 November 2017 - 01:06 PM

None of the leading Democrats seeking the nomination for Governor seem likely to be supportive of concealed carry or any other pro-gun position, and I really doubt that Rauner can get re-elected. I'm wondering what effect a new Democrat Governor is likely to have on our current concealed carry law, i.e, might we see more places added to the "do not carry" list, might the legislature push through fee or other changes to make it harder for citizens to get or renew their license, or might we face a state version of the "assault weapon ban" or the "high capacity magazine ban" or something similar. 


Retired U.S. Army

NRA Life Member

Fully retired!

Proud member of the Deplorables

Refined Hydrocarbon Recycler 


#2 Jam77

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 162 posts
  • Joined: 22-November 16

Posted 11 November 2017 - 01:33 PM

I’m sure it won’t be good.

#3 soundguy

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 4,737 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 05

Posted 11 November 2017 - 01:42 PM

I think, if the legislature stays Pro 2A we wouldn't see much change. CC has not been a bloody failure, as predicted by some.

 

If the legislature desires, we could see the improvements we feel it needs (allow carry in parks, mass transit, etc). A Governor can't just change things on his/her own. There are actual problems that need to be resolved and watering down CC isn't one of them.

 

I don't care for any of the Dem contenders and will likely vote for Rauner again... Unless a better 2A candidate surfaces.


Edited by soundguy, 11 November 2017 - 01:48 PM.

Life is a cooperative venture... That's what makes it work.

#4 Quiet Observer

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 815 posts
  • Joined: 20-May 15

Posted 11 November 2017 - 02:04 PM

Jeanne Ives a state representative, district 42, from DuPage County is in the early stages of establishing a primary challenge to Governor Rauner.  She is a West Point grad and veteran and votes pro-2A.  She has chosen Rich Morthland, a Rock Island County Board member who previously served in the Illinois House from 2011 to 2013, as her running mate.  Going against the big money of Rauner and Pritscher will be stiff challenges.

 

http://www.ilga.gov/...p?MemberID=2045

http://www.nwherald....rauner/atkvx5z/

http://www.jeanneives.org/



#5 mauserme

    Eliminating the element of surprise one bill at a time.

  • Admin
  • 17,443 posts
  • Joined: 20-February 09

Posted 11 November 2017 - 02:23 PM

I think, if the legislature stays Pro 2A we wouldn't see much change. CC has not been a bloody failure, as predicted by some.

 

If the legislature desires, we could see the improvements we feel it needs (allow carry in parks, mass transit, etc). A Governor can't just change things on his/her own. There are actual problems that need to be resolved and watering down CC isn't one of them.

 

I don't care for any of the Dem contenders and will likely vote for Rauner again... Unless a better 2A candidate surfaces.

 

I agree and would add that the anti-gun faction in the legislature has mostly ignored the fact that they can't rely on Governor Rauner to sign any bill the send him, the way they could rely on his predecessors.   In other words, it hasn't changed the kinds of bills they've tried to pass one bit.


.
Link to ILGA House Audio/Video..........Link to ILGA Senate Audio/Video ..........Advanced Digital Media Link ..........Blue Room Stream Link

Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. (Ephesians 4:31)

 

On 5/25/2017, Superintendent Eddie Johnson predicted a 50% reduction is Chicago violence within 3 years of SB1722 becoming law.  The bill was signed into law on 6/23/2017. The clock is now ticking.


#6 mic6010

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,352 posts
  • Joined: 04-January 14

Posted 11 November 2017 - 02:33 PM

What more could they possibly add to the list banned places ? Walking down the sidewalk ? Any relevant place that the state or a municipality has any control over is already prohibited.

Any private place is allowed to ban carry on its premises at any time.

 

I agree with others, the legislature is where anti gun anything starts and stops. Having a Republican governor who is pro gun is simply a little added insurance in case something horrible does get through. The pressure on our 2nd amendment rights is not gonna change regardless of who gets elected. IL has been selected (for obvious reasons) as a battleground state in the war against the second amendment. They will not stop trying to make an example out of us by turning us into California or New York. Its never gonna stop. Not ever.


Edited by mic6010, 11 November 2017 - 02:37 PM.

"Living in Chicago, it used to be, 'don't go out at night,' or 'be more careful at night'. Now it's turned into a place where it doesn't matter if it's day or night."  - John Hendricks.


#7 RoadyRunner

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,793 posts
  • Joined: 03-October 12

Posted 11 November 2017 - 02:58 PM

Remember, carry was passed under a very anti-2A D Governor, who issued an amendatory veto that was then overridden by the legislature. Yes, it was under a clock set by a court order, but still...

IC Supporting member
NRA life member
NRA certified Basic Pistol Instructor

Illinois Certified Concealed Carry Instructor

 


#8 Trevis

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,890 posts
  • Joined: 19-October 07

Posted 11 November 2017 - 05:23 PM

Remember, carry was passed under a very anti-2A D Governor, who issued an amendatory veto that was then overridden by the legislature. Yes, it was under a clock set by a court order, but still...

That's about the only reason they did anything, because that clock to constitutional carry was something the Chicago establishment types REALLY didn't want. So they passed the best they thought they could get to make it as hard as they possibly could. Kind of sad that when a court says it's our right, and the legislature says, ok, we'll make it as hard and expensive as we can and stay out of court. 


"You know, there are some words I've known since I was a schoolboy: 'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' Those words were uttered by Judge Aaron Satie, as wisdom...and warning. The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged..." - Capt. Jean-Luc Picard

 

“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case it is unfit to exist.”

― Lysander SpoonerNo Treason: The Constitution of No Authority

1AApp.jpg


#9 BobPistol

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,610 posts
  • Joined: 24-February 13

Posted 11 November 2017 - 10:51 PM

Many ways.

 

All the gray areas we talk about, can easily be made into prohibited areas by executive order.   Then court lawsuits happen.

 

Plenty of test cases can easily be created.  

Prohibit carry in all forest preserve districts outside of Cook County?  Done.  EO signed.

 

Prohibit carry in day care centers?   Another EO says they're "educational facilities."  



 


The Second Amendment of the Constitution protects the rest.

#10 soundguy

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 4,737 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 05

Posted 11 November 2017 - 11:32 PM

Many ways.

 

All the gray areas we talk about, can easily be made into prohibited areas by executive order.   Then court lawsuits happen.

 

Plenty of test cases can easily be created.  

Prohibit carry in all forest preserve districts outside of Cook County?  Done.  EO signed.

 

Prohibit carry in day care centers?   Another EO says they're "educational facilities."  



 

 

While I've only done a little reading on this, I'm pretty sure the Illinois Gov can't do that with an executive order, which seem to be fairly limited...

 

Generally, you

can think of executive orders as the way the governor tells employees how
to get their jobs done, or how they must behave as the governor’s employ-
ees. For example, in 2010, Governor Pat Quinn issued an executive order

creating the Governor’s Office of New Americans.

 


Life is a cooperative venture... That's what makes it work.

#11 gangrel

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 2,833 posts
  • Joined: 13-April 11

Posted 12 November 2017 - 09:22 AM

Not saying that we shouldn't be vigilant or keep fighting here, but have y'all noticed that Rauner hasn't had to veto any anti-gun legislation?  That's because it's gotta' get through the ILGA first, and they don't have the votes.  A Democratic governor would mean that we're not going to get much in the way of improvements to CCW or better laws, but it is not the Republicans keeping the anti-gun legislation at bay, it is the downstate representatives and senators.  It is telling that the closest the antis have come to passing anything at all in the last 3 years was getting Dealer Licensing past the Senate vote.  While that is far too close for comfort for me, and while the yea vote and the excuse was way beyond the boundaries of decency for me, I received a response from one senator who voted yea on that bill partly because he knew for certain it didn't have the votes in the House.

 

Chicago kept gun rights in this state trapped for decades because any bill that preempts home rule requires a 3/5 supoermajority to pass.  A minority held our rights hostage because they were a big enough minority.  Then Moore/Shepard happened, and the numbers shifted.  They were the ones who needed to pass SOMETHING, and they didn't have the votes to stay away from the cliff.  Because that cat is out of the bag, and the preemption that comes with it, it is no longer the pro-gun side that needs a supermajority, it is the antis who need it.  They don't have a simple majority, let alone a supermajority.

 

Unless the Governor is signing or vetoing bills, either pro-gun or anti, the office doesn't even figure into this fight.

 

Personally, I hope Rauner or whomever mounts a successful primary challenge can hold the office.  There are plenty of other reasons I want a Republican to hold the Governor's office.  But if you're worried about gun rights, you're focused on the wrong branch of the government.


NRA Life Member

NRA Certified Range Safety Officer

NRA Certified Instructor - Basic Pistol, PPIH, PPOH, Rifle, Shotgun, Home Firearm Safety
ISP Approved Firearm Concealed Carry Instructor

Utah CCW Instructor


#12 vito

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,558 posts
  • Joined: 30-October 04

Posted 12 November 2017 - 10:38 AM

For me, both my State Senator (Syversen) and my State Representative (Sosnowski) are reliable pro-gun votes. As we all know, the gorilla in the room is the Chicago Democrats and I can't do much about that. I see the Governor as the almost last hope should some anti gun bill make it to his desk, and having a Democrat at that desk is not likely to be much help for us. 


Retired U.S. Army

NRA Life Member

Fully retired!

Proud member of the Deplorables

Refined Hydrocarbon Recycler 


#13 BobPistol

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,610 posts
  • Joined: 24-February 13

Posted 12 November 2017 - 05:26 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

While I've only done a little reading on this, I'm pretty sure the Illinois Gov can't do that with an executive order, which seem to be fairly limited...

 

Generally, you

can think of executive orders as the way the governor tells employees how
to get their jobs done, or how they must behave as the governor’s employ-
ees. For example, in 2010, Governor Pat Quinn issued an executive order

creating the Governor’s Office of New Americans.

 

 

 

Executive orders can also codify the government's interpretation of an existing law.  Administrative regulations already do this.  An EO can be one of them too. 

 

Law says "educational institution" for no-carry zones deals with A, B and C.    EO says government's interpretation of A is A1, A2, A3.   Example: educational institutions funded by the government are no carry zones.  So an EO can define a day care center funded by tax dollars as one of those the government considers no carry zones.

Another example:  Are AR pistols considered handguns under pre-emption?  An EO can say No because it is part of the AR (rifle, long gun) platform and let the lawsuits fly.  

Whether those interpretations are correct, the 50,000 lawsuits filed will determine.     

 


The Second Amendment of the Constitution protects the rest.

#14 soundguy

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 4,737 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 05

Posted 12 November 2017 - 08:06 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

While I've only done a little reading on this, I'm pretty sure the Illinois Gov can't do that with an executive order, which seem to be fairly limited...

 

Generally, you

can think of executive orders as the way the governor tells employees how
to get their jobs done, or how they must behave as the governor’s employ-
ees. For example, in 2010, Governor Pat Quinn issued an executive order

creating the Governor’s Office of New Americans.

 

 

 

Executive orders can also codify the government's interpretation of an existing law.  Administrative regulations already do this.  An EO can be one of them too. 

 

Law says "educational institution" for no-carry zones deals with A, B and C.    EO says government's interpretation of A is A1, A2, A3.   Example: educational institutions funded by the government are no carry zones.  So an EO can define a day care center funded by tax dollars as one of those the government considers no carry zones.

Another example:  Are AR pistols considered handguns under pre-emption?  An EO can say No because it is part of the AR (rifle, long gun) platform and let the lawsuits fly.  

Whether those interpretations are correct, the 50,000 lawsuits filed will determine.    

 

Does an EO work this way in Illinois? I haven't yet seen and IL EO that gets into anything like that.

It seems rather far fetched...


Life is a cooperative venture... That's what makes it work.

#15 BobPistol

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,610 posts
  • Joined: 24-February 13

Posted 13 November 2017 - 06:09 AM

 

 

 

 

 

Does an EO work this way in Illinois? I haven't yet seen and IL EO that gets into anything like that.

It seems rather far fetched...

 

 

EO's work this way on the Federal level.   I'm wondering why they wouldn't work this way on a state or local level.   

 

An EO can't make new law, but it can interpret existing law.   

 

Example I've seen in the city of Chicago:   Mayor Daley issued an EO (mayoral directive) that there is no free parking in the Loop.   There are perhaps dozens of parking spots, properly signed, that if you park there, you an park for free.  But you'll get a ticket.   This directive continues even under the Rahm's administration. 

It will be dismissed if you show up in person and make the case, bring pictures as proof.   

You will beat the rap, but you won't beat the orange present.

 

This is a case of an EO contradicting existing law (state law says a sign must be posted, and so does city ordinance).     However, this EO is their interpretation of existing parking laws.     

My guess is that this directive was put in as part of the "leasing parking meters" contract. 


The Second Amendment of the Constitution protects the rest.

#16 sctman800

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,734 posts
  • Joined: 14-April 04

Posted 13 November 2017 - 08:32 AM

   Not looking forward to that possibility, I won't call it a sure thing but highly possible.  The big difference I see is some of the squishy lawmakers here in Illinois will go more anti.  If they are worried about a veto from the Governor they are more likely to vote with the gun owners.  That way they wont Pi$$ off the gun owners on a vote that was wasted.   Jim.


Kristofferson wrote it and Janis sang it "Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose."

#17 Jeffrey

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,245 posts
  • Joined: 10-January 08

Posted 13 November 2017 - 09:28 AM

For me, both my State Senator (Syversen) and my State Representative (Sosnowski) are reliable pro-gun votes. As we all know, the gorilla in the room is the Chicago Democrats and I can't do much about that. I see the Governor as the almost last hope should some anti gun bill make it to his desk, and having a Democrat at that desk is not likely to be much help for us. 

Lets face it, Chicago runs the rest of the state.  The Governor doesn't seem to do much for us regardless of the party.  Yes Rauner is/was a potential safety net in case something got through our state reps.  We fortunately do have some dems down south that still believe in the Constitution.  That said, what has Rauner blocked to help our cause?  I don't believe that the reps haven't passed anything because they were afraid of Rauner vetoing anything.  The fact is, if the dems in Illinois truly want something collectively, they'll talk to Chicago and make it happen.  


...and justice for all

YOUR WALLET, the only place Democrats care to drill

#18 soundguy

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 4,737 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 05

Posted 13 November 2017 - 09:29 AM

EO's work this way on the Federal level.   I'm wondering why they wouldn't work this way on a state or local level.

 

As a State, we have our own constitution outlining/limiting what Government can do.

 

If such changes to a law could be made by our Governor, I think Gov Quinn would have done so. Blagojovich certainly would have outlawed ALL guns. In the days following a shooting at NIU, I recorded him telling three NIU students that all guns would be banned from Illinois if it was up to him. Or perhaps Rauner could make it easier to carry everywhere by issuing an EO. That would certainly enhance his popularity with us...

 

I'm pretty sure it cannot be done.

 

Generally, you can think of executive orders (in Illinois) as the way the governor tells

employees how to get their jobs done, or how they must behave as the governor’s

employees. For example, in 2010, Governor Pat Quinn issued an executive order

creating the Governor’s Office of New Americans.


Life is a cooperative venture... That's what makes it work.

#19 BigJim

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,044 posts
  • Joined: 30-June 08

Posted 13 November 2017 - 09:51 AM

I could go on and on with bills they tried to pass in the past but why remind them?


Big Jim
-----------------------------------------
I will not be commanded,
I will not be controlled
And I will not let my future go on,
without the help of my soul

The Lost Boy - Greg Holden

#20 mauserme

    Eliminating the element of surprise one bill at a time.

  • Admin
  • 17,443 posts
  • Joined: 20-February 09

Posted 13 November 2017 - 10:29 AM

I beleive this is the extent of the Governor's EO authority

http://ilga.gov/comm.../lrb/conent.htm


SECTION 11. GOVERNOR - AGENCY REORGANIZATION

The Governor, by Executive Order, may reassign functions
among or reorganize executive agencies which are directly
responsible to him. If such a reassignment or reorganization
would contravene a statute, the Executive Order shall be
delivered to the General Assembly. If the General Assembly is
in annual session and if the Executive Order is delivered on
or before April 1, the General Assembly shall consider the
Executive Order at that annual session. If the General
Assembly is not in annual session or if the Executive Order
is delivered after April 1, the General Assembly shall
consider the Executive Order at its next annual session, in
which case the Executive Order shall be deemed to have been
delivered on the first day of that annual session. Such an
Executive Order shall not become effective if, within 60
calendar days after its delivery to the General Assembly,
either house disapproves the Executive Order by the record
vote of a majority of the members elected. An Executive Order
not so disapproved shall become effective by its terms but
not less than 60 calendar days after its delivery to the
General Assembly.
(Source: Illinois Constitution.)


 


.
Link to ILGA House Audio/Video..........Link to ILGA Senate Audio/Video ..........Advanced Digital Media Link ..........Blue Room Stream Link

Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. (Ephesians 4:31)

 

On 5/25/2017, Superintendent Eddie Johnson predicted a 50% reduction is Chicago violence within 3 years of SB1722 becoming law.  The bill was signed into law on 6/23/2017. The clock is now ticking.


#21 civilone

  • Members
  • 22 posts
  • Joined: 10-November 16

Posted 13 November 2017 - 02:19 PM

I could see an attempt to change from "shall issue" conceal carry to "may issue-if you can justify" conceal carry (similar to other states), magazine capacities (introduced before in Illinois), firearm order of protection (introduced before in Illinois), partial rifle ban (introduced before in Illinois), and gun dealer licensing (introduced before in Illinois).



#22 chislinger

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 5,534 posts
  • Joined: 21-November 13

Posted 13 November 2017 - 05:37 PM

What we get with a Dem governor:

- any improvements to gun laws and concealed carry laws get vetoed, and there won't be enough votes to override.

- any new restrictions of gun rights is immediately signed into law.

If you think this doesn't matter you aren't thinking clearly.
"I'm not worried about following the U.S. Constitution." - Washington County, Alabama Judge Nick Williams

#23 WitchDoctor

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 412 posts
  • Joined: 08-March 16

Posted 13 November 2017 - 05:50 PM

What we get with a Dem governor:

- any improvements to gun laws and concealed carry laws get vetoed, and there won't be enough votes to override.

- any new restrictions of gun rights is immediately signed into law.

If you think this doesn't matter you aren't thinking clearly.

Chislinger, your take seems to be how I feel too.  G-d help us if BJ Pritker makes it into office. That is another reason to GTFO from Illinois in general.


ISRA Member

NRA Life Member

3/504 P.I.R Blue Devil

25 years US Army

Proud Parent to a Wonderful Kid...

Tired of Chicago B.S.

 

 


#24 AlphaKoncepts aka CGS

    Firearm Instructor and Gun Rights Activist

  • Members
  • 7,982 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 12

Posted 13 November 2017 - 06:11 PM

 

Jeanne Ives a state representative, district 42, from DuPage County is in the early stages of establishing a primary challenge to Governor Rauner.  She is a West Point grad and veteran and votes pro-2A.  She has chosen Rich Morthland, a Rock Island County Board member who previously served in the Illinois House from 2011 to 2013, as her running mate.  Going against the big money of Rauner and Pritscher will be stiff challenges.

 

http://www.ilga.gov/...p?MemberID=2045

http://www.nwherald....rauner/atkvx5z/

http://www.jeanneives.org/

 

This is interesting to me for 2 reasons. 1, Republicans are trying to primary a sitting governor and 2. I actually like her alot based on the floor debates I have witnessed from her. She is strong and I agree with most of her politics. I have not researched her enture voting record yet however.

I'm not sure Rauner can get re-elected. He's done a few things (unrelated to guns) that have p***** off some people whom have voted for him. Also I'm not sure he's done enough to garner votes from moderates away from Pritzker. He's done alot of good fighting Madigan but Madigan controls the media as well as the state house, and was able to flip all over that against Rauner.

I've been helping campaign for someone who is trying to run for rep against Lou Lang (BTW if you are in Skokie, Lincolnwood, Morton Grove or Roger Park, can I get you to sign a petition please?!), what I have learned is that all Republicans are running against Trump. Imagine the pleasantries I was told as I was asking for petition signatures.


-Thomas

Member, ISRA; Life Member, NRA; NRA Certified Instructor, AGI Certified Gunsmith, Illinois Concealed Carry Instructor
www.alphakoncepts.com  www.gunrights4illinois.com  @AlphaKoncepts


#25 Mick G

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 408 posts
  • Joined: 26-September 17

Posted 13 November 2017 - 07:46 PM

 

What we get with a Dem governor:

- any improvements to gun laws and concealed carry laws get vetoed, and there won't be enough votes to override.

- any new restrictions of gun rights is immediately signed into law.

If you think this doesn't matter you aren't thinking clearly.

Chislinger, your take seems to be how I feel too.  G-d help us if BJ Pritker makes it into office. That is another reason to GTFO from Illinois in general.

 

 

This is the absolute truth. You are basically looking at the most expensive Governors race in the history of Illinois but here's the thing. You are going to have two billionaires going at it. The problem with Rauner is two fold. First: Even the people who would normally vote for him have a why bother even voting attitude. The perception is that he turned Illinois into the laughing stock of the nation. Second, he made a lot of enemies who were on his side when he signed HB40.

 

A lot of Republicans would love to see someone like Jeanne Ives run against him, the bold truth is he is not likeable. The bolder truth is he has the money to crush anybody who runs against him in a primary.

 

He does not have enough money to take down Pritzker.

 

"When I was 7 years old, my dad passed away, and my mother was left with three young children. She lost her job as my father’s partner in business. She lost her life partner, and she was afflicted with alcoholism.

She struggled valiantly to overcome a disease so she could take care of her own kids, and even though she lost the battle, she ultimately won because although she passed away, all three of us survived."

 

That makes Democrats instantly burst into tears.

 

How about this for the a bit more of the truth.

 

"I was born into one of the wealthiest families in the United States and my mother had a drinking problem after my rich father passed away when I was 7.  She was run over by the tow truck that was towing her Cadillac which had broken down during a shopping spree in 1982 when I was 17. I come from a family that has never lived a normal existence. We are FILTHY RICH and when I was young and pointed at something, I would say mine and it was so. My families wealth is 30 BILLION DOLLARS. I now point to being the Governor of Illinois and say mine."

 

Hello Indiana!


Edited by Mick G, 13 November 2017 - 07:49 PM.


#26 BobPistol

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,610 posts
  • Joined: 24-February 13

Posted 13 November 2017 - 08:47 PM

Pritzker.  The Democrat party crony who wants to buy the Governor's seat.  


The Second Amendment of the Constitution protects the rest.

#27 Hap

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,714 posts
  • Joined: 16-May 13

Posted 13 November 2017 - 09:12 PM

I wouldn't be surprised if we see more attempts to limit or roll back preemption.


Ad utrumque paratus


#28 ChicagoRonin70

    The Landlord of the Flies!

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,021 posts
  • Joined: 02-August 14

Posted 14 November 2017 - 12:05 AM

 

 

What we get with a Dem governor:

- any improvements to gun laws and concealed carry laws get vetoed, and there won't be enough votes to override.

- any new restrictions of gun rights is immediately signed into law.

If you think this doesn't matter you aren't thinking clearly.

Chislinger, your take seems to be how I feel too.  G-d help us if BJ Pritker makes it into office. That is another reason to GTFO from Illinois in general.

 

 

This is the absolute truth. You are basically looking at the most expensive Governors race in the history of Illinois but here's the thing. You are going to have two billionaires going at it. The problem with Rauner is two fold. First: Even the people who would normally vote for him have a why bother even voting attitude. The perception is that he turned Illinois into the laughing stock of the nation. Second, he made a lot of enemies who were on his side when he signed HB40.

 

A lot of Republicans would love to see someone like Jeanne Ives run against him, the bold truth is he is not likeable. The bolder truth is he has the money to crush anybody who runs against him in a primary.

 

He does not have enough money to take down Pritzker.

 

"When I was 7 years old, my dad passed away, and my mother was left with three young children. She lost her job as my father’s partner in business. She lost her life partner, and she was afflicted with alcoholism.

She struggled valiantly to overcome a disease so she could take care of her own kids, and even though she lost the battle, she ultimately won because although she passed away, all three of us survived."

 

That makes Democrats instantly burst into tears.

 

How about this for the a bit more of the truth.

 

"I was born into one of the wealthiest families in the United States and my mother had a drinking problem after my rich father passed away when I was 7.  She was run over by the tow truck that was towing her Cadillac which had broken down during a shopping spree in 1982 when I was 17. I come from a family that has never lived a normal existence. We are FILTHY RICH and when I was young and pointed at something, I would say mine and it was so. My families wealth is 30 BILLION DOLLARS. I now point to being the Governor of Illinois and say mine."

 

Hello Indiana!

 

 

Hah! I forgot about that! That is bizarrely hilarious!


“One can never underestimate the idiocy of those determined to be offended by things that don't affect their real lives in the slightest.” —Me
 
“Hatred is the sharpest sword; the desire for peace is armor made of willow leaves in the face of an enemy who despises you, as neither alone will stop a strike that is aimed at your neck.” —Samurai proverb
 
“An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.” —Robert Heinlein
 
“I reserve the right to take any action necessary to maintain the equilibrium in which I've chosen to exist.” —Me
 
"It ain't braggin' if you done it." —Will Rogers

 

Gb1XExdm.jpg
 
 

 
 
 
 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users