Buzzard Posted January 8, 2010 at 06:41 AM Posted January 8, 2010 at 06:41 AM Lets see if we are unified in our support or are we splitting our votes.
sctman800 Posted January 8, 2010 at 08:26 AM Posted January 8, 2010 at 08:26 AM Wow, two votes and both for Dillard, I guess old bikers think alike. Actually I really like Brady an awful lot but think Dillard has the best chance of winning. Last time the vote got split up with Brady and Oberwise and we got JBT who I really had to hold my nose to vote for her. I would really hate to be in that situation again with Ryan or Mckenna both of which I consider worse than JBT and I will not vote for either of them ever. Don't get me wrong I also like Dillard and think he will be fine for us and I say this as a one issue voter. Jim.
gravyboy77 Posted January 8, 2010 at 02:45 PM Posted January 8, 2010 at 02:45 PM Wow, two votes and both for Dillard, I guess old bikers think alike. Actually I really like Brady an awful lot but think Dillard has the best chance of winning. Last time the vote got split up with Brady and Oberwise and we got JBT who I really had to hold my nose to vote for her. I would really hate to be in that situation again with Ryan or Mckenna both of which I consider worse than JBT and I will not vote for either of them ever. Don't get me wrong I also like Dillard and think he will be fine for us and I say this as a one issue voter. Jim. The Sun-Times endorsed Dillard today: Link: We're backing Dillard in GOP gov primary January 8, 2010 In the fall of 2008, the man who then ran the Illinois Senate, Emil Jones, refused to call the Senate back into session to vote on an important ethics bill. Only one man, insiders speculated, might be able to change Jones' mind -- U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, Jones' former protege. But who could persuade Obama -- running for president and loathe to get mixed up in local politics -- to make the call? As it turned out, a major player in that effort was not another Democrat, but a Republican -- state Sen. Kirk Dillard. Setting off a sweet three-bank billiards shot, Dillard gave a shout out through the press to his friend Barack, who phoned his friend Emil, who called the Senate back into session. That story speaks volumes about Sen. Dillard's ability to work with all comers -- Republicans and Democrats, tea-party conservatives and knee-jerk liberals -- to get a good job done. He is a resolute Republican, committed to limited government and conservative on most social issues. But he is a pragmatist as well, an essential quality for any Republican wishing to be effective in this Democratic-leaning state. He is cut from the same cloth as several of Illinois' most successful governors -- Richard Ogilvie, Jim Thompson and Jim Edgar. Dillard was, in fact, Gov. Edgar's chief of staff. The Chicago Sun-Times endorses Sen. Kirk Dillard for governor in the Feb. 2 Republican primary. No other candidate comes close to matching his experience in the executive and legislative branches of state government, his knowledge of the back doors of power in Springfield, and his proven ability to build cross-party coalitions without abandoning core Republican values. Dillard has correctly identified the greatest challenge facing Illinois' next governor -- the mountain of debt and unfunded pension obligations undermining our state's economic competitiveness. His solution is, in part, to freeze all hiring and non-emergency spending, impose zero-based budgeting, reduce Medicaid fraud and trim pension benefits for new employees. Many of these ideas, frankly, strike us as general and vague. Cut Medicaid fraud? Sure. But how? On the other hand, grand plans are a dime a dozen -- every candidate has one. Far more valuable is the political skill to carry out that plan -- and here Dillard stands apart. When Edgar (who has endorsed Dillard) was elected governor in 1990, Illinois was in a recession and in debt. By the time Edgar and Dillard, his chief of staff, left office eight year later, the state enjoyed a $1.5 billion surplus. Edgar pulled that off by shrinking the size of government and making a temporary income tax hike permanent. Dillard now refuses to even discuss a tax hike, insisting he would solve the state's current fiscal problems by reducing spending and growing the economy. But he has wisely refused to sign a no-new-tax pledge, despite hectoring from critics, knowing that a smart executive never takes any option off the table. Dillard was an early leader in state government ethics reform, working on the issue with then-state Sen. Obama. He is a strong proponent of tort reform, the placing of limits on malpractice awards by juries. He is opposed to gay marriage and civil unions. And he says he would lift the state's moratorium on the death penalty once reforms that he sponsored in the Senate, such as new procedures for reviewing capital cases, are in place. The next governor of Illinois, Republican or Democrat, cannot afford to be a lone wolf or an ideologue. He will have to work closely, without being co-opted, with Springfield's two Democratic powerhouses, House Speaker Mike Madigan and Senate President John Cullerton. Sen. Kirk Dillard has built a career on working with others, friends and foes alike. And it's nice to know the White House will quickly return his calls.
pyre400 Posted January 9, 2010 at 03:56 AM Posted January 9, 2010 at 03:56 AM This pretty much where we were before with the hidden majority being "undecided". Those "undecideds" are going to be critical in this race, and I really hope they show. I also wish the media would start exposing Ryan and McKenna already... I think they're saving the dirt for when their beloved dems need some support in the general.
Lou Posted January 9, 2010 at 05:34 AM Posted January 9, 2010 at 05:34 AM The next governor of Illinois, Republican or Democrat, cannot afford to be a lone wolf or an ideologue. He will have to work closely, without being co-opted, with Springfield's two Democratic powerhouses, House Speaker Mike Madigan and Senate President John Cullerton. Sen. Kirk Dillard has built a career on working with others, friends and foes alike. IMHO, Dillard is not perfect but he is not only electable but can govern if elected. I would love to see Adam A elected but he could never win and if he did he could not lead the state.
spec4 Posted January 9, 2010 at 03:53 PM Posted January 9, 2010 at 03:53 PM In a previous post I mentioned my concern over Dillard hanging around with anti 2A RINO Jim Edgar. Can anyone help me get by that? I'd sure feel like an idiot if the majority of us voted for him (as the above poll indicates) and he ended up screwing us. Had I known Edgars true colors in the past, I never would have voted for him. Having said that, for practical reasons I can see how he may be the right one for now, given our choices.
pyre400 Posted January 9, 2010 at 05:57 PM Posted January 9, 2010 at 05:57 PM NYT has covered the candidates. Not any new news for me, but may be interesting for others. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/08/us/08cncwarren.html
lockman Posted January 9, 2010 at 07:41 PM Posted January 9, 2010 at 07:41 PM I wonder who voted for Andy McKenna, he is against RTC.
pyre400 Posted January 9, 2010 at 08:52 PM Posted January 9, 2010 at 08:52 PM I wonder who voted for Andy McKenna, he is against RTC. Who knows, could also be a prankster... Also, there is sometimes a subliminal hangup where people have called Adam "Andy".
moparcardave Posted January 10, 2010 at 08:19 PM Posted January 10, 2010 at 08:19 PM Who to vote for? Well I have my mind made up and I want new blood. I see Adam Andrzejewski's facebook page is starting to take off growing over 800 friends in the past couple weeks to 3200. I looked at Kirk Dillards and he has 800 friends. I also did a simple search on their names on google and number of hits. Adam is gaining steam though he has only been a public name for a short time he has 2/3'rds as many hits as Dillards. From my view point of a 57 year old voter I want someone new that hasn't been in the business of politics. Lots of the ideals of the Brady, Adam and Dillard are the same from our way of thinking. However, I do believe the other republican voters are just plain tired of politics of old. I am not saying Brady or Dillard are bad but I am saying voters are looking for somone that is an outsider. Why not go for someone that will win. Put all our votes here in one basket and go for it. Here in nothern Illinois where I live I honestly believe someone from central or southern Illinois has less of a chance just because downstaters have so much less of a chance. Someone without grey hair has a better chance and yes what hair I have left is grey.
Thirdpower Posted January 11, 2010 at 05:37 PM Posted January 11, 2010 at 05:37 PM I'm bouncing between Dillard and Brady. Both are strong 2A but a buddy of mine sent me an add from the last election showing Dillard gushing over O.
c-rock Posted January 11, 2010 at 09:43 PM Posted January 11, 2010 at 09:43 PM Between Andrew and Proft for me.
John Bambenek Posted January 11, 2010 at 09:49 PM Posted January 11, 2010 at 09:49 PM Can someone explain to me this idea that: 1) Adam can't win 2) Adam couldn't lead this state What is this based on, besides the latest talking points from the Gubnatorial Candidate that endorsed Barack Obama? The next governor of Illinois, Republican or Democrat, cannot afford to be a lone wolf or an ideologue. He will have to work closely, without being co-opted, with Springfield's two Democratic powerhouses, House Speaker Mike Madigan and Senate President John Cullerton. Sen. Kirk Dillard has built a career on working with others, friends and foes alike. IMHO, Dillard is not perfect but he is not only electable but can govern if elected. I would love to see Adam A elected but he could never win and if he did he could not lead the state.
spec4 Posted January 11, 2010 at 10:04 PM Posted January 11, 2010 at 10:04 PM IMO, sadly, we are forced to prevent McKenna or Ryan from a win. Dillard may be able to do that. So what rules, the heart (for Adam) or the brain (for Dillard)?
Sigma Posted January 11, 2010 at 10:57 PM Posted January 11, 2010 at 10:57 PM Adam has the family like look. He may win over those who was tricked by Obama. No one knew Obama nor did he have experience. But he looked and talked good. Adam may have a chance but after this he will never have another. It seems everyone here wants him so why dont we push him?I understand the point of this being the primary and we need to play our cards right to win later but we will see once everyone takes this poll.Either is good for me.
Kenny Posted January 12, 2010 at 02:21 PM Posted January 12, 2010 at 02:21 PM IMO, sadly, we are forced to prevent McKenna or Ryan from a win. Dillard may be able to do that. So what rules, the heart (for Adam) or the brain (for Dillard)? I am so sick of voting for the candidate that can win & getting F$#*@% so I am going with the candidate I can feel good about voting for. If enough people don't buy into the BS that "the Machine" wants us to believe we could get who we actually want!!!! Ya know if we got everybody on this board to vote the best candidate & push for that candidate it could make a difference but it is tough when people are split by the best candidate & the candidate that can win and is not real bad!!!!!!!
oldude Posted January 12, 2010 at 02:55 PM Posted January 12, 2010 at 02:55 PM I am so sick of voting for the candidate that can win & getting F$#*@% so I am going with the candidate I can feel good about voting for. agreed Kenny. The people who vote for the least of 2 evils are still voting for evil. I'm sick & tired of voting for RINO's. The GOP needs to revert back to conservatism. Untill then I will vote for the candidate who most shares my concerns.
boog Posted January 12, 2010 at 03:03 PM Posted January 12, 2010 at 03:03 PM IMO, sadly, we are forced to prevent McKenna or Ryan from a win. Dillard may be able to do that. So what rules, the heart (for Adam) or the brain (for Dillard)? I am so sick of voting for the candidate that can win & getting F$#*@% so I am going with the candidate I can feel good about voting for. If enough people don't buy into the BS that "the Machine" wants us to believe we could get who we actually want!!!! Ya know if we got everybody on this board to vote the best candidate & push for that candidate it could make a difference but it is tough when people are split by the best candidate & the candidate that can win and is not real bad!!!!!!! my thinking EXACTLY
Buzzard Posted January 12, 2010 at 03:23 PM Author Posted January 12, 2010 at 03:23 PM IMO, sadly, we are forced to prevent McKenna or Ryan from a win. Dillard may be able to do that. So what rules, the heart (for Adam) or the brain (for Dillard)? I am so sick of voting for the candidate that can win & getting F$#*@% so I am going with the candidate I can feel good about voting for. If enough people don't buy into the BS that "the Machine" wants us to believe we could get who we actually want!!!! Ya know if we got everybody on this board to vote the best candidate & push for that candidate it could make a difference but it is tough when people are split by the best candidate & the candidate that can win and is not real bad!!!!!!!Here's another point to think about. Many voter's pick their candidate over the quirkiest things. How many voter's will pass over Adam Andrzejewski because of his last name? Remember how many people couldn't pronounce Blagojevich's name - let alone spell it? Newspapers around the country would sometimes print the proper pronunciation after his name when he was mentioned in an article. That may not have been so bad, had he go on to do great things. But instead he made Illinois a laughing stock with his divisive poitics, his shady deals, his criminal indictment, and now an aspiration to be a reality show star. I know most of you will think this is petty, but look how easily Obama hoodwinked the voters with a teleprompter and reverb. The man has done nothing other than make speechs and run for president. He was a senator for almost ten minutes. And with the MSM covering up his past and predicting his great future, he was elected president with no experience and credentials whatsoever. How foolish can voters be? So now we ask the Illinois voters to choose a governor. The same voters that largely voted for Obama. Will they choose wisely this time? Is there any reason to think they will? For some, it may just come down to what's in a name. They may not want another governor with a name they can't pronounce. No matter how good Adam Andrzejewski's stump speech is. And I'm not saying there will be many like this, because it's a foolish way to choose. But all the same, I practically guarantee that there will be some that will not vote for him just for that. I know a girl that voted for Blagojevich just because of his hair.
Buzzard Posted January 12, 2010 at 04:16 PM Author Posted January 12, 2010 at 04:16 PM I wanted to mention, the above comment was / is not intended to affect the poll. If Andy's your man then, by all means vote for him! He's a good candidate. I did want to throw that comment out there to see if anyone else perceived a small handicap there. I did not vote in the poll, and have yet to decide.
Bill Matio Posted January 12, 2010 at 04:22 PM Posted January 12, 2010 at 04:22 PM I wanted to mention, the above comment was / is not intended to affect the poll. If Andy's your man then, by all means vote for him! He's a good candidate. I did want to throw that comment out there to see if anyone else perceived a small handicap there. I did not vote in the poll, and have yet to decide.Unfortunately Mr. Buzzard, because of all of the people in Chicago who will vote straight democratic, as much as I hate to say it, the next governor will be a democrat They're all blinded by the machine politics that have been in place for way to long. Just my opinion
Buzzard Posted January 12, 2010 at 04:30 PM Author Posted January 12, 2010 at 04:30 PM I wanted to mention, the above comment was / is not intended to affect the poll. If Andy's your man then, by all means vote for him! He's a good candidate. I did want to throw that comment out there to see if anyone else perceived a small handicap there. I did not vote in the poll, and have yet to decide.Unfortunately Mr. Buzzard, because of all of the people in Chicago who will vote straight democratic, as much as I hate to say it, the next governor will be a democrat They're all blinded by the machine politics that have been in place for way to long. Just my opinionYou're probably right, Mr. Matio. I'm not very optimistic when it comes to Illinois politics. And it doesn't help when we gun owners can't agree on a primary candidate to propel him a little closer towards winning the GOP nomination.
Bill Matio Posted January 12, 2010 at 04:47 PM Posted January 12, 2010 at 04:47 PM You're probably right, Mr. Matio. I'm not very optimistic when it comes to Illinois politics. And it doesn't help when we gun owners can't agree on a primary candidate to propel him a little closer towards winning the GOP nomination.It certainly doesn't help any when 7 people throw their hats into the primary. (And I'm sure the democrats were jumping up and down in joy when looking at how these 7 potential candidates would dilute the primary.
Ashdump Posted January 12, 2010 at 04:59 PM Posted January 12, 2010 at 04:59 PM I wanted to mention, the above comment was / is not intended to affect the poll. If Andy's your man then, by all means vote for him! He's a good candidate. I did want to throw that comment out there to see if anyone else perceived a small handicap there. I did not vote in the poll, and have yet to decide. I don't know if a name is a handicap or not, Buzz. Obama is real close to "Osama" but yet folks wet all over themselves for him. Blagojevich? I think it was Jay Leno that said "what the heck is a Blagojevich?". He won handily two terms. The name Ryan should hold a fair ammount of stigma too on account of the former governer and jail bird George Ryan, yet Jim RINO, ahem, I mean Ryan, seems to be doing well.
Buzzard Posted January 12, 2010 at 05:13 PM Author Posted January 12, 2010 at 05:13 PM I wanted to mention, the above comment was / is not intended to affect the poll. If Andy's your man then, by all means vote for him! He's a good candidate. I did want to throw that comment out there to see if anyone else perceived a small handicap there. I did not vote in the poll, and have yet to decide. I don't know if a name is a handicap or not, Buzz. Obama is real close to "Osama" but yet folks wet all over themselves for him. Blagojevich? I think it was Jay Leno that said "what the heck is a Blagojevich?". He won handily two terms. The name Ryan should hold a fair ammount of stigma too on account of the former governer and jail bird George Ryan, yet Jim RINO, ahem, I mean Ryan, seems to be doing well. Going back to Obama's presidential campaign, remember how Obama's operatives denounced anyone mentioning his middle name Hussein, by calling them racist? They obviously thought that it was an unwanted liability. Now that he's been elected, it's treated as a non-issue, but it sure wasn't before.
moparcardave Posted January 12, 2010 at 05:56 PM Posted January 12, 2010 at 05:56 PM Look at Scott Brown in Ma. A vitural unknown and someone standing who is an outsider. That's what people want... youth and somone that's not been there before. As far as the name comparison I don't see a merit in that either. Blago is in a class by himself and those that have been to Springfield in many cases are assocaited with the last election Maybe I am wrong, have been many times but Adam offers us a real chance.
gravyboy77 Posted January 12, 2010 at 10:55 PM Posted January 12, 2010 at 10:55 PM Look at Scott Brown in Ma. A vitural unknown and someone standing who is an outsider. That's what people want... youth and somone that's not been there before. As far as the name comparison I don't see a merit in that either. Blago is in a class by himself and those that have been to Springfield in many cases are assocaited with the last election Maybe I am wrong, have been many times but Adam offers us a real chance. Nice reasoning except for the fact that Scott Brown has been a house member for years(he has political experience) and is a Rino, were talking about bright blue Taxachussets. Brown is like Kirk, while you may not see eye to eye with them on everything, i think they will both hold the line when it comes to the Democrats ramming unpopular legislation through whereas the Dems will rubberstamp and vote as they are told. Brown is running his campaign on stopping the heathcare bill and is gaining in the polls daily.
spec4 Posted January 13, 2010 at 02:57 PM Posted January 13, 2010 at 02:57 PM This poll has been up for over a week and we only have 58 votes. Come on folks, get involved!! How many people access this site per day?
Buzzard Posted January 13, 2010 at 04:27 PM Author Posted January 13, 2010 at 04:27 PM I'm not saying he's my candidate, I like Bill Brady, but it seems he's running a half hearted campaign. What's the point of that? I don't see or hear any ads. Maybe it's a money problem. I think it would be better for the GOP to not field so many candidates. Wouldn't that save primary campaign funds to use in the real race?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.