Jump to content

So who are you going to vote for in the primary for Governor?


vito
 Share

Recommended Posts

I keep hearing "I want to vote for X as he has more of what I believe in." Next I hear "I am voting for Y because he has a better chance in the elections." I understand everybody wants to be on the winning side, but sometimes you have to stand up for what you REALLY believe in. Rant Over!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/14/2022 at 6:34 PM, Ranger said:

FWIW:  I read that the democrats are sending out those Bailey too conservative flyers to help out in both the primary and general.  They will help Bailey win the general and then be more easily beaten in the general.

 

I don't follow that bizarro-world logic.  How does running anti-Bailey ads translate into him winning the GOP nomination?   The most likely scenario is they are running anti-Bailey ads because he is the one candidate that they fear could beat Jabba in the general.   

The Democrat's Governors PAC doesn't spend money backwards.   
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point, after getting no less than 50 pounds of junk mail from all these hacks, I'm 100% undecided. Unless I see someone I really align with on most issues, I might, dare i say, stay home. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My opinion, which means nothing.

 

Bailey is the best choice for the second amendment. Period. End of story. However you need to win every county minus Cook to win. And we all know that winning the collar counties is what matters and in particular the suburban mom vote. The abortion issue I feel is critical to winning those collar counties. So far Bailey stated in the debates that he doesn't support tax payer abortion and only believes it's acceptable when the mothers life is in jeopardy. I believe this will hurt him if he goes against Prizker.


So far I'm when asked about Roe v Wade leak Irvin stated he won't comment on a leak and he is waiting for the opinion of the court to come out. He is choosing his words very carefully. 
 

We have had a Republican Gov with Rauner 4 years ago and I believe we can have one again. But Rainer's opinion on abortion was that he personally didn't like it, but he believed in pro choice and he wasn't going to change Illinois laws regarding it. 
 

Numerous factors probably helped Rauner has well. Pat Quinn was an idiot and Obama was in his final 2 years and the majority of people were tired of the democratic b.s. Rauner wins. And I know Rauners sucked but he at least veto the gun dealer bill. 
 

There are many factors now that may help us in the general election as well. Thanks to Biden, if gas prices and inflation keep rising this will help us tremendously. 

 

BUT this is Illinois. The majority of the population believes abortion is a right. If Bailey wins the primary and continues to be anti abortion  he is going to probably lose one collar county, be it Dupage, Lake or Will and the election is over. 

 

I could very well be wrong and I hope I am. Or Bailey is careful with his view on abortion and that will help him and give him a good fighting chance. 

 

Since Irvin kinda danced around the answer he probably won't give a real answer on abortion until after the primary if he wins.

 

All speculation, but if Irvin says he is pro choice or believes in a woman's right to choose he could beat prizker(if Irwin is anti abortion he will lose to JB). If Bailey wins primary and sticks to his anti abortion opinion he will lose to JB. 

 

Again I hope I'm wrong and Because I want Bailey as Governor myself. (Revoke the foid and legalize suppressors!) 

 

for the record I hate abortions as well but the Moms in the collar counties are pro choice. 

 

(Please correct me if I'm wrong on anything in the post regarding Irvin or Bailey's opinion on abortion/roe v wade)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, I see nothing wrong with that.  

There's no way In ... the right to an abortion in Illinois is going to change regardless because we are packed with Democrats.  

The only statement I would say (unfortunately) abortion isn't going to change there's no reason to discuss it.  

Illinois is going to become abortion capital of the midwest maybe the US if as JB says the state will even pay for it. 

Bring you 12 year old girlfriend to Illinois a no questions include names abortion, what a he..hole we have become. 

I'm from DuPage at a time you could find a .. democrat in the county now it's gone into the sh..

I'll be REAL interested to hear what Sean Casten's 17 year old daughter "suddenly" died of, being she decide she was pro-choice and took her own live or maybe he will reconsider his stance on the Fentanyl border.   The OD rate is just staggering, 129 kids have been killed in schools in the last 30 years, I'm not adding the whoopdedoo because that's terrible but it's a spit in the ocean. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/14/2022 at 8:22 PM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:

 

I don't follow that bizarro-world logic.  How does running anti-Bailey ads translate into him winning the GOP nomination?   The most likely scenario is they are running anti-Bailey ads because he is the one candidate that they fear could beat Jabba in the general.   

The Democrat's Governors PAC doesn't spend money backwards.   
 

Picture this...  you have a chance to play a one on one game of basketball.  Full court.  First one to 10 points wins a billion dollars.  Your opponent will either be Michael Jordan in his prime or Rosie ODonnell.  Would you like to be able to pick which one you're competing against?  What would that option be worth to you?  Probably pretty darn close to a billion dollars...

 

Several years ago, Claire McCaskill ran in Missouri.  It was an uphill battle and there was only one guy on the Republican side whom she had a realistic chance to beat.  Her campaign (and the democratic party) reportedly spent over $1,000,000 helping the republican candidate they wanted for an opponent win the primary.  It worked.  Claire cruised to an easy win.

 

https://apnews.com/article/elections-campaigns-senate-elections-missouri-claire-mccaskill-094722b44bdb42bdb4f5387b2babc6be

 

If Pritzker and the democrats can spend $10 - $15 million in the primary helping ensure their opponent is the one most easily beaten and avoid having to spend even more in a general election against someone with even more money (Griffin), why wouldn't they?

 

The flyers they are sending out attacking Bailey as being too conservative are a twofer.  They increase the likelihood of Bailey winning the primary (if he's too conservative for democrats he's probably perfect for Republicans) and decrease the likelihood of Bailey winning the general (how well will advocating separation Chicago all those comments and others play with women moderates and most folks in the northeast region of our state).  Win.  Win.  For them.  Not us.

 

Edited by Ranger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/14/2022 at 7:26 PM, Wideglide11 said:

I keep hearing "I want to vote for X as he has more of what I believe in." Next I hear "I am voting for Y because he has a better chance in the elections." I understand everybody wants to be on the winning side, but sometimes you have to stand up for what you REALLY believe in. Rant Over!

I understand and it sucks; but sometimes we just have to be pragmatic.  I think Richard Nixon used to have a term called realpolitics or something like that.  Basically, it referred to not what you ideally wanted; but what was realistically possible as close to what you want.  I'd love to have a Governor who would do a, b, c; but I might be smarter to support the candidate who will do b, c, d if the abc candidate would never get elected and the bcd candidate might as opposed to just wasting a vote and conceding to x,y,z so I can feel good about supporting who I might really want.

https://millercenter.org/president/nixon/impact-and-legacy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/14/2022 at 8:23 PM, JDW said:

At this point, after getting no less than 50 pounds of junk mail from all these hacks, I'm 100% undecided. Unless I see someone I really align with on most issues, I might, dare i say, stay home. 

If nothing else they are keeping the postal service employed.    I got 5 ads this morning in the mail and 3 were from groups outside of IL.    One for Miller, one against Miller, one against Bailey, and two for Davis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/8/2022 at 8:29 AM, Windermere said:

Didn’t Bailey get endorsements from dems?  Didn’t he endorse Obama?  Please correct me if I’m wrong. 

 

irvin did not denounce rioting in his own town.  That’s an closeted Dem if I ever seen one. 
 

I’m leaning towards Rabine. 
 



No, he didn't he didn't endorse Obama.  He's been a life long conservative Republican.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I've ever seen such a dirty mud-fest as this on this level of elected office.  Let's just look at the truth of the matter:  Irvin would be a great Republican candidate, IF he were actually a Republican.  He is, sadly, just a Democrat who doesn't have to run as such in his "non-partisan" Aurora elections. so, he figures it's easier to go up against Pritzker in the General Election as a moderate "Republican," than to try and fail miserably running against him in the Dem primary.  He's just an opportunist and can't be trusted.  As others here have said, you can't make abortion an issue in Illinois running for Governor as a conservative Republican.  You will lose.  Every.  Single.  Time.  Drop it, or state that you don't personally believe in it, but will leave those matters to the legislature, where it belongs, and move on.  Bailey will be another Alan Keyes.  You have to be a fiscal conservative and social moderate to win statewide in Illinois.  

 

Good Lord, as if the Dems don't know the power of the pro-choice platform here.  You have a goofball (Valencia) running for Secretary of State on a pro-choice platform, claiming her main opponent (Giannoulias) is pro-life or whatever.  The Sec of State's office has NOTHING to do with abortion, but she will gain traction anyway, because of the vast number of low information/low brain cell count voters in Illinois.  And from her end, why not?  The emotional, non-substantive smokescreen platform is a time-proven Dem campaign tactic, never mind that it insults the intelligence of informed voters with IQ's in the triple digits.

Edited by 2A4Cook
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/19/2022 at 3:00 PM, mikew said:

This is a gun rights forum.
Vote for your gun rights.
Vote Bailey.

Exactly 

 

We also need to vote Tom Devore in as Illinois Attorney General.  I saw him on the news this morning and his stance is that the FOID ACT is unconstitutional.  He also said that as AG he would not oppose any lawsuit that challenges the constitutionality of the FOID.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/19/2022 at 3:00 PM, mikew said:

This is a gun rights forum.
Vote for your gun rights.
Vote Bailey.

Sometime's is not best person who supports your ideals but stopping the person who has and will continute to do most to destroy them. I haven't wavered, I'm supporting the person with the best chance to pull the most votes out of Chicago against JB.  Every goveror race in the history of Illinois has been won or lost in Chicago. Chicago (didn't break out the calculator) is roughly 9/10ths of the state.  Win Chicago win the state, unfortunately that's not voting for the best person for the job its voting for the one that can beat JB.   I don't look at the GOP poll winner when 3/4 of Chicago is democrat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No offense; but I wouldn't trust Tom Devore.  Do some searches and learn more about him before you vote.  Ultimately, it won't matter as he won't have a chance in the general if he wins the primary anyway.

 

I know several very strong conservatives and pro 2nd amendment folks who would either not vote or vote for the dem vs. voting for devore if it comes to that.

Edited by Ranger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/23/2022 at 10:27 AM, Ranger said:

I imagine this will happen in reverse in Illinois where democrats will vote for Bailey in the primary so Pritzker will win more easily in the general.  We'll see.

 

https://dnyuz.com/2022/06/22/in-boeberts-district-as-elsewhere-democrats-surge-into-g-o-p-primary/

 

I don't want to disagree with Molly but I think there's a cold day in heck that Bailey can pull 22% of Chicago.  Not south, as most people say north of route 80 :), are not going to vote for him.  We need the minorities out of the big cities and unfortunately I don't think that's Bailey.  A vast amount of, well I won't say that, vote on first impression (looks). 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/23/2022 at 10:48 AM, SiliconSorcerer said:

 

I don't want to disagree with Molly but I think there's a cold day in heck that Bailey can pull 22% of Chicago.  Not south, as most people say north of route 80 :), are not going to vote for him.  We need the minorities out of the big cities and unfortunately I don't think that's Bailey.  A vast amount of, well I won't say that, vote on first impression (looks). 

 

Every other Sunday Darren is praying in a different church in Chicago, playing to his strengths. 
He is not afraid to go where he must to make 22%+ a reality.

He makes friends (and dedicated supporters) everywhere he goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had an interesting conversation with a left leaning friend last week. His comment was he couldn’t vote for some farmer that  “talks like that.”   
 

I mentioned that that farmer is a millionaire if you count the value of his land.  A modern day farmer is also a businessman who has to buy combines and other equipment that cost 100s of thousands of dollars. I reminded him that his is also a state Senator.  
The kicker was when I reminded him that probably 1/3 of the country “talks like that” and that if I told him I could never vote for a Black because of how they talk he would brand me a bigot and a racist.  
 

I’m sure he will vote for Pritzker anyway but at least he shut up.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/20/2022 at 7:49 AM, Molly B. said:

 General info, it doesn't take winning Chicago to beat Pritzker, it only takes about 22% of Chicago . . .

 

Problem is, election after election IL's Repub party seems to think they can dredge up a Mr. No-Name-Recognition White guy, from someplace in Illinois that the northeast corner of the state considers "The Sticks," and then pray that photo-ops and flyers in our mailboxes will turn him into a candidate that's capable of winning a general election.  How's that been working?  Especially considering that there'll be little support from the media in the way of unbiased reporting, fair reporting, or even reporting at all.  Especially in the NE corner where it's especially needed. 

 

If a solid R candidate had a real chance, then clearly I'd vote for him/her.  But upsetting the established Dem machine in <this state>, turning it on it's ear by electing someone with solid conservative credentials (which would be ideal) has less than the proverbial snowball's chance.  It's wishful thinking.  It hurts, but it's the truth.  Trump's endorsement will turn away as many voters as it attracts.

 

We don't need perfection.  We need Pritzker gone.  Which at this time would be an amazing victory.  Or in other words, good enough.  I figure there's a reason a lot of the anti-Irvin flyers stuffing my mailbox are funded by the Democratic Governor's Association.  They see Irvin as a threat to Pritzker.  Which is good enough for me.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...