Illinois Statewide Mega-Thread: State has first budget in over a year

[Green Line]

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Madigan is the closest a human being can come to garbage

He's not that bad, aside from bankrupting the state.  The Illinois Democrats are pretty moderate thanks to him.

Madigan is not a moderate; if he was the legislature wouldn't be a gridlocked hellhole. I mean seriously, they can't even pass education funding despite rauner bending over backward? Madigan is a fierce partisan who wants to punish the state for electing rauner.

One can be a partisan moderate.

LOLOLOLOL. A moderate is the antithesis of a partisan.

...

Don't be a moron.

[Maxwell]

Madigan is the closest a human being can come to garbage

He's not that bad, aside from bankrupting the state.  The Illinois Democrats are pretty moderate thanks to him.

Madigan is not a moderate; if he was the legislature wouldn't be a gridlocked hellhole. I mean seriously, they can't even pass education funding despite rauner bending over backward? Madigan is a fierce partisan who wants to punish the state for electing rauner.

One can be a partisan moderate.

LOLOLOLOL. A moderate is the antithesis of a partisan.

...

Don't be a moron.

You mean, Don't be a wulfric.

[Kingpoleon]

Yes, Illinois Republicans are much more attractive than Illinois Democrats.  Not even close!

Upon first thought of analyzing the attractiveness of top Republicans in the state vs. top Democrats, I may have to concede that you're right. My congressman, Bill Foster, cannot take a picture that won't scare children away.

Among the voters though, its a Democratic landslide

Literally the last statewide election I know of that the Democrat clearly looked better than the Republican was the 2010 Senate race. Even then there was a nearly twenty year age difference.

[136or142]

For a little throwback to 1988, to see how much things have and haven't changed: http://www.lib.niu.edu/1989/ii890217.html

Worth the read, has easy-to-read tables as well

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The George H W Bush campaign was initially planning to cede Illinois to Dukakis when they noticed how poor an organization the Dukakis campaign was in the state.

[Mr. Illini]

The state is actually being funded now

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-illinois-budget-impasse-madigan-rauner-met-0701-20160630-story.html

[Miles]

Teacher's union members crash Rauner's press conference after he insulted tem:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

FF's!

It was so nice when Illinois had a Governor who cared about public education. Sad!

[Bojack Horseman]

I'm counting the days until 2018. With a 33% approval rating, Rauner should get absolutely humiliated.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I'm counting the days until 2018. With a 33% approval rating, Rauner should get absolutely humiliated.

2018 will be a D disaster under a Clinton presidency. Key democratic groups just don't vote in midterms in large enough numbers. Everyone (including me at times) said 2014 wasn't going to be as bad as 2010 was for Democrats, but it was. Senate races were a massacre, with the democrats only winning NH among those races considered competitive before election day, and nearly lost supposedly safe D Virginia. Governor races were a massacre, with Democrats only winning RI among races considered competitive before election day, while losing normally strong D Maryland and nearly losing Vermont to a sacrificial lamb. The only reason Republicans didn't pick up 50 or 60 house seats was because they hit their ceiling or close to it. Yeah if you tried you could get them to near 260 with the 2014 battleground map, just as you could with the 2010 battleground map, but you're never going to win every competitive seat out there. A recruiting bungle, a really good recruit by the other side, incumbent too entrenched, turnout problems, plain old bad luck - this will always screw up a few races even in the biggest of waves. 247 seats is the biggest republican house majority since the 1920s, I doubt they will ever get much higher, if they beat it at all.

After that, I'm done subscribing to any sort of theory that 2010/2014 is an anomaly. 2018 will be a D massacre under Clinton, and even under Trump I have trouble seeing it being anything more than a neutral year, provided he is not at bush 2006 approvals. 

Yeah, Rauner could be a Corbett. But he could also end up like this guy:









 

[Miles]

Rauner vetoes automatic voter registration bill:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

HP!

[Xing]

I'm counting the days until 2018. With a 33% approval rating, Rauner should get absolutely humiliated.

2018 will be a D disaster under a Clinton presidency. Key democratic groups just don't vote in midterms in large enough numbers. Everyone (including me at times) said 2014 wasn't going to be as bad as 2010 was for Democrats, but it was. Senate races were a massacre, with the democrats only winning NH among those races considered competitive before election day, and nearly lost supposedly safe D Virginia. Governor races were a massacre, with Democrats only winning RI among races considered competitive before election day, while losing normally strong D Maryland and nearly losing Vermont to a sacrificial lamb. The only reason Republicans didn't pick up 50 or 60 house seats was because they hit their ceiling or close to it. Yeah if you tried you could get them to near 260 with the 2014 battleground map, just as you could with the 2010 battleground map, but you're never going to win every competitive seat out there. A recruiting bungle, a really good recruit by the other side, incumbent too entrenched, turnout problems, plain old bad luck - this will always screw up a few races even in the biggest of waves. 247 seats is the biggest republican house majority since the 1920s, I doubt they will ever get much higher, if they beat it at all.

After that, I'm done subscribing to any sort of theory that 2010/2014 is an anomaly. 2018 will be a D massacre under Clinton, and even under Trump I have trouble seeing it being anything more than a neutral year, provided he is not at bush 2006 approvals. 

Yeah, Rauner could be a Corbett. But he could also end up like this guy:

(P**l LeP***)

 

2018 certainly could be as bad as 2010/2014, but I think it's just as dangerous to assume that the pattern of horrible midterms for Democrats (based on two years in a row) will continue. Voters may very well forget about the GOP nominating Donald Trump by 2018, and the strategy of simply being the opposition party could work again for Republicans. If Democrats are smart, though, they'll work to get more voters out to the polls, and get strong candidates in as many races as possible.

It's possible Rauner could survive, but he could be facing a decent opponent, and almost certainly won't have a third-party spoiler like LePage did. The fact that Corbett lost in a state which isn't as Democratic as Illinois should be concerning to Rauner.

[muon2]

Rauner vetoes automatic voter registration bill:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

HP!

The bill was rammed through on the last the day of session and perhaps not surprisingly there was a serious technical flaw. As written and passed the bill was not automatic registration, but mandatory registration.

Though the sponsors claimed that there was an opt out provision, and the person at motor vehicles would note that an applicant asked for an opt out, the applicant's name would still be sent to the State Board of Election to be added. The applicant wouldn't know this and would have to have their names manually removed from the list when they did discover they were registered. In the meantime their name would be on the registered voter list at the state and with the local election authorities.

The registered voter list is a public document with name, address, age, phone number, etc. So under this bill a person who came to a window at a branch of the DMV (or other state agency) would not be able to keep that private, even if they wished to. This flaw was brought up in debate in the House, but the sponsor was not willing to fix the problem. The legislature should take up a corrected version of the bill IMO.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

I'm counting the days until 2018. With a 33% approval rating, Rauner should get absolutely humiliated.

2018 will be a D disaster under a Clinton presidency. Key democratic groups just don't vote in midterms in large enough numbers. Everyone (including me at times) said 2014 wasn't going to be as bad as 2010 was for Democrats, but it was. Senate races were a massacre, with the democrats only winning NH among those races considered competitive before election day, and nearly lost supposedly safe D Virginia. Governor races were a massacre, with Democrats only winning RI among races considered competitive before election day, while losing normally strong D Maryland and nearly losing Vermont to a sacrificial lamb. The only reason Republicans didn't pick up 50 or 60 house seats was because they hit their ceiling or close to it. Yeah if you tried you could get them to near 260 with the 2014 battleground map, just as you could with the 2010 battleground map, but you're never going to win every competitive seat out there. A recruiting bungle, a really good recruit by the other side, incumbent too entrenched, turnout problems, plain old bad luck - this will always screw up a few races even in the biggest of waves. 247 seats is the biggest republican house majority since the 1920s, I doubt they will ever get much higher, if they beat it at all.

After that, I'm done subscribing to any sort of theory that 2010/2014 is an anomaly. 2018 will be a D massacre under Clinton, and even under Trump I have trouble seeing it being anything more than a neutral year, provided he is not at bush 2006 approvals. 

Yeah, Rauner could be a Corbett. But he could also end up like this guy:









 

Illinois voters do not vote for governor based on national issues. The statewide partisan environment is very much different than the national one in the state.

[Green Line]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-joan-murphy-obituary-20160918-story.html

Cook County Commissioner Joan Murphy has died.  She was a trailblazer for women in Cook County government, and will be greatly missed!  Her kind of Democrat is rare in Cook these days, and she is a woman I admire.

[Heisenberg]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-joan-murphy-obituary-20160918-story.html

Cook County Commissioner Joan Murphy has died.  She was a trailblazer for women in Cook County government, and will be greatly missed!  Her kind of Democrat is rare in Cook these days, and she is a woman I admire.

RIP

[Kingpoleon]

If the primary's Lisa Madigan v. Andrea Zopp v. Daniel Hynes v. Kwame Raoul/Napoleon Harris, what do you guys think the results would be?

[Kingpoleon]

If the primary's Lisa Madigan v. Andrea Zopp v. Daniel Hynes v. Kwame Raoul/Napoleon Harris, what do you guys think the results would be?

I don't know what the margins would be for each candidate, but obviously Madigan would win in a landslide in this scenario, with almost certainly a majority.

So you don't think the black vote(Harris or Raoul), the progressives and women(Zopp), and reformists, moderates, and young voters(Hynes) would break significantly against her? To me, those are the strongest opponents she could face excluding heavyweights Durbin and Quinn and maybe Bustos.

[Torie]

Oh boy. Quinn will surely use that to it's fullest extent.

No doubt, but way down the Tribune article on the issue was this item.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's not clear if the story will have legs.

If in fact the money in the Cayman Islands is in Rauner's personal name, I agree that it offers up no tax advantages. So why is Rauner parking his money there?