Describe a Romney 2012/Quinn 2014 voter

[Mr. Illini]

Imagining these would come downstate, but their reason for not voting Rauner should have applied to Romney in 2012. We'll see what y'all come up with.

[Free Bird]

Do they even exist considering the respective margins?

[IceSpear]

I'm not sure these people exist, but if they do, probably racist left-leaning downstaters.

[Mr. Illini]

They don't exist in large numbers, but those that do are likely largely concentrated in Little Egypt down near the Kentucky border. Racial issues no doubt.

[Rockefeller GOP]

I'll echo earlier guesses: racist Democrats in Southern Illinois, and not many of 'em.

[RINO Tom]

They don't exist in large numbers, but those that do are likely largely concentrated in Little Egypt down near the Kentucky border. Racial issues no doubt.

Probably this, though I'd EASILY answer "they don't exist" first.

[TJ in Oregon]

I probably would have been if I had lived in Illinois. Perhaps socially conservative union members?

[Miles]

I probably would have been if I had lived in Illinois. Perhaps socially conservative union members?

This. Republicans who voted against Rauner in the primary and held their nose for Quinn in the general.

[Rockefeller GOP]

I probably would have been if I had lived in Illinois. Perhaps socially conservative union members?

Exit polls show that those folks still vote Democrat, on average.  I really don't get why a social conservative would choose Quinn over Rauner, unless they literally just wanted a more folksy (read: less smart) candidate...

[Miles]

^ Rauner's answer to every debate question was to parrot the line "Pat Quinn had been a failure." He seemed very smart.

[TJ in Oregon]

I probably would have been if I had lived in Illinois. Perhaps socially conservative union members?

Exit polls show that those folks still vote Democrat, on average.  I really don't get why a social conservative would choose Quinn over Rauner, unless they literally just wanted a more folksy (read: less smart) candidate...

Let's say for a second you're a pro-life public employees union member in the state of Illinois and care equally about both (in reality some people will value either one of those two more that comes out to union households voting somewhere around 60-40 D, and clearly not all are socially conservative). In 2012 there would have probably been some effect of the presidential election on your union but it would be marginal at best since neither candidate made unions a centerpiece of their campaign the relevant laws and funding decisions are made mostly on the state level. Your union probably collectively bargained for health insurance so Obamacare also has little effect on you. In that scenario Romney looks more attractive than Obama who had just spent the last six months making the "War on Women" a centerpiece of his campaign. Now fast forward to 2014. You probably voted for Dillard if you decided to vote in the GOP primary, which you might have done since it was more interesting than the Democratic primary. But in the general election Rauner does nothing for you as a candidate. Whatever problems Quinn might have, he'll probably leave your benefits alone and you can continue about your life. Rauner comes with a pay cut and no upside.

[ElectionsGuy]

I can't find any counties where the Romney margin was higher than the Rauner margin, but there were some that were close, and they were all in the very southern part of Illinois. I suspect some of them would vote against Obama for the same reasons western Kentucky did.