Bruce Ranuer 2020?

[Thunderbird is the word]

Could Illinois governor Bruce Ranaur mount a credible bid for the GOP nomination in 2020? In some areas he seems like he could appeal to Trump voters in terms of being somewhat heterodox on economic issues while at the same time being more of a compromise candidate for establishment Republicans.

[RINO Tom]

Only in the delusional dreams of RINO Tom.

[Sir Mohamed]

Nope, he’ll likely be dumped in 2018 by IL voters.

[Mike Thick]

It's a possibility, if he wins reelection and the situation in Illinois improves. This is a very big "if," though.

[ElectionsGuy]

He's not high profile at all right now. He needs to be a conservative hero somehow (like Walker with Act 10) in the next few years and then win re-election if he wants to run for president. Unlikely with the Democratic legislature.

[Shameless Lefty Hack]

No IL politician other than Durbin and MAYBE Kirk should be given anything but a sound razzing on the national stage.

[Higgs]

He's not high profile at all right now. He needs to be a conservative hero somehow (like Walker with Act 10) in the next few years and then win re-election if he wants to run for president. Unlikely with the Democratic legislature.

Exactly this, but he could be a formidable candidate if this did happen.

[Illiniwek]

Nyyyyooooooooooooope. 2018.

Btw, if he were the nominee, Dems would still win Illinois.

[Senator-elect Spark]

Ranuer Rauner and no he'll probably bow out before the primaries.

[Kingpoleon]

No IL politician other than Durbin and MAYBE Kirk should be given anything but a sound razzing on the national stage.

What did Obama do?

[Mister Mets]

He's got a shot. He's a big state Governor, with a geographic advantage in an early primary state, and a background as a businessman that has helped recent Republican nominees.

[Ljube]

That's a good candidate. Not sure if he'll win though, but he would have a far better chance than any of Ryan, Pence, Cruz, Sasse crowd.

[Kingpoleon]

He's got a shot. He's a big state Governor, with a geographic advantage in an early primary state, and a background as a businessman that has helped recent Republican nominees.

I agree with this assessment. If Rauner holds his positions on social issues and keeps a low key ground game in Iowa until, say, mid January or about two to four weeks before the caucus, he should get an impressive showing there.

From there, I'm not sure if he should focus on his moderate positions and fiscal conservatives to win New Hampshire for a two-for-one or immediately focus on Michigan/Florida/Nevada(one of the first two if they are early states in 2020, otherwise Nevada).

His path would largely be the Midwest and big cities like Miami, Oklahoma City, Tampa, and Manchester where they often vote Republican, alongside the Rubio "establishment" voters.

[Derpist]

Hell no. He's a former I-Banker. The Republicans have gone down this road once and it ended just as badly then.

[RINO Tom]

Hell no. He's a former I-Banker. The Republicans have gone down this road once and it ended just as badly then.

LOL.  Can't be nominating professionals!

[Californiadreaming]

Nope, he’ll likely be dumped in 2018 by IL voters.

Out of curiosity--why did he win in Illinois in 2014?

[anthonyjg]

Nope, he’ll likely be dumped in 2018 by IL voters.

Out of curiosity--why did he win in Illinois in 2014?

I think the biggest reasons were that it was a midterm, he had a lot more money than Quinn, and people wanted change and they got it with Rauner

[Green Line]

I would love it if he did, but he isn't running. 

1. He doesn't want it.
2. (More Importantly) His wife Diana will NEVER allow it, and I have that on good word from people in the know.

[Californiadreaming]

I would love it if he did, but he isn't running. 

1. He doesn't want it.
2. (More Importantly) His wife Diana will NEVER allow it, and I have that on good word from people in the know.

What exactly is Diana's issue with this, though?

[anthonyjg]

I would love it if he did, but he isn't running.  

1. He doesn't want it.
2. (More Importantly) His wife Diana will NEVER allow it, and I have that on good word from people in the know.

What exactly is Diana's issue with this, though?

I know she's a democrat, I'm not sure if that's the main reason though.

[Californiadreaming]

I would love it if he did, but he isn't running.  

1. He doesn't want it.
2. (More Importantly) His wife Diana will NEVER allow it, and I have that on good word from people in the know.

What exactly is Diana's issue with this, though?

I know she's a democrat, I'm not sure if that's the main reason though.

Did any U.S. President's spouse have different political views from his or her husband in the past, though?

[Illiniwek]

Well, even if 2018 will be a tough year for Democrats to gain back ground in Congress, you just know statewide the Democrats are going to be foaming at the mouth to start taking back control. A qualified D nominee is going to win bigly.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

It's spelled "Rauner"

No, because I think he'd have had a tough time getting through a Republican primary even with a Democrat in the White House. If people didn't vote for Scott Walker or John Kasich, why would Bruce Rauner be any different?

[anvi]

Please don't say it. While there's plenty of blame to be cast on the Dems in the state legislature for it too, Rauner, by doing nothing but sitting on his hands, will probably lead to the shutdown of the university I work at in downstate before he is done. We're firing non-tenure track profs and staff left and right, having ten percent blown out of our college budgets every term and are spiraling fast toward financial exigency, And without this university here,  even with fewer students and teachers, this region will take yet another huge economic loss. It ain't funny. Rauner shouldn't be anywhere near an office of public responsibility.

[Phony Moderate]

From what I hear he's turning out to be a, eh, typical governor of that state.