I like Bruce Rauner. He's willing to offer himself to the voters, and invest a lot of his own money. And I sincerely hope he loses his quest to be Illinois' next governor.
But not for the reasons that most Red Staters might think. Rauner is a fiscally conservative, socially liberal Republican. He supports same-sex marriage, and a "woman's right to choose." ( Which means he's pro-abortion.)
While these views alone mean that he's anathema to the majority of the GOP base, there's still a good chance that he might win, because Illinois voters are finally starting to realize that the state is tottering on the edge of insolvency, and a change is needed. There's no more road left down which to kick the can.
Illinois is the example of what happens when you have decades of unchecked Democrat/liberal machine governance run amok. I'm not going to elaborate at length on the problems; everyone knows them. The massive debt, the unfunded pension system, the ruinous governmental union contracts, the corruption, the onerous taxes, the increasing exodus of people and businesses to other states...it's a long list.
And Quinn and the Democrats have absolutely nothing to offer in the way of solutions. It took them less than one day for their campaign strategy to be revealed...a cheap, faux-populist appeal. Rauner's rich, therefore he's no good for Illinois. He'll just look out for other rich guys ( but not for rich gals, one assumes..after all, the GOP is waging that war on women.)
OK..let's assume that enough Illinois voters have an AHA!! moment, and Rauner wins. Then what? Basically, nothing. You'll have four years of squabbling between Rauner and the Democrat dominated legislature. Nothing will get done, and each side will blame the other for the state's increasing woes.
Illinois today is the manifestation of decades of liberal, Democrat governance. The made it, they own it. Let them reap the "rewards."
When a landslide occurs, and a house totters precariously on the rim, you let it go over the edge into the abyss below. It can't be saved.
Illinois today is that house. The state is broke. It can't even pay its bill. Only a bankruptcy filing will stop the bleeding, and let the state begin the long, painful process of righting the ship.
Some here may thank my analysis is faulty; that it's not that bad, that the state can turn itself around. To those I offer two words:
The Daley name is magic in Illinois, for generations. When Daley left the White House in 2012 ( where he was Obama's Chief of Staff) everyone assumed it was to run for governor this year. Pat Quinn, the current governor, is an incompetent, corrupt, party hack, and widely unpopular in the state. He would not have even bothered to run, had Daley announced.
It was Daley's for the asking. He'd have won easily. The fulfillment of a lifelong dream, a family's legacy.
Yet he declined to run. Which, of course, begs the question: WHY?
The answer, is, of course, quite easy. Daley is smart. He knows what's going on, what the real numbers are, and what's about to happen in the next few years. And he wanted no part of it. Any attempt at reform would result in an epic battle with the unions. ( Think Wisconsin, then multiply it by 100x. And these are his supporters)
Nope, Daley channeled his inner Napoleon: "Apres Quinn, le deluge!"
Smart guy. A very, very smart guy.
So when Illinois implodes, and the money runs out, there will be the inevitable call for a federal bailout. It will never happen, for a whole host of reasons, but the incessant bleats and pleas for one will be loud and numerous. Do we really want them to come from a Republican governor, and have them rejected by a Republican Congress? In a word, no!
Some also would maintain that it 's necessary for the GOP to have a viable ticket to help with the congressional elections. That's completely bogus. Here's why:
The Illinois congressional delegation is 12-6 Democrat. Indeed, the few gains the Dems managed in 2012 came in Illinois, as a result of gerrymandering by the Democrat controlled legislature. The GOP will easily maintain control of the House, likely through 2022, ( and probably gain seats this November), so even if the Democrats somehow manage to pick off one or two GOP representatives this year, it's no big deal.
The talking heads are already listing Mark Kirk as endangered. His win in 2010 is attributed to the GOP wave that year, and being blessed with a very flawed Democrat opponent. He's said to be, well, "doomed," given the state's huge Democrat advantage.
So, what scenario would give Kirk a better chance in 2016? Being smeared as a Republican, just like the evil, rich Republican governor who's doing all these terrible things to us, or...
Running as Republican who's espoused values and principals that are the exact opposite of what the Democrats are doing in Illinois, and which have brought the state to its knees.
Sorry Bruce, but I hope you lose. Have fun in the campaign. Enjoy the experience. Speak fearlessly, hold nothing back. Take on the unions, raise the issues that need to be addressed. You'll lose, but you'll gain a lot.
Think Romney..getting to point out the idiocy of Obama's comments about Russia. You'll be the prophet who will have been proven correct. Stay in the public eye; comment as it all falls apart.
And you'll be perfectly positioned to run, and win in 2018.