Even more: the GOP held the Illinois governorship from 1977 through 2003, through three different governors: Jim Thompson, Jim Edgar, and George Ryan. Though, that was a different time, and a different GOP.
Yeah, my typo. Damn fat fingers.
And yet Rauner still managed to win in 2015 even though Chicago/Cook went to Quinn. It was a weird election but still shows while carrying Chicago and Cook County will normally guarantee the state it isn’t a sure thing.
An article today from the AP, on Pritzker, and the leadership role he seems to be taking for the Democrats on fighting against Trump – both in Illinois, and nationwide.
I find myself fantasizing about a Pritzker-Ocasio-Cortez ticket a lot these days.
Now a lot can change in four years, but this seems like a ticket that has some fucking fight and fury in it.
A billionaire though? The momentum and energy on the left all seems to be flowing in the exact opposite direction. It’s really hard to imagine the same people who are energized by Sanders and AOC getting on board with a literal fat cat capitalist and political machine insider.
A billionaire whose priorities aren’t “I should have more money and less taxes and laws”.
Directly from Wikipedia:
During the 2018 campaign, the Chicago Sun-Times reported that Pritzker had intentionally caused a mansion he had purchased next door to his home to become uninhabitable by removing its toilets. He then appealed his original property tax assessment[222] because the newly built property was uninhabitable; the Cook County assessor reduced the home’s value from $6.25 million to about $1.1 million, which granted Pritzker an 83% property tax reduction, equal to about $230,000 per annum.[223] The Cook County inspector general accused Pritzker of a scheme to defraud the county.[224
Now keep in mind, if the spotlight is directed at this guy in earnest, who knows what else is going to come up. I’m skeptical.
If the past few years have taught us anything, it’s that most voters care more about emotional connection to a message than facts or a candidate’s past. If JBP can capture the fury of the left and disillusioned Trump voters in the middle, that’s what’s gonna matter.
I mean, he is a Chicago Democrat - the party that gave us the Dalys and John Wayne Gacy. Dig deep enough and you’ll find some skeletons in the closet (or crawl space).
Still, he’s a saint compared to Trump.
Gacy was a very small-time/local operative for the Democratic Party. He became a local precinct captain, and was the organizer for the Polish parade in Chicago for several years. The news that he was a mass murderer was certainly shocking to anyone who associated with him in party work, but his heinous crimes had nothing to do with his work for the party, compared to so many actual corrupt Democratic politicians or higher-level officials that one could name.
(Also, it’s “Daley.”)
Years ago, I watched a documentary on the local PBS station, about the Chicago Democratic Party. One of the people they interviewed was an older woman, who had been a party official for decades. She joked, “In my will, it is specified that I am to be buried in Cook County, so that I can stay active in party politics.” 
Looking at the NPR story, I would never vote for him in a primary. GOP corruption is going to be a good issue for Democrats going forward as the current administration is unprecedentedly corrupt. Throwing away the corruption issue, by giving the Democratic nomination to a crook, would be complete political malpractice.
I’m no expert, or even a resident of IL, but my impression after visiting and seeing the Pritzker name everywhere on plaques denoting their contribution to this museum or that building, is of a family of philanthropists. I wish it was different, but we need a fat cat political machine insider (provided he actually does have good intentions).
Crook? He paid back the taxes. The Republicans have literally elected a rapist con-artist traitorous thief twice. Sorry if I don’t clutch my pearls over a stupid stunt that was ultimately made right by a billionaire who has given hundreds of millions of dollars over the years to issues like early childhood development, and genocide and Holocaust education, as well as to institutions of higher learning.
I’m not saying the guy’s a saint, but geez Louise, to call him a crook? These insane purity tests for Democrats are why we can’t have nice things any more.
I’m usually the one against purity tests. And every candidate has weaknesses. But toilet removal seems to me such an unusually easy to understand example of corruption as to make Pritzker being on a presidential ticket a mistake.
Uhboy. Yeah, that’s not a great look. I didn’t know about that when I posted but I still think he has more in the plus column than the minus.
I’m having a lot of trouble getting worked up over toilet-related creative accounting. Let me know when he sexually assaults a woman in a department store changing room and then defames her multiple times on live TV.
I still say the smart move for Pritzker would be to primary Durbin.
The fact he is a billionaire and Jewish would be less of an issue in a statewide election in Illinois than in a national election.
I feel like a billionaire businessman who’s already been a governor would see a gig as a junior Senator as a step down. He’s an executive by trade, not someone who sits as 1-of-100 and tries to make sausage as a member of the minority.
ETA: He’s the kind of guy who likes to be in charge. I don’t think he’d run for a political position that doesn’t run the show. I think he’d be more likely to run for mayor of Chicago than Senator.
Well I brought this incident up in response to Smapti’s reply:
I can’t really square that assessment of Pritzker’s priorities with the kind of behavior displayed with the toilet situation. Of course it’s nothing compared to Trump, but it’s still dickhead behavior and as I said, it could be the tip of the iceberg if Pritzker underwent more public scrutiny as a presidential candidate.
I think you’re right when you said that:
If the past few years have taught us anything, it’s that most voters care more about emotional connection to a message than facts or a candidate’s past. If JBP can capture the fury of the left and disillusioned Trump voters in the middle, that’s what’s gonna matter.
But I can’t see a billionaire political insider being the one to capture “the fury of the left.”
Twenty years ago, I couldn’t have seen an anti-labor billionaire capturing so much of the union vote, a very public racist capturing the a sizeable chunk of the black and Latino vote, a seditionist who has repeatedly fucked over the military and vets capturing the veteran/military vote, and a convicted felon and adjudicated rapist capturing the “law & order” vote, but here we are. The old ways of attracting votes aren’t the current ways.
It’s not about what you’ve done as much as what you say and how you say it these days, and ultimately, how you make people feel. I don’t hold his being a billionaire against him, especially if he’s among the few Dems attacking Trumpism full-throatedly. There aren’t many Dems out there these days with the balls to do that.