So it's Pritzker and Rauner (lawyer, homes, to buy)

[civis]

Originally Posted by nealtaylor

It just blows my mind that with the mess this state is in that we will likely vote in a Dem, just insane...

When you say "we" , who do you have in mind? Democrats win solely because huge Latino community votes for them, many illegally. Same reasons dems push for protection of illegal immigrants and refuse immigration reform, they protect their electorate. Latinos population tripled in just last decade, so democrats have sure win situation .

[Maintainschaos]

Originally Posted by civis

When you say "we" , who do you have in mind? Democrats win solely because huge Latino community votes for them, many illegally. Same reasons dems push for protection of illegal immigrants and refuse immigration reform, they protect their electorate.

[fusillirob1983]

Originally Posted by civis

When you say "we" , who do you have in mind? Democrats win solely because huge Latino community votes for them, many illegally. Same reasons dems push for protection of illegal immigrants and refuse immigration reform, they protect their electorate. Latinos population tripled in just last decade, so democrats have sure win situation .

Right.
https://twitter.com/MiahSaint/status/930651277737861120

[BaptistFundie]

Originally Posted by My Kind Of Town

I don’t share your fears about legalizing marijuana and while there are some definite negative consequences for users to be aware of (like any other consumed substance used in excess), it also comes with proven medical benefits.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.bus...-health-2015-4

Guess we will agree to disagree but I would encourage you to do more research on the topic before deciding the idea of legalization is a terrible policy decision and a huge detriment to society.

Keep in mind, we really have no data on long-term usage of marijuana. It'll be interesting to see in a generation what the ramifications of it are.

[MongooseHugger]

Originally Posted by BaptistFundie

I suppose it's what he HASN'T done....imagine the damage JB will likely do.

Rauner's Good:

1.) Has stood, I believe as strong as he could, on fiscal issues. However, that budget fiasco was partially Republicans's fault. In 2016, the Democrats lost their supermajority in the House, meaning that they couldn't have overridden Rauner's veto without some Republican votes.

2.) Vetoed gun control bills.



Rauner's Bad:


1.) Signed bill making taxpayers fund abortion (technically, that was a bad move, even fiscally. We have better things to do than fund corrupt Planned Parenthood with our tax money!)

2.) Signed bill making us a sanctuary state.

3.) Signed bill allowing people to change gender on birth certificates.

4.) His wife is definitely strongly Leftist. Also, he's too chummy with Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel.




So he might be fairly good on economic issues but for those that are socially conservative and those who are anti-open borders, he's ticked them off.

[BaptistFundie]

Originally Posted by MongooseHugger

Rauner's Good:

1.) Has stood, I believe as strong as he could, on fiscal issues. However, that budget fiasco was partially Republicans's fault. In 2016, the Democrats lost their supermajority in the House, meaning that they couldn't have overridden Rauner's veto without some Republican votes.

2.) Vetoed gun control bills.



Rauner's Bad:


1.) Signed bill making taxpayers fund abortion (technically, that was a bad move, even fiscally. We have better things to do than fund corrupt Planned Parenthood with our tax money!)

2.) Signed bill making us a sanctuary state.

3.) Signed bill allowing people to change gender on birth certificates.

4.) His wife is definitely strongly Leftist. Also, he's too chummy with Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel.




So he might be fairly good on economic issues but for those that are socially conservative and those who are anti-open borders, he's ticked them off.

Nice summary. As someone new to Illinois, good to know.

[Liledgy]

Originally Posted by MongooseHugger

Rauner's Good:

1.) Has stood, I believe as strong as he could, on fiscal issues. However, that budget fiasco was partially Republicans's fault. In 2016, the Democrats lost their supermajority in the House, meaning that they couldn't have overridden Rauner's veto without some Republican votes.

2.) Vetoed gun control bills.



Rauner's Bad:


1.) Signed bill making taxpayers fund abortion (technically, that was a bad move, even fiscally. We have better things to do than fund corrupt Planned Parenthood with our tax money!)

2.) Signed bill making us a sanctuary state.

3.) Signed bill allowing people to change gender on birth certificates.

4.) His wife is definitely strongly Leftist. Also, he's too chummy with Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel.




So he might be fairly good on economic issues but for those that are socially conservative and those who are anti-open borders, he's ticked them off.

Pension debt went up 30 billion under his watch. Added 9 billion to unpaided bills. Failed on pretty much everything. If he could just start paying the bills, that would be great.

[BaptistFundie]

Originally Posted by Liledgy

Pension debt went up 30 billion under his watch. Added 9 billion to unpaided bills. Failed on pretty much everything. If he could just start paying the bills, that would be great.

Do you believe Pritzker has the answers? I've seen a lot of promises from him to start a lot of new government programs...that can't be cheap. If we can't pay for the things we already have, why promise more?

[Liledgy]

Originally Posted by BaptistFundie

Do you believe Pritzker has the answers? I've seen a lot of promises from him to start a lot of new government programs...that can't be cheap. If we can't pay for the things we already have, why promise more?

I believe that he will be better than Ruiner who didn’t pay down any debts, only added. He wants to starve the government like all the states in the news over the teacher strikes, West Virginia, Oklahoma, Kentucky. You can add Kansas to the list too. Wisconsin will be the next.

[chet everett]

Originally Posted by Liledgy

I believe that he will be better than Ruiner who didn’t pay down any debts, only added. He wants to starve the government like all the states in the news over the teacher strikes, West Virginia, Oklahoma, Kentucky. You can add Kansas to the list too. Wisconsin will be the next.

If you have any evidence that would back up your conjecture it would be wonderful to share.

I suspect you have ZERO clue as to how West Virginia's very unique funding model puts unusual control on state legislators -- https://www.ecs.org/what-does-wvs-sc...achers-strike/

The fact is Oklahoma has a MUCH DIFFERENT system of funding its public schools than Illinois, most analysis would find it to be MORE fair -- Understanding Oklahoma Public School Funding - Tulsa Kids - July 2017 - Tulsa, OK

For what its worth Kentucky actually has had somewhat successful reforms of its school funding, but there are still BIG differences in the areas with high value property and those that remain literally "dirt poor" -- https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016...is-on-the-line

BTW For all the chaos of DEMOCRATIC state legislators from Wisconsin literally hiding out in Illinois rather than do their job and other grandstanding the basic formula for Wisconsin school funding has not shifted in decades. https://www.badgerinstitute.org/Repo...-A-Primer-.htm Wisconsin has an extremely wide range of options among public schools and the vast majority are exceeding state standards, any honest example shows what should be no surprise to those who follow these things -- lack of success tracks with high percentage of disadvantaged students -- https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...tor/875658001/ I know many decent people in Wisconsin who very much want to help their fellow citizens overcome whatever challenges they face but simply changing school funding formula that works for the vast majority of the state is not likely to garner much support...