Posted on 03/28/2014 8:17:50 AM PDT by GIdget2004
Bruce Rauner, the billionaire Republican nominee for Illinois governor, is doing all he can to turn himself into a career politician named Mark Kirk.
Fresh off a closer-than-expected primary victory over three underfunded opponents, Rauner is avoiding social issues at all costs and hewing to a throw-the-bums-out message against the unpopular Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn.
Rauner has on his staff four Kirk alumni in his effort to replicate the moderate GOP senator’s path to blue-state victory. And like Kirk — and unlike Republicans in almost everywhere else in the country — Rauner avoids bashing President Barack Obama, who remains popular in his home state.
It is all part of a recipe for victory Rauner’s team is banking on working again four years later in what is shaping up to be one of the most expensive and nastiest governor’s races in the country.
“It’s a winning strategy to be a social moderate and a fiscal conservative, which is exactly what the state is,” Kirk said earlier this week during an interview at the Capitol.
Kirk defined the recipe for Republicans to win in Illinois: “Be pro-choice and be a social moderate and be right up front with that. Use the pro-choice words that come out of your mouth, which for a lot of Republicans is hard to do.”
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
I still haven’t figured out if Rauner is a Kirk Republican or a Lincoln Chaffee Republican or a Bloomberg Republican, but he’s sure as hell not a Peter Fitzgerald Republican.
One can make the argument that the best the Illinois GOP can do is run RINO’s, but it would be nice to know exactly how RINO this plutocrat is likely to be.
Someone remind me again why Mark Kirk is different from a Democrat.
What’s “moderate” about wanting to force the entire country to accept gay marriage and protecting abortion on demand? That sounds pretty much like anyone on the far left. You’d think a moderate would favor reasonable restrictions on abortion and support the right of states to choose whether or not they want gay marriage. That’s a moderate, i.e. middle of the road approach.
I think social “moderates” are little more than social liberals. They embrace immorality either because it’s politically expedient or they like it, and they therefore can’t be trusted to be very fiscally conservative either. Name even ONE social moderate/fiscal conservative who is successfully slashing government spending or even trying to do so. I bet you can’t.
Rauner spent most of his primary money blasting away at Quinn and the IEA who backed Dullard. But he did have a hand in some nasty stuff against Rutherford and Brady.It’s my feeling when all these court cases wind up SCOTUS is going to dump zerocare.
Once that happens the dependence on using that issue will throw the GOPES (gop elite snobs) into a tizzy. Because these so called “social issues” which they’re discarding is what makes the ideological discussion between the “republicans” vs the new radicalized “democrat” in name only party (they should be called “demo-coms) back to the forefront.
Kirk IS an economic consevative
Kirk voted to advance the clean debt ceiling bill. In fact, he was the first Republican senator who said he would back Harry Reid in bringing it to the floor.
He’s the same kind of ‘fiscal conservative’ as Mitch McConnell — vote aye on the only vote that can stop such a bill, the cloture vote, and then pretend to be a conservative by voting against it on the floor. After which, he said:
”I just want the orderly administration of the U.S. debt.” - Mark S. Kirk, February 28, 2014. http://www.ibtimes.com/senate-passes-debt-ceiling-hike-55-43-1555064
Instead of reducing it. If that’s fiscal conservatism, what’s fiscal liberalism?
Fag leaning Kirk is a rino - at best.
Isn’t Kirk backing some Illinois democrat cause he’s a friend and used the words partisan jihad to denounce openly supporting the Republican challenging his Democrat friend?
Being a social moderate means approving of using the foot of govt to stand on the neck of tje first, second amendments. Can’t vote for that kind of Republican.
Harry Reid!
I have no problem with this strategy in IL. The state is bankrupt and hemorrhaging jobs.
But Kirk is wrong that its a winning strategy overall.
So how does Kirk’s support for Harry Reid make him a fiscal conservative?
Graybeard also mentioned Kirk’s support for ‘cap and tax’. Also not exactly fiscally conservative.
He’s a Combiner. That’s all you need to know. He’s been given the “OK” to “defeat” Combiner Quinn (just as Kirk was given the “OK” in 2010 while Brady was given the “thumbs down” as an anti-Combiner).
Dig post #6, kids.
Uh-huh. And I'm Mary, Queen of goddamned Scots and also Luke ****ing Skywalker.
Marky-boy is fiscal moderate at best, and a social liberal.
Impy, I agree about Sen. Kirk’s fiscal views, since he was my congressman. He said that he opposed all earmarks, for other districts, but he supported a lot of unconstitutional pork barrel spending for his district, including spending for Metra, Headstart, and local police departments. That proves that he’s liberal and a hypocrite. In July 2009, he voted for the Cap & Trade bill, which included a few tax rate increases.
Heh. And Taco Bell IS authentic Mexican food.
Nancyboy Kirk is likely the single sorriest excuse for a "GOP" US Senator.
He CLAIMS to be a fiscal conservative on those rare occasions when he finds it expedient and then votes like Ted Kennedy used to. Any distinction between Nancyboy Kirk and, say, Susan Collins favors Collins.
Would you trust Nancyboy with your guns? To babysit your children? To decide on whether your daughter can sneak off to an abortion mill without your knowledge or consent? To decide whether Barry can marry Larry? Why not in each case?
Then there is the matter of "fiscal conservatism" whatever that may mean to him or to you. He sure won't get in the way of the endless GOP-Elite schemes to line Muffy's trust fund with generally special interest ill-gotten gains at the expense of ordinary taxpayers. Nor will he resist further bonded indebtedness of the federal government or of the state governments or of local governments, all of which indebtedness enriches his polo club, ummm, ummm, "buddies" and contributors. Nor will he lift a finger to actually REDUCE the size of Akinskyite programs of government nor eliminate useless regulations of our lives and of small business. Nor will he flip a privileged tiddleywink to slash the welfare state lest he harm the overall political alliance of zillionaires and gummint dependents.
Nancyboy will do NOTHING to reverse the devastation of the middle class carried out by Obozo nor, as he frankly admits, to disturb the re-election campaign of Nancyboy's pal, little Dick Durbin. Is Durbin a "fiscal conservative" like Kirk? Kirk claims that he and Dickie are in "partnership" on behalf of the people of Illinois. Or was that THE People of Illinois?
Having Kirk in the Senate continues to be worse than just another garden variety Demonrat since he gets to attend GOP caucus meetings so as to report back to Dickie Durbin, to Planned Barrenhood, to GLAAD, to various gun grabber groups and to his other natural allies on the Left.
McCain is a fraud. Romney is a fraud. Ryan is a fraud. Boehner is a fraud. McConnell is a fraud. BUT, most of all, Nancyboy Kirk is a fraud. The sooner he is erased from the Senate and from public life the better. He is nothing but UpChuck Percy in a new skin and with even less "fiscal conservatism."
Know of any "fiscally conservative" bills co-sponsored by Nancyboy with Ted Cruz? Neither do I.
Better to eliminate Nancyboy and a lot of allegedly "Republican" Illinois officeholders, take away the lobbyists' and zillionaires interest in controlling what passes for the Republican Party here and start over with a rampagingly populist, SOCIAL, military, pro-gun, low tax on ordinary folks, anti-public employee pension, smaller government and, only them, what the plutocrats please to call "fiscal conservatism."
Also, the only difference between Nancyboy Kirk and the unlamented Lowell P. Weicker, Jr., is about a foot in height and the fact that Weicker disgraces Yale as an alumnus while Nancyboy disgraces Cornell. They are equally treasonweasels to anything remotely conservative in any meaningful sense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.