Again, that is pivoting from my point. We already know Rauner is a liberal on social issues.
The pertinent question should be how would have the democrat Quinn would have been better than Rauner on the immigrant issue. That is a question for which we will never know the answer, but I am willing to stick my neck out and pontificate that Quinn would be no better.
On the other issue facing hard working Illinois citizens which is it’s headlong trajectory towards bankruptcy, loss of businesses, loss of jobs etc, while Rauner has actually ran a financial corporation for 30 years with great success. Democrat Quinn has no such experience. Advantage? Rauner! Having spent all my working career in Illinois, I feel for my friends still in Illinois.
Willard had business “experience”, how’d that work out for Massachusetts ? If you have two execrable leftist candidates, one an R and one an D, it’s better to let the D own it, lest that failed Socialism be hung around the neck of the GOP and its candidates. Quinn was at least not pretending to be a Republican. So, hence, “advantage Quinn.”
Rauner isn’t only liberal on social issues. He’s also liberal on fiscal issues. He wants to increase the sales tax rate, on services, and he wants to increase the minimum wage.
Rauner & Quinn agree about immigration.