Rutherford was done after the scandal, true or not (and I don’t know even if he was gay why he would try to rape some ugly dude and honestly I wouldn’t give a damn if he screwed circus animals as long as he could win, but he was done), primary votes for him were wasted, he came in a poor 4th.
Rauner’s main competition was Dillard, this was known. On paper at least pro-life and stuff but a combiner. I couldn’t bring myself to vote for him, and you could make the case Rauner was to be preferred to him.
So I voted for Brady, despite being displeased that he ran again after a poor performance (I believe he won and was robbed but it shouldn’t have been close enough to steal, he was a poor candidate).
A bushel of poor choices.
As for sodomy, Quinn is who hurt my butt. Rauner=Satan bores me, he is what he is, which is better than Quinn not to mention lard boy Prickzer.
I don’t think Rauner can win reelection with his horrible numbers. I don’t think Ives is likely win either but at worst it’s a push so she’s the clear choice to vote for.
We really needed Brady to win in 2010, winning 2014 and losing in 2018 does us no good for redistricting.
As to this article, conservative Republicans in Lipinski’s district should vote in the Republican primary to make sure Erica Harold is nominated for Attorney General, if nothing else, and look for a Republican to run for the district in 2020. For the point of view of having any chance of winning the seat in 2020 (it would be tough to win but isn’t safe), it’s better that the Progtard witch beats Lipinski and in a macro sense it’s good if moderates learn they have no place in the democrat party.
The chance for a conservative victory in this state was 2010 (NOT 2006, 2014, and 2018 -- which were all extreme long shots for anyone decent winning), and we blew it, thanks to voter fraud and numerous "conservatives" (who shall go unnamed but some of whom post on FR) who threw Brady to the wolves because he wasn't perfect enough for them. Good luck getting another conservative nominated for Governor after that. Talk about cutting off your nose to spit in your face.
Some IL GOP partisans want to continue to buy the "Kirk just worked harder in the suburbs" fantasy, which is about about true as the Hillary backers deluding themselves that "Russian hackers" are responsible for Trump winning instead of their candidate sucking.
The fact so many conservative sellouts who hopped on the Rauner train during the PRIMARY are now trying to spin their decision to back the MOST LIBERAL Republican is irritating though. Actions have consequences. The so-called "Tea Party" people who took the Rauner cash and turned a deaf ear to his PUBLIC support of liberal causes need to be held accountable.
I will not vote for Rauner if he wins the primary, but Pritzler is such a horrible dirtbag I'm not going to make up some "there's no difference between the two" hyperbole.
I also agree with you and Spintreebob that Lipinski is unlikely to lose the RAT primary (mainly because incumbents almost always win re-nomination and he has the party machinery on his side), as much as the Bernie Sanders types loathe him. If I lived in IL-3 I'd vote in the GOP primary
One point I'd disagree on though, I'm no longer supporting Harold for A.G. She was a favorite of mine until a few months ago, but Rauner hand-picked her for the A.G. race and she's sold her soul to him. She's "evolved" her positions and is now promoting Rauner's policies. She even attacked Ives and demanded Ives pull her anti-Rauner ads. Like when Bob Barr went nuts after losing his congressional seat, a former rock star conservative is now dead to me. (I even emailed Harold and told her I was withdrawing my endorsement for her, whatever its worth) Gary Grasso is both more conservative and more qualified for the job than Harold, he'll be getting my vote in the primary (though I will be shocked if Harold doesn't win the primary).
I'll hold my nose for Harold in November if she's the nominee.