Wednesday, Jun 19, 2019
* Politico…
Just five months into his term — and numerous pieces of progressive legislation under his belt — Illinois Gov. J.B. PRITZKER has proven he's a loyal foot soldier for the Democratic Party. […]
Still, there are some places where his personal philosophy runs headlong into party practicality. Exhibit A: Rep. DAN LIPINSKI
The Illinois congressman's firm position against abortion rights has already made him something of a pariah within the Democratic party, and turned its liberal wing against Lipinski so hard that Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair Cheri Bustos backed out of a fundraiser for him this month. While Lipinski regularly finds critics and primary challengers to his left, his abortion stance hasn't necessarily hurt him in a seat he's held onto since 2005.
And that's where Pritzker believes in the big-tent ethos of the Democratic Party.
"We have to look at the totality of the issues that candidates are running on," he says. Just consider the Illinois Legislature. "There are a few Democrats who have a different position than I do, for example, on gun safety. But when you look at the totality on all the issues, where they stand on them, they're Democrats and this is what people in their district believe that's how they represent them."
Pritzker says he's not going to weigh in on Lipinski's 3rd Congressional District race. "It's a federal office, and I'm focused on having a state government that's working."
* The Question: Do you agree or disagree with Gov. Pritzker's decision to stay out of that Democratic primary? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
- Romeo - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 1:47 pm:
I live in Lipinski's district, and appreciate his moderation. Yes, he's a Democrat but he's stuck to his pro-life values. Glad that JB (didn't vote for him) is not actively opposing Lipinski. The Democratic Party nowadays victimizes you if you don't go along with their groupthink. Glad that JB is showing that he has a brain, even if he disagrees with Lipinski's stances.
- MakePoliticsCoolAgain - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 1:48 pm:
Democrats (hopefully) learned in 2016 that muddying the waters within the party only leads to the other side slithering in for the win.
- Amalia - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 1:51 pm:
Seniority. too important on transportation issues to lose. JB knows that.
- Bavette - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 1:51 pm:
I doubt many people care which candidate JB supports, so good move.
- Anon312 - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 1:51 pm:
Coward's way out. Given the choice to lead, follow, or get out of the way, it's disappointing he chose the latter.
- anon2 - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 1:51 pm:
== The Democratic Party victimizes you if you don't go along with their groupthink. ==
Wouldn't that apply to the GOP as well when it comes to groupthink about supporting Trump?
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 1:52 pm:
===learned in 2016 that muddying the waters within the party only leads to the other side slithering in===
Where did that happen here? Two hotly contested Democratic congressional primaries resulted in two Republican incumbents losing seats.
Statewide, there were fiercely contested Dem primary battles for governor and attorney general and both of those victors won.
- SWIL Voter - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 1:55 pm:
—The Democratic Party nowadays victimizes you if you don't go along with their groupthink. —
Regardless of what one thinks about the goodness of either party, it's pretty difficult to deny there's vastly more ideological diversity in the Democratic Party at virtually every level than on the Republican side.
- brugroffil - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 1:58 pm:
I live in Lipinski's district, and I can't stand his conservatism. He's stuck to his anti-choice, anti-LGBT, anti-healthcare values. IL-3 can do much better.
- Perrid - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 1:59 pm:
I agree. It's a bit of a duck, but it is (very conveniently) the most responsible thing for him to do. It is a federal office so he doesn't need to work a lot with the Rep, and you shouldn't air your party's differences out in public.
I also very much agree with him about the "totality of the issues". No one is always going to agree with you on everything. You just have to decide what you can accept and what are deal breakers, and hopefully there's a lot more differences you can accept than deal breakers.
- TheInvisibleMan - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 2:01 pm:
While I would never vote for a Lipinski-like candidate in my district, or for Lipinski himself - he's not in my district and it is up to the people of his district to decide if he best represents them or not.
- Fax Machine - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 2:03 pm:
Not worth the headache. No one can question that JB is 100% pro choice so what would he gain by endorsing Newman?
- OutOfState - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 2:05 pm:
Agree. He doesn't need to stir up Democrat on Democrat drama when he can wait to see how the primary shakes out based on the Democratic constituents in the district. Then he can decide whether he supports Lipinski enough to campaign for him (if Lipinski wins the primary).
- Fav human - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 2:06 pm:
Fax machine said it perfectly. Nothing for JB to gain and lots for him to lose in capital Hill clout.
Or do we suddenly love governors who pick fights that he need not?🤣🤣🤣
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 2:08 pm:
I voted disagree kind of out of ambivalence. Gov. Pritzker is obviously very pro-choice, and this decision is about not sticking his beak in on southwest side politics than anything else.
- ArchPundit - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 2:18 pm:
===—The Democratic Party nowadays victimizes you if you don't go along with their groupthink. —
Yes, the beliefs of constituents are groupthink. It's a 60-40 Democratic district in the general election.
Governor of the same party not endorsing a sitting MOC is actually somewhat telling in itself. I wouldn't expect the Governor to pick a fight so I'm fine with it, but let's be real he's taking a position here.
- 47th Ward - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 2:22 pm:
==="But when you look at the totality on all the issues, where they stand on them, they're Democrats and this is what people in their district believe that's how they represent them.'===
That's a perfect answer. It's unsatisfying only to those, like Politico, who sit and wait for others to do something. This entire item is the journalistic equivalent of saying: Let's you and him fight.
Nonstory. Despite the efforts of many in my party, I don't support a litmus test. I agree 100% with Governor Pritzker on this.
(Also, I thought calling him a "loyal foot soldier" was a ridiculous way to describe him, negating everything he is and he stands for to put him in some stupid box. Aim higher Shia.)
- Cheryl44 - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 2:27 pm:
I dont see how not sticking his beak in on southwest side politics is a problem. Not his circus.
- lincoln's beard - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 2:31 pm:
I'm a little baffled as to how the billionaire governor of the fifth-most populous state can be considered a "foot soldier" of anything. Who edits this stuff?
- RWP - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 2:31 pm:
I don't like Lipinski or his type of Democrat. However, why would the Governor get into this hornet's nest when he does not have to? He is also correct that there will be members of the state house who he does not agreee with that he will have to leave alone. The Lipinski s and Madigans have know each other for years. As the Chairman said, under oath, sometimes we are on the same side and sometimes we are not, but who wants to poke the nest and see what the temperature is today?
- Monday Morning Quarterback - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 2:33 pm:
Smart move. This isn't his battle. He's proven his credentials on the choice issue as governor. He's respecting the big tent philosophy which is better than the issue-purity philosophy. As a progressive, I support his staying out.
- Dude - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 2:35 pm:
Rule #1 - stay out of fights that are not yours. He will be drawn into more scuffles than he ever dreamed possible relating to issues that ARE State matters.
Signing up for inter-party squabbles that you have absolutely no control over or say in would be foolish. Politics 101.
- Roman - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 2:42 pm:
Agree. @Fax Machine put it best.
The activists core of both parties isn't tolerant of much dissent on abortion, which we can see in some of the negative comments being directed at JB here. But the majority of Americans are somewhere in the middle on abortion. If Lipinski goes down, it not going to be just because of this single issue, it's gonna be because he's out of the party's mainstream on a handful of other things.
- Quibbler - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 2:47 pm:
Disagree. Failing to endorse Newman against the anti-LGBT, forced-birth supporter Lipinski is both morally wrong and politically foolish.
- City Guy - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 2:50 pm:
I agree with ArchPundit, not making an endorsement is taking a position. I would also look at what occurs behind the scenes. Who ends up helping Lipinski and who ends up helping his opponents.
As a side comment, I have always been opposed to Lipinski because he was basically given the seat by his father. In a state where political nepotism is common, his case was particularly egregious.
- Powdered Whig - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 2:51 pm:
=== Failing to endorse Newman against the anti-LGBT, forced-birth supporter Lipinski is both morally wrong and politically foolish. ===
Get off your high-horse. There are moral arguments that can be made by both sides of the issue.
== There are moral arguments that can be made by both sides of the issue. ==
Maybe you can "both sides" bodily autonomy in Missouri. Not in the Illinois Democratic party of 2019.
Maybe it is the right move politically. It just seems like one day the Governor is saying abortion is a zero sum game with no room for compromise, the next day it is just like transportation funding or any other issue to be horse traded.
=== Maybe you can "both sides" bodily autonomy in Missouri. Not in the Illinois Democratic party of 2019. ===
Morality is not defined by politics. What you are saying is that there is no room for pro-life candidates in the Democratic party - an opinion to which you are entitled - but please don't make this about "morals". Doing so is just as inappropriate as certain individuals calling pro-choice candidates "baby-killers" in the name of morality.
No. He is saying that when we agree 80% of the time, we are all on the same team. An old time notion that still stands for the non-knuckleheads, of which there are increasingly fewer on both sides of the isle.
== Morality is not defined by politics. ==
I have a secret for you: politics is the means by which we determine whose version of morality will prevail in our society. There is one moral vision in which it is acceptable to use the law to force pregnant people to give birth against their will, and one in which it is not. Pritzker had the chance to weigh in against a candidate who takes the former view, and he didn't. That's morally wrong.
== Doing so is just as inappropriate as certain individuals calling pro-choice candidates "baby-killers" in the name of morality. ==
Okay, buddy.
=== I have a secret for you: politics is the means by which we determine whose version of morality will prevail in our society. There is one moral vision in which it is acceptable to use the law to force pregnant people to give birth against their will, and one in which it is not. Pritzker had the chance to weigh in against a candidate who takes the former view, and he didn't. That's morally wrong.===
Your self-righteousness and arrogance is unbecoming.
- JS Mill - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 3:19 pm:
I like JB's big tent approach. I don't think we have to agree on everything and it rally is a smart approach to look at the totality of a candidate. I am neither a republican or democrat.
Definitely an independent as much as anything because of zealots who believe you have to toe the line or else.
- Earnest - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 3:19 pm:
Agree with Pritzker's rationale as stated. With a few exceptions, I'm good with national and statewide politicians and parties staying neutral in primaries.
Powdered Whig's measured, thoughtful statement eloquently acknowledges the heartfelt differences on this issue.
A bygone skill for which there is always room.
- Ron Burgundy - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 3:22 pm:
Let the voters decide who best represents them on balance across all the issues. I am against one issue purity tests in general. Unless the candidate is an actual Nazi of course.
- Blue Dogs are Blind, Deaf, and Dumb - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 3:33 pm:
Lipinski is going down this time as Marie Newman will have had even more time to reach her voters and defeat the incumbent. Cheri Bustos deserves to be challenged as well for her refusal to stay neutral in primary battles. Bustos is also wrong on the issues as she opposes Medicare for All and making college truly affordable. I sincerely hope Bustos gets a challenger and I will donate time and money to such challengers.
- SpfdNewb - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 3:43 pm:
I agree with the Governor's logic. Why get into a potential headache when he has a lot on his plate with state issues?
- {Sigh} - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 3:44 pm:
=It's a federal office, and I'm focused on having a state government that's working=
{Sigh} Does this mean the Governor will not be weighing in on the Presidential primary either? And what % of the state budget qualifies for federal match or comes from a federal pass through funding source?
- Southern Illinois Mayor - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 3:44 pm:
Better than ending up the pup tent sized party of the IL GOP
- MG85 - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 3:53 pm:
I try, where I can, to not be hypocritical despite my political leanings.
I was very hard on Rauner for not taking a position on what Trump said that week or a position Trump expressed.
In turn, I should hold JB to the same standard on federally elected politicians as well. If he wants to justify supporting Lipinski because of all the things he agrees on with Lipinski, then so be it.
If he wants to justify supporting a primary opponent because of the few issues he doesn't agree, then so be it also.
To be silent, however, is a sign of political cowardice. JB needs to take a position. That's what leaders do.
- regular democrat - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 4:10 pm:
I voted agree. He wise to stay out of it. The fact that the 13th ward organization will be heavily involved in the outcome may have played in to his decision. Its gonna be a war out there
- PJ - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 4:10 pm:
==Does this mean the Governor will not be weighing in on the Presidential primary either?==
I highly doubt he will. Why would he?
- Bigtwich - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 4:33 pm:
"So welcome to Massachusetts, Mr. Ribicoff - a Democratic state with a Democratic heart - a state that in the past year or so has offered the party more state chairmen and more John F. Kennedys than anyone else in the nation. I trust you won't be alarmed by these apparent divisions - for you know they are a traditional sigh of Democratic strength. Here's how Will Rogers described the Democratic Convention before the sweep in 1932:
"They fought, the fit, the split, and adjourned in a dandy wave of dissension. That's the old Democratic spirit. A whole day wasted and nothing done. I tell you they're getting back to normal."
And here's what Finley Peter Dunne's Mr. Dooley said about the party fifty years ago:
"The Democratic Party ain't on speaking terms with itself. When you see two men with white neckties set in opposite corners while one mutters 'traitor' and the other hisses 'miscreant', ye can bet they're two Democratic leaders trying to reunite the party. There's as many Democrats out of the party as there are in, settin' on the doorstep to read themselves back and the other readers out. The loudest readers wins."
So don't worry about Massachusetts, Governor Ribicoff. For in the words of Adlai Stevenson:
"We are Americans first, last and always. May the day never come when the things that divide us seem more important than the things that unite us."
John F. Kennedy, June 8, 1956
- Illinfan - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 4:53 pm:
As a democrat I don't want group think. As long as Lipinski agrees with the party on 90% of the issues I can accept a differing view on abortion.
- Liandro - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 4:58 pm:
"Maybe you can "both sides" bodily autonomy in Missouri."
Are you talking about the bodily autonomy of both human lives involved? Or do only some humans get the right to bodily autonomy?
- Pundent - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 5:01 pm:
=Despite the efforts of many in my party, I don't support a litmus test.=
I'm with this assessment all day long. Both parties seem to have too many people applying purity tests these days around what it means to be a D or an R. Look at the number of Republicans that have to offer ridiculous, nonsensical defenses of the President for purposes of "unity." The best way to avoid that trap is not to step into it in the first place.
If Lipinski no longer represents what it means to be a Democrat in this district, the voters of the 3rd will say so.
To the post: agree. It's distracting and divisive to wade into every political battle out there, and this isn't even in the same government as him. Case in point: Rauner picked a few too many political battles, and it often cost him the ability to get things done.
== Are you talking about the bodily autonomy of both human lives involved? ==
Like I said, you're welcome to have this argument in Missouri. We're done litigating the issue here, and the actual, walking-around, living humans won.
- d. p. gumby - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 5:16 pm:
Let the Repub have the circular firing squads. Lipinski is still better than any Repub would be.
Same true in the Pres. race. Don't bash each other.
"the actual, walking-around, living humans won"
The only part of your stated standard that an unborn human doesn't meet is the "walking-around" part. Death is a high price to pay for not being able to walk.
But to the victors goes the right to decide who lives or dies; that is certainly true.
- Bruce - Wednesday, Jun 19, 19 @ 5:57 pm:
If not careful a divided Democrat base in 3 might yield a Republican. Especially one well known. Radogno?
== But to the victors goes the right to decide who lives or dies; that is certainly true. ==
The RHA certainly will save many lives if Roe falls. Good chat. Enjoy your day.
- Da Big Bad Wolf - Thursday, Jun 20, 19 @ 9:00 am:
==To be silent, however, is a sign of political cowardice. JB needs to take a position. That's what leaders do.==
Wow, people sure like to use the word coward. Being a coward is running from danger. There is no real danger to Pritzker taking a side.
- Charlie Brown - Thursday, Jun 20, 19 @ 9:06 am:
Lipinski is Lightfoot's problem. He is part of the Chicago Congressional delegation. If she wants him out, she needs to either work it out with Lipinski, the committeemen, or take him out by force.
I would suggest the first option.