News that the CTU House of Delegates endorsed Pat Quinn for Governor over the Napa wine connoisseur comes as no great surprise.
I will not vote for either one.
However, the CTU endorsement certainly reflects the views of most Chicago teachers. In that regard, the Rauner panic-machine has been very effective.
Although I am not a member of the CTU and I am certainly not privy to their internal discussions, the overwhelming vote by the HOD in favor of this endorsement does not suggest some back-door deal.
Nor does it suggest that President Karen Lewis is “in the pocket of the Democratic Machine,” a ridiculous assertion I heard someone make.
How is this different from Quinn’s endorsement by the state’s union leadership?
Here’s how.
For the longest time we have asked our state leadership to create a working families, pro-union electoral alternative to Quinn. Instead they accepted the status quo, spending millions of dollars on a futile attempt to elect the Illinois Chairman of ALEC as the Republican gubernatorial nominee. When that bit of political opportunism failed, they endorsed the current pension thief.
More importantly, there is no sign that the union leadership at the state level has any plan or vision for something different. Only a change in leadership will change that situation.
It is at the Region level that some of us kept our promise and voted not to recommend any pension thieves.
In Chicago we are seeing something quite different.
In Chicago we have a strategy to change the political landscape of the city with aldermanic challenges to get-along incumbents, support for members of the Progressive Caucus and a challenge to the sitting mayor by Karen Lewis and possibly Bob Fioretti.
Is the gubernatorial endorsement part of that changing landscape?
No.
However, nothing should keep us from being diverted from our efforts to unseat the current mayor and create an ongoing progressive alternative to the Democratic Machine.
Even if we wished for different choices in the Governor’s race.
Fred Klonsky 
If u don’t vote it’s a vote for Rauner, were voting not for the best candidate but the lesser of two evils
Sent from my iPhone
>
Yep. It’s a problem I have. I don’t vote for evil, lesser or otherwise.
So what is one to do? Just not vote. Anyone who does vote for Rauner deserves to lose their pension.
I agree with Fred. I am also finished with the “lesser of two evils argument. I too have “the problem”. A problem these thieves created for all of us. I will vote FOR people who support my pension. I don’t vote “against” anybody. Just me.
John, I’ve been hearing that “lesser of the two evils” game all my life and I’m getting tired of it. I’m with Fred and Hugh. Perhaps if we quit playing the lesser of the two evils game, the political strategists of the incumbents will start thinking differently prior to elections.
I will vote for Quinn. I consider voting to be a right and a responsibility. I vote, and keep working to make room for other candidates to step up. On Monday, the US Senate will be considering a vote on something called the Senate Joint Resolution 19 which would assert that Congress and the States have the authority to limit the amount for campaign contributions and expenditures. Contact your Senator before Monday. One place for some background info is here http://www.commoncause.org/ but there are many others, including Move to Amend https://movetoamend.org/. Our limited and crappy choices are in part due to the fact that most of us can’t afford to run and can’t (nor should we) compromise enough to raise millions. I think this kind of change would make a difference in State House and Senate races that have the same people run nearly unopposed for 30+ years, and could open the field for local elections like school boards. Just my thoughts.
Don’t forget that it has to pass BOTH houses. FAT CHANCE—it’ll even be brought up in the house.
I am with Fred and Hugh. I leave it blank . I just don’t think these endorsements will help him . I saw he is going to outsource his GOTV and we know how successful that has been in this state . I doubt he has many volunteers. I hope the uinions don’t waste too much on him and let Fred have some for his north shore races and save some for March
As a side comment, regarding something mentioned in this article – let’s hope that Bob Fioretti and Karen Lewis come to some sort of cooperative, rational thinking regarding any attempt to unseat Rahm. There is nothing more than Rahm would like than to see a third person in the race. This would make it easier for him as the incumbent. In my opinion, Mr. Fioretti and Ms Lewis would both be better suited to run the city than our current Mayor. I hope the political strategists of the two challengers are considering this.
I cannot stomach voting for Quinn or his marginal running mate, a former CPS CEO. I was fortunate to get away from CPS just when he was coming on. How is he not responsible for some of the CPS problems?
“Marginal” is being kind. Vallas’ selection as Governor Lite was what sealed it for me – Rauner could grow horns and a tail and I still wouldn’t vote for Quinn.
I don’t like Quinn, but I will hold my nose and vote for him in an effort to stop Rauner.
Letting Rauner win would really “show Quinn” how displeased we are with him, but it would almost be self-immolation on the part of public employees, unions, and public retirees.
I’m not voting for Quinn, I’m voting AGAINST Rauner.
I have not made-up my mind yet.But the idea that Quinns Lt Gov.would be one heartbeat,or one conviction, away from the office is something I cannot forget.