Blowing with the wind, is he? Someone inform me if this isn’t just pure posturing for voters.
Edit: Holy crap! What an interesting split on this comment. Look people, all I was trying to do was glean more info on what type of billionaire behavior this guy’s been exhibiting, and perhaps have a measured discussion on the subject. Truth be told, no billionaire or person of such excessive means can be trusted until separated from such wealth and means, and certainly all high profile politicians say the favorable thing and then do something else. I’d rather folks share what they know etc even just to approximate where this guy is on that scale; it’s interesting (and somewhat disappointing) that the middle ground I imagined (ie: has done some good, still don’t trust him) just really not represented here. I just don’t know where the bar is anymore. I do know that getting vitriolic and irrational, or conversely strongly supporting establishment types is ultimately distracting and a useful tool to those in power.
He recently did an interview with Heather Cox Richardson that lays his ideas out pretty clearly. He’s an interesting guy, and they talk a lot about what he’s already done and how and why, not about what he’s going to do. Which is to say it’s not the usual load of jam tomorrow political bullshit because he’s already done what he talked about doing. Listen (or read the transcript) for yourself.
For myself, I don’t want another fucking billionaire in power. But if it’s Pritzker I would make an exception, because while he’s not perfect he’s demonstrably worked (and is still working) very hard for his state and its people in the ways that matter right now. I am sure there are things he could do better or more of, but he’s doing a lot of things right, especially when it comes to building Illinois’ economy and protecting individual rights.
He’s also trying to make it as difficult as possible for the orange hitler to fuck with Illinois, and right now that’s a huge plus in my eyes, as it speaks to character: does a politician actually see all citizens as equal, and immigrants deserving of all their rights under the law in this country? Pritzker does, which is admittedly a low bar in itself but jesus fuck do some people currently in power manage to limbo under it these days. Or I could just say, “He’s not a fascist,” but it’s the same thing. Ten years ago I’d have laughed; today it’s at the top of my list of necessary qualifications for public office.
Or to put it another way, we regular Americans have never been so hated by those in power as we are right now, especially in the midwest and southeast: take a look at some of those governors and senators and appointees and tell me they don’t fucking loathe their own voter base. Pritzker is genuinely not among those that hate their own constituents: he seems to love Illinois and its people and it’s been working out well for Illinois.
Nah, Pritzker has been pretty good about enacting policies that are actually meaningfully effective. He’s likely prepping for a 2028 presidential run, but he’s still getting good stuff done in Illinois.
JB has an excellent track record of passing legislation that benefits the working class and protects marginalized people. It’s evident that he cares for the people of IL and is trying to do what’s best.
Fuck JB Prickster. He does stuff “for the people” in Chicago, aka votes, then reverses course. On many things beneficial. Let’s destroy the outer grid with data centers around rural places cuz fuck them, and gives then incentives to stay here cheaply vs make money for the people of the state to, idk, say lower taxes or something.
His gas and grocery tax pause was for voting season. His ban on “assault” weapons was useless since they all come from out of state anyway. He’s VERY soft on crime, implementing cashless bail for many offenses. And his Private Equity is HEAVILY invested in many AI companies, so he going to profit off of their coming to IL anyway…
He’s not for the people, he’s for the likes to manipulate for his own gains…
For those not from Illinois, there is a very loud (also small) contingent from outside of Chicago who like to complaint that the entire state isn’t Chicago. They are usually republican and are mostly subsidized by the people who live in chicago paying taxes. They are deeply republican, and there is nothing that he or anyone else could do to make them happy. (Biggest tip off here is that he resorts to name calling and fox news talking points)
Is Pritzker perfect, no. But on the politician scale, he’s one of the better ones…
Illinois is 29th in violent crime and 21st in property crime by state. Crime rates are going down, both in Illinois and nationally. Source. White, rural people are terrified of what their tv tells them about minorities and cities, facts and statistics be damned. One or two anecdotes will always overshadow reality for these kinds of people.
Dude, holy shit, smh. If crime is down nationally then its nothing to do with pritzker lol. Not everyone outside the city is “rural” nor afraid of minorities, you’re assuming an awful lot based on what your TV tells you. Jokes on you, I don’t watch any TV, news, media, etc. You get you’re info probably from some FB group eco chamber about how “everyone else not Democratic” is ruining the country. News flash, both are equally corrupt by the ultra wealthy. If dems were actually trying, the fed minimum wage would’ve gone up in one of 12 out of the last 18 years, or anything else bitched about. So, stereotype and generalize all you like, it won’t get you anywhere.
You get you’re info probably from some FB group eco chamber about how “everyone else not Democratic” is ruining the country.
I deleted my fb years ago.
I agree that dems aren’t doing enough. There are a few decent ones, but nothing will change until people get up off their asses and vote for progressives in the primaries to make the count of decent ones more than just a few. Both parties suck, but good change will never come from Republicans and it will take a lot of pressure to get it from Democrats.
I will read news from external US sites that aren’t biased or owned by US media or billionaires shoveling propaganda.
Same, I’ve been off all social media since 2016.
The 2 party system is broken. Anyone who wants real change should disassociate with either major party to help start that change. Stay to show it’s acceptable to break away. Being too progressive doesn’t suite everybody everywhere, either. I am a unaffiliated but have found that something like the Forward Party where they push common sense policy and have a beliefs & values oath they take, shows they’re actually looking out for their constituents. Using data to help reinforce the direction they move rather than arguing black and white when are so full of grey. I think a blend of various values suites everyone best. States can then take that further as it suites them, and so on down to local cities, townships, or villages. But were need a strong core value system at the federal level for accountability. That’s what’s fucked, currently.
If someone wanted to, they could flee the state and go commit more crimes elsewhere. It happens with repeat offenders too. I get it’s to get to be more fair, but I think the execution was wrong.
It’s not poor people who commit crimes. Crimes happen at all levels. BUT, how about don’t commit any crimes in the first place?! Ever thought about that?! I get mistakes happen and issues arise for innocent people. Been there, done that. But at the same time, bigger crimes have bigger bail, and it’s harder to “accidentally” commit bigger crimes.
I’m not presuming anything. Hence why I said I get mistakes happen and arise for innocent people. Been there, done that. I’ve had it happen due to clerical errors in something small that turned not so small. My life didn’t necessarily get flipped upside down, but it took several months to clear up for sure.
So if these people are not convicted and may be innocent, and whether bail is granted is determined by the risk the arrested person presents… How is cashless bail soft on crime?
That can happen with cash bail too. You know that cashless bail doesn’t mean everyone just gets bail right? It means that bail is determined by a judge depending on your flight risk and danger to the community instead of a dollar amount.
His ban on “assault” weapons was useless since they all come from out of state anyway
I agree with much of what you post here, but not this.
Even if he’s accomplishing making it inconvenient for criminals, gun nuts, and wannabe mass shooters, that’s a good thing. Legislation on guns in this country is never going to be perfectly effective because of the Federal Government, but making things harder on the local level is 100% a good thing.
How so? Anyone who’s grown up with them respects and follows the law, respects firearms (has a healthy fear and understanding), and the law in Illinois are already some of the toughest.
Indiana has open carry (constitutional carry), so does MO, and I believe WI. BTW, NONE of the firearms banned in that list were assault rifles, aka fully automatic. That’s illegal to own without other special licensing that the ATF doesn’t just hand out to anybody. So to ban then just technically “infringes” on anyone’s else’s ability to own or purchase who rightfully follows the laws anyway. I quoted infringe bc of the constitution.
Not just the gun ban portion either, it’s the threaded barrels, the magazine capacity, chambering mechanism, the ammo types (calibers), etc. Basically, the law was written by clueless people that banned based on limited and scary sounding information thinking it does anything to stop actual criminal activity.
IF you’re a criminal, would and you’re already dying illegal stuff anyway, does this new ban effect you, realistically? Not likely, you’re already engaging in illegal purchases or other activity, so how does that effectively help? It might stop a few select people who have a slight conscious left, but probably not well enough to make a difference.
Gun ownership became a thing legally as the founding members fought off corruption- who cares how ethical (bc I’m sure someone will comment about their slave-owning rapist, etc) not the topic. They understood ownership was important to give the people a fighting chance at standing their own ground against corruption.
Personally, I can somewhat agree with something from Reddit a couple years back. The US created the military to protect the country, but it could also be used to protect itself from the citizens who may eventually rise up and challenge the Govts power, too. We also have the highest, or at least most talked about, patriotism. And I think when people have the sense of loyalty, they’ll put up with a lot more abuse and crappy conditions. This also keeps people obedient. It’s also why I think gen Z is outspoken about hating AI, or the job market, or corporations taking advantage, etc. They don’t have that sense of patriotism like older groups, so they’re more willing to stand up for themselves. It’s going to get a lot worse before the rest of the general population finally do something.
The fact that every online statement he makes is met with cries from people in little shithole red towns that don’t contribute, at all, whatsoever to the state GDP, makes me think he’s doing something right.
Blowing with the wind, is he? Someone inform me if this isn’t just pure posturing for voters.
Edit: Holy crap! What an interesting split on this comment. Look people, all I was trying to do was glean more info on what type of billionaire behavior this guy’s been exhibiting, and perhaps have a measured discussion on the subject. Truth be told, no billionaire or person of such excessive means can be trusted until separated from such wealth and means, and certainly all high profile politicians say the favorable thing and then do something else. I’d rather folks share what they know etc even just to approximate where this guy is on that scale; it’s interesting (and somewhat disappointing) that the middle ground I imagined (ie: has done some good, still don’t trust him) just really not represented here. I just don’t know where the bar is anymore. I do know that getting vitriolic and irrational, or conversely strongly supporting establishment types is ultimately distracting and a useful tool to those in power.
He recently did an interview with Heather Cox Richardson that lays his ideas out pretty clearly. He’s an interesting guy, and they talk a lot about what he’s already done and how and why, not about what he’s going to do. Which is to say it’s not the usual load of jam tomorrow political bullshit because he’s already done what he talked about doing. Listen (or read the transcript) for yourself.
For myself, I don’t want another fucking billionaire in power. But if it’s Pritzker I would make an exception, because while he’s not perfect he’s demonstrably worked (and is still working) very hard for his state and its people in the ways that matter right now. I am sure there are things he could do better or more of, but he’s doing a lot of things right, especially when it comes to building Illinois’ economy and protecting individual rights.
He’s also trying to make it as difficult as possible for the orange hitler to fuck with Illinois, and right now that’s a huge plus in my eyes, as it speaks to character: does a politician actually see all citizens as equal, and immigrants deserving of all their rights under the law in this country? Pritzker does, which is admittedly a low bar in itself but jesus fuck do some people currently in power manage to limbo under it these days. Or I could just say, “He’s not a fascist,” but it’s the same thing. Ten years ago I’d have laughed; today it’s at the top of my list of necessary qualifications for public office.
Or to put it another way, we regular Americans have never been so hated by those in power as we are right now, especially in the midwest and southeast: take a look at some of those governors and senators and appointees and tell me they don’t fucking loathe their own voter base. Pritzker is genuinely not among those that hate their own constituents: he seems to love Illinois and its people and it’s been working out well for Illinois.
Nah, Pritzker has been pretty good about enacting policies that are actually meaningfully effective. He’s likely prepping for a 2028 presidential run, but he’s still getting good stuff done in Illinois.
JB has an excellent track record of passing legislation that benefits the working class and protects marginalized people. It’s evident that he cares for the people of IL and is trying to do what’s best.
He’s a billionaire, and therefore, almost certainly invested in LLM’s himself. Probably needed time to adjust his portfolio before making the move.
This should have happened a year ago at least.
Fuck JB Prickster. He does stuff “for the people” in Chicago, aka votes, then reverses course. On many things beneficial. Let’s destroy the outer grid with data centers around rural places cuz fuck them, and gives then incentives to stay here cheaply vs make money for the people of the state to, idk, say lower taxes or something.
His gas and grocery tax pause was for voting season. His ban on “assault” weapons was useless since they all come from out of state anyway. He’s VERY soft on crime, implementing cashless bail for many offenses. And his Private Equity is HEAVILY invested in many AI companies, so he going to profit off of their coming to IL anyway…
He’s not for the people, he’s for the likes to manipulate for his own gains…
Whoops, looks like you put a good thing in you list of bad things.
Fuck the prison industrial system, and the poor tax that is bail.
For those not from Illinois, there is a very loud (also small) contingent from outside of Chicago who like to complaint that the entire state isn’t Chicago. They are usually republican and are mostly subsidized by the people who live in chicago paying taxes. They are deeply republican, and there is nothing that he or anyone else could do to make them happy. (Biggest tip off here is that he resorts to name calling and fox news talking points)
Is Pritzker perfect, no. But on the politician scale, he’s one of the better ones…
Yeah “soft on crime” was cringe af.
Illinois is 29th in violent crime and 21st in property crime by state. Crime rates are going down, both in Illinois and nationally. Source. White, rural people are terrified of what their tv tells them about minorities and cities, facts and statistics be damned. One or two anecdotes will always overshadow reality for these kinds of people.
Dude, holy shit, smh. If crime is down nationally then its nothing to do with pritzker lol. Not everyone outside the city is “rural” nor afraid of minorities, you’re assuming an awful lot based on what your TV tells you. Jokes on you, I don’t watch any TV, news, media, etc. You get you’re info probably from some FB group eco chamber about how “everyone else not Democratic” is ruining the country. News flash, both are equally corrupt by the ultra wealthy. If dems were actually trying, the fed minimum wage would’ve gone up in one of 12 out of the last 18 years, or anything else bitched about. So, stereotype and generalize all you like, it won’t get you anywhere.
Where do you get your info then?
I deleted my fb years ago.
I agree that dems aren’t doing enough. There are a few decent ones, but nothing will change until people get up off their asses and vote for progressives in the primaries to make the count of decent ones more than just a few. Both parties suck, but good change will never come from Republicans and it will take a lot of pressure to get it from Democrats.
I will read news from external US sites that aren’t biased or owned by US media or billionaires shoveling propaganda.
Same, I’ve been off all social media since 2016.
The 2 party system is broken. Anyone who wants real change should disassociate with either major party to help start that change. Stay to show it’s acceptable to break away. Being too progressive doesn’t suite everybody everywhere, either. I am a unaffiliated but have found that something like the Forward Party where they push common sense policy and have a beliefs & values oath they take, shows they’re actually looking out for their constituents. Using data to help reinforce the direction they move rather than arguing black and white when are so full of grey. I think a blend of various values suites everyone best. States can then take that further as it suites them, and so on down to local cities, townships, or villages. But were need a strong core value system at the federal level for accountability. That’s what’s fucked, currently.
ah yes, the people with MAGA and “pritzker sucks” signs littering their lawns along with staples like
First off, NOT Republican, nor do I watch fox news. Second, Illinois has some of the highest taxes especially property (https://www.illinoispolicy.org/no-2-no-more-illinois-property-taxes-rank-highest-in-u-s/) and the entire state is not subsidized by the city.
How is cashless bail soft on crime?
If someone wanted to, they could flee the state and go commit more crimes elsewhere. It happens with repeat offenders too. I get it’s to get to be more fair, but I think the execution was wrong.
So it’s ok for that to happen with people who have the money to get out but not poor people?
I don’t think you understand how bail works. It’s not always granted and cash bail doesn’t solve the issue you raised.
It’s not poor people who commit crimes. Crimes happen at all levels. BUT, how about don’t commit any crimes in the first place?! Ever thought about that?! I get mistakes happen and issues arise for innocent people. Been there, done that. But at the same time, bigger crimes have bigger bail, and it’s harder to “accidentally” commit bigger crimes.
People who are convicted of crimes don’t get bail. I think you need to learn a lot more about this justice system before digging in on these opinions.
Innocent people have their lives destroyed awaiting trial all the time.
You are presuming guilt just because of an arrest, that’s anti-american.
I’m not presuming anything. Hence why I said I get mistakes happen and arise for innocent people. Been there, done that. I’ve had it happen due to clerical errors in something small that turned not so small. My life didn’t necessarily get flipped upside down, but it took several months to clear up for sure.
So if these people are not convicted and may be innocent, and whether bail is granted is determined by the risk the arrested person presents… How is cashless bail soft on crime?
That can happen with cash bail too. You know that cashless bail doesn’t mean everyone just gets bail right? It means that bail is determined by a judge depending on your flight risk and danger to the community instead of a dollar amount.
I agree with much of what you post here, but not this.
Even if he’s accomplishing making it inconvenient for criminals, gun nuts, and wannabe mass shooters, that’s a good thing. Legislation on guns in this country is never going to be perfectly effective because of the Federal Government, but making things harder on the local level is 100% a good thing.
How so? Anyone who’s grown up with them respects and follows the law, respects firearms (has a healthy fear and understanding), and the law in Illinois are already some of the toughest.
Indiana has open carry (constitutional carry), so does MO, and I believe WI. BTW, NONE of the firearms banned in that list were assault rifles, aka fully automatic. That’s illegal to own without other special licensing that the ATF doesn’t just hand out to anybody. So to ban then just technically “infringes” on anyone’s else’s ability to own or purchase who rightfully follows the laws anyway. I quoted infringe bc of the constitution.
Not just the gun ban portion either, it’s the threaded barrels, the magazine capacity, chambering mechanism, the ammo types (calibers), etc. Basically, the law was written by clueless people that banned based on limited and scary sounding information thinking it does anything to stop actual criminal activity.
IF you’re a criminal, would and you’re already dying illegal stuff anyway, does this new ban effect you, realistically? Not likely, you’re already engaging in illegal purchases or other activity, so how does that effectively help? It might stop a few select people who have a slight conscious left, but probably not well enough to make a difference.
Gun ownership became a thing legally as the founding members fought off corruption- who cares how ethical (bc I’m sure someone will comment about their slave-owning rapist, etc) not the topic. They understood ownership was important to give the people a fighting chance at standing their own ground against corruption.
Personally, I can somewhat agree with something from Reddit a couple years back. The US created the military to protect the country, but it could also be used to protect itself from the citizens who may eventually rise up and challenge the Govts power, too. We also have the highest, or at least most talked about, patriotism. And I think when people have the sense of loyalty, they’ll put up with a lot more abuse and crappy conditions. This also keeps people obedient. It’s also why I think gen Z is outspoken about hating AI, or the job market, or corporations taking advantage, etc. They don’t have that sense of patriotism like older groups, so they’re more willing to stand up for themselves. It’s going to get a lot worse before the rest of the general population finally do something.
His estimated net worth is $4,000,000,000. The second wealthiest politician behind Trump. Should tell you everything you need to know right there
The legislation he passed tells me what I need to know.
The fact that every online statement he makes is met with cries from people in little shithole red towns that don’t contribute, at all, whatsoever to the state GDP, makes me think he’s doing something right.