|
I get a lot of Rauner ads on Twitter of all places. I'm in Chicago and seeing a ton of Quinn TV spots. Seen that lawnmower and Ford factory ad about a thousand times now. Rauner had a lot of TV spots but seems to be tapering off a bit.
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 07:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 21:08 |
|
|
Niwrad posted:I get a lot of Rauner ads on Twitter of all places. I'm in Chicago and seeing a ton of Quinn TV spots. Seen that lawnmower and Ford factory ad about a thousand times now. Rauner had a lot of TV spots but seems to be tapering off a bit. Rauner's strategy is moving towards personally-targeted ads due to the internals showing the same as Quinn's: the race is tightening and base turnout will be key. Increased general turnout improves Quinn's and Durbin's odds. Increased targeted turnout improves Rauner's and decreases Durbin's. Pretty fun meta-strategy going on.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 07:33
|
|
|
Barudak posted:This election blows and I'm not thrilled with my choices. Thanks Illinois for continuing to provide year after year. It does kind of suck that every election we look at the candidates and groan. At some point the state has to produce someone decent, right? It's too bad Madigan wouldn't step down so his daughter could run. I'm leaning toward Rauner right now. He will lead to gridlock but at least Madigan won't be able to do whatever he wants. And maybe we'll get a little oversight if both sides have some power and are constantly monitoring one another. Father Pfleger will never be promoted. They've actually tried to nudge him out recently. But he's far too popular for them to force it. He's a unique character and I hope he keeps doing his thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 08:05
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:I'm kinda late to the discussion about her, but Lewis lost any chance of me voting for her the minute she said "We don't believe in merit pay." What does merit pay for teachers look like to you then? Define it and defend it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 12:48
|
|
|
The X-man cometh posted:What is it about Quinn that you don't like? He's pretty much an old school leftist, who was never part of the Machine, and supports all the progressive positions, while being against DLC type policy. From what I hear, he's a complete nitwit in his actual political dealings with other people. Not saying that Rauner's any better, as he'll be completely incapable of working with others (Madigan) to do anything. It's too bad the Republicans keep voting against Dillard/Rutherford so that there would actually be a viable alternative to Quinn. Although Judy got crushed by Blago so I'm not sure how much that would've mattered.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 13:38
|
|
|
Niwrad posted:It does kind of suck that every election we look at the candidates and groan. At some point the state has to produce someone decent, right? It's too bad Madigan wouldn't step down so his daughter could run. I'm leaning toward Rauner right now. He will lead to gridlock but at least Madigan won't be able to do whatever he wants. And maybe we'll get a little oversight if both sides have some power and are constantly monitoring one another. Madigan will still be able to do whatever he wants if the Democrats retain a supermajority. All they need to do is override all of Rauner's vetoes, and Rauner is reduced to a figurehead. From what I hear though, Rauner is trying to avoid this by getting enough Republicans elected to the House and Senate so that there's no longer a veto-proof majority. That's a longshot though, and it's scaring the rest of the Republicans because Rauner is raining money on those key races, making them more loyal to Rauner than the party itself.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 13:46
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:I'm kinda late to the discussion about her, but Lewis lost any chance of me voting for her the minute she said "We don't believe in merit pay." Why is merit pay so important to you that you're willing to overlook a slew of other more terrible things that Rahm has done/is doing? Also, are you voting for Rauner, or just against Quinn? What do you like about Rauner's platform that makes you want to vote for him?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 13:59
|
|
|
I thought I read that they had a shot at gaining a couple Senate seats but the state was so gerrymandered a few years ago that even that looks difficult. The supermajority is likely here to stay.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 14:00
|
|
|
Firm tied to Bruce Rauner profits from 'court-sanctioned extortion' - what has Rauner invested and/or been a board member of that wasn't built ontop of bilking the most vulnerable people in society?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 16:09
|
|
|
That company was given $21 million in taxpayer money. Not sure either candidate looks good on that one. Rauner profited from a shady company that Quinn funded.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
Clouseau posted:Firm tied to Bruce Rauner profits from 'court-sanctioned extortion' - what has Rauner invested and/or been a board member of that wasn't built ontop of bilking the most vulnerable people in society? His security surveillance company was built on invading the privacy of all Americans, regardless of class.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 03:30
|
|
|
The X-man cometh posted:His security surveillance company was built on invading the privacy of all Americans, regardless of class. The links may not work anymore, what you're looking for, specifically, are Rauner's comments on Six3 and his BIT Systems acquisitions and talent raids; etc. Taken from the document pull, you'll want to find the HRM-# from" Related proceeding at In re Six3 Sys., 2012 U.S. Comp. Gen. LEXIS 283 (Comp. Gen., Nov. 2, 2012) CASE SUMMARY: ...and pull other docs in re Six3 Sys.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
menino posted:What does merit pay for teachers look like to you then? Define it and defend it. Pay based on performance, performance based on how their students perform on some sort of standardized testing. This is the point where someone tries their best at  why standardized testing doesn't work, or something, but nobody complains about the rules when they follow them. If you're kvetching about merit pay, it's because your merit is lacking. Meltathon posted:Why is merit pay so important to you that you're willing to overlook a slew of other more terrible things that Rahm has done/is doing? One's opinion on merit pay tells me what they feel about performance at their job. Rejecting merit pay shows a dislike for their performance influencing their pay, and as such, is undeserving of my vote. menino posted:Also, are you voting for Rauner, or just against Quinn? Against Quinn. Came in promising to undo Blago, wound up being another one. MisterBibs fucked around with this message at 05:36 on Sep 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2014 05:31
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:Pay based on performance, performance based on how their students perform on some sort of standardized testing. Take it from someone who handled money around Blago: Quinn is a lot of things. A shameless crook on the level of Blago, he's not. He's not organized enough to be.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2014 05:33
|
|
|
Merit pay is completely reasonable because children are amorphous blobs, with no variance in abilities/home situation with respect to their peers, all in homogeneous classrooms, and standardized testing is actually effective.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2014 16:04
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:Pay based on performance, performance based on how their students perform on some sort of standardized testing. There was no actual argument there, just word salad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2014 16:17
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:I suffer from Just World fallacy. You could have made that first half of your post so much more succinct.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2014 17:58
|
|
|
I wonder if Rauner's "Jobs" ad will have any affect now that some new unemployment numbers came out and Illinois's rate went way down. This probably would've have worked better over the summer before the news broke, but I doubt Rauner saw that coming. Quinn also has an ad out featuring him at the Ford plant. I feel like Rauner's ads are pretty much all negative Quinn ads, with maybe a small positive for Rauner at the end, while Quinn has a mix of straight vote for Quinn and negative against Rauner ads. Maybe none of it has any real affect. Election is a little over a month out, so I imagine we'll start seeing a lot more polls this month. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqjoF903rkc
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
I saw a Rauner ad last night on Hulu. It was completely negative. It showed Quinn, Madigan, someone else and BLAGOJEVICH! It said between them, they had served over 100 years in Illinois government. Blagojevich! He has not been in the equation for 5 years now and Rauner has to bring him up. It did not mention ONE THING about Rauner. He is simply running the "Vote for me, I am not THEM!" campaign that Judy Barr Topinka ran against Blago.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 19:58
|
|
|
Bizarro Kanyon posted:I saw a Rauner ad last night on Hulu. It was completely negative. It showed Quinn, Madigan, someone else and BLAGOJEVICH! It said between them, they had served over 100 years in Illinois government. You're thinking of Cullerton. Don't worry, he has his guy for the next gubernatorial election earning favors in the senate.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 20:12
|
|
|
ohgodwhat posted:Merit pay is completely reasonable because children are amorphous blobs, with no variance in abilities/home situation with respect to their peers, all in homogeneous classrooms, and standardized testing is actually effective. You are implying that standardized testing is ineffective. Why? All criticisms against merit pay for teachers boil down to "there is no absolutely perfect way to measure student performance, therefore, let's just not measure it and not reward teachers who do better jobs than others". I think that providing some incentive for teachers to do better jobs would be great. I had a couple of bad teachers in public high school who just showed movies all the time and didn't assign writing assignments to avoid having to teach and grade essays. Having some sort of incentive for teachers to cut that crap out would be great.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 20:29
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:You are implying that standardized testing is ineffective. Why? Having entered standardized test scores into the state's database, all standardized tests measure are access to adequate income in the home environment, and even then, those stats aren't too reliable. You're providing an incentive for duking the stats and increasing distrust of teachers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 20:36
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Having entered standardized test scores into the state's database, all standardized tests measure are access to adequate income in the home environment, and even then, those stats aren't too reliable. Well, if good test scorers correspond with students who have learned how to read and do math well, then it isn't shocking to me that students who come from better homes tend to read and do math well and do better on the tests. Are you claiming that the tests are not good measures of students' ability to read and math ability? My Imaginary GF posted:You're providing an incentive for duking the stats and increasing distrust of teachers. This is a little hyperbolic, don't you think? Of course, with pay based maybe partially on test scores, there is an incentive for teachers to forge the tests, but if that is actually a serious problem, maybe it is good to be distrustful of teachers as a whole. silence_kit fucked around with this message at 20:58 on Oct 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 20:51
|
|
|
Bizarro Kanyon posted:I saw a Rauner ad last night on Hulu. It was completely negative. It showed Quinn, Madigan, someone else and BLAGOJEVICH! It said between them, they had served over 100 years in Illinois government.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 20:53
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:Well, if good test scorers correspond with students who have learned how to read and do math well, then it isn't shocking to me that students who come from better homes tend to read and do math well and do better on the tests. They correlate with students' ability to take the test. Yes, I am saying that standardized tests are a poor measure of anything apart from readiness to take the standardized test. Why do you want to turn American education into Chinese education? Not hyperbolic at all. If a teacher has the potential to lose their job because one kid, who hasn't shown up for 2 months, scores poorly on a test, why isn't the incentive to duke the stats? And when you get caught duking, it furthers distrust between teachers and all whom interact with them. You're looking at this as a problem-solution issue. I'm looking at it from a systemic framework. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 20:56 on Oct 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:They correlate with students' ability to take the test. Are you claiming that standardized test scores have no correlation with reading and mathematical ability? If so, you are going to have to support that. I find that very hard to believe. My Imaginary GF posted:Not hyperbolic at all. If a teacher has the potential to lose their job because one kid, who hasn't shown up for 2 months, scores poorly on a test, why isn't the incentive to duke the stats? If this actually would be a big problem and teachers as a whole have no integrity, then maybe it is good that people should distrust them. This is a dumb argument.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 21:07
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:Are you claiming that standardized test scores have no correlation with reading and mathematical ability? If so, you are going to have to support that. I find that very hard to believe. Why are you in favor of big government regulations, and don't trust professionals to know best about their profession?
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 21:10
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:Are you claiming that standardized test scores have no correlation with reading and mathematical ability? If so, you are going to have to support that. I find that very hard to believe. No, they're arguing that the performance on standardized testing correlates more closely with family income/conditions in the home than it does with any other metric. Stop being obtuse.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 21:45
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:Well, if good test scorers correspond with students who have learned how to read and do math well, then it isn't shocking to me that students who come from better homes tend to read and do math well and do better on the tests. Great, you see the problem then; this rewards teachers for teaching in richer neighborhoods where the average kid has a houselife that is predisposed to doing well on standardized tests, and punishes teachers who teach in poorer neighborhoods that are predisposed to doing poorly. This means better quality teachers will avoid poor schools and so poor schools are left with the teachers that couldn't make it in richer schools. Even if standardized testing worked, merit pay based on those tests would only create an economic incentive for good teachers to teach only in rich neighborhoods.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
DrProsek posted:Great, you see the problem then; this rewards teachers for teaching in richer neighborhoods where the average kid has a houselife that is predisposed to doing well on standardized tests, and punishes teachers who teach in poorer neighborhoods that are predisposed to doing poorly. This means better quality teachers will avoid poor schools and so poor schools are left with the teachers that couldn't make it in richer schools. Even if standardized testing worked, merit pay based on those tests would only create an economic incentive for good teachers to teach only in rich neighborhoods. Doesn't that already happen? Teachers in New Trier get paid a ton more than elsewhere, etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 23:10
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:You are implying that standardized testing is ineffective. Why? You're implying that it is effective, why? What makes one premise more or less false than the other?
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 23:18
|
|
|
You might as well argue that Chicago schools should be segregated so all the white yuppies can send their kids to high performing schools and let everyone else rot. As to Quinn, how on earth is Rauner leading? I know a lot of north shore Republicans that can't stand Rauner so I have no idea who he's appealing to.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:Doesn't that already happen? Teachers in New Trier get paid a ton more than elsewhere, etc. True, and it was wrong for me to imply it's not the case already. I should have said that it would make the problem that currently exists even worse.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 00:07
|
|
|
There may be problems with how teacher merit is currently being assessed but people who say things like: Thermite posted:No, they're arguing that the performance on standardized testing correlates more closely with family income/conditions in the home than it does with any other metric. Stop being obtuse. or DrProsek posted:Great, you see the problem then; this rewards teachers for teaching in richer neighborhoods where the average kid has a houselife that is predisposed to doing well on standardized tests, and punishes teachers who teach in poorer neighborhoods that are predisposed to doing poorly. This means better quality teachers will avoid poor schools and so poor schools are left with the teachers that couldn't make it in richer schools. Even if standardized testing worked, merit pay based on those tests would only create an economic incentive for good teachers to teach only in rich neighborhoods. These are not intelligent arguments, yet I see them made by people here all the time. Yes, it is difficult to access teachers because the students they teach are variable, but this is hardly some mysterious problem in statistics- we deal with situations where there is high variance in your response all the time. Such effects can be adjusted for trivially. menino posted:You're implying that it is effective, why? What makes one premise more or less false than the other? Because measurement is not objectionable to most people, so the idea that it is impossible to measure teachers performance is nonsense- measurement of variable things is exactly why statistics exists. To suggest that teachers' performance cannot be measured is by far the more false and anti-intellectual of the two; similar measurements are done all the time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 00:23
|
|
|
Who said teacher's performance can't be measured?  I think you need to reread some posts, we've all been talking about using standardized tests to evaluate a teacher's performance. If someone had another metric that didn't involve standardized tests, I'd love to hear about it, but we're pretty clearly just talking about the proposal to use standardized tests to do it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 00:27
|
|
|
tsa posted:There may be problems with how teacher merit is currently being assessed but people who say things like: Done how? By whom, for which industry, and which function? What is your criteria for 'similar', and how are the both the functions being measured, and competencies used in measurement not only similar but also meaningful? Task dependent, context dependent? Declarative, process, trait? Etc
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 00:28
|
|
|
tsa posted:Such effects can be adjusted for trivially. They can be, but they're not, since no one wants documented proof that schools are inherently unequal.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
tsa posted:These are not intelligent arguments, yet I see them made by people here all the time. Yes, it is difficult to access teachers because the students they teach are variable, but this is hardly some mysterious problem in statistics- we deal with situations where there is high variance in your response all the time. Such effects can be adjusted for trivially. Clearly whichever teacher taught you vocab needs their pay cut. I think you're absolutely right though, it is totally trivial to adjust for any of the effects that were mentioned. I guess nobody has ever seen fit to hire a statistician! Maybe you could do some of this trivial analysis, perhaps on this data set: http://star.cde.ca.gov and let CA know? Maybe they'd be inspired to hire some statisticians so you'd be helping your peers out. It shouldn't take too long, it is trivial after all, and you'd solve this whole debate right then and there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 01:30
|
|
|
ohgodwhat posted:Clearly whichever teacher taught you vocab needs their pay cut. Or, you know, you could use data for Illinois in a discussion on Illinois education and not data from California. Take your bi-costal argument to the school reform thread and see how it stacks up there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 02:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 21:08 |
|
|
California was just the most comprehensive data I found; it would be great if Illinois had similar data, but I couldn't find it broken down by district. Should we only have skin deep discussions of the policies put forth by Illinois candidates in this thread?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 02:31
|
|