Davis says Trump, Republicans still big in 13th District

Davis says Trump, Republicans still big in 13th District

CHAMPAIGN — U.S. Rep. Rodney Davis said Wednesday that President Donald Trump remains popular in his central Illinois congressional district and that he believes the district has become more Republican in recent years.

Although Trump lost Champaign County by more than 18 percentage points in 2016, he won the rest of the 13th District, which stretches from Champaign-Urbana on the northeast to Edwardsville and Collinsville on the southwest, by 49.4 percent to 43.9 percent. Champaign County was the only county in Davis' district to support Democrat Hillary Clinton for president.

Davis won by a greater margin in the same election, 59.7 percent to 40.3 percent.

"I see people in the rural counties I serve — Christian, Macoupin, Montgomery, Jersey, Greene, Calhoun, Macon — a lot of area where people will come up me at a restaurant or grocery stores or when I'm out at events and say, 'Hey, keep working with the president. Keep up the good job,'" Davis said. "They like him."

Davis acknowledged that Trump has a different governing style than previous presidents, but he said that's what voters wanted.

"Remember, he's the first president we've had in our lifetimes that's not had any military or government experience. This is the first president we've had who came directly from the private sector. He's going to be different. The American people wanted different," Davis said.

"There is not a bigger contrast in candidates over government versus someone not in government than what we had in November 2016. And President Trump is going to go about things much differently than anybody before him and that's exactly what the people who voted for him wanted. And they're getting that.

"Now, I think sometimes tweets are just tweets and they become the news story of the hour. And don't you think he knows that? If you want him to tweet less, regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum, the more that the news media covers those tweets, the less likely that's going to happen."

Davis, who withdrew his support for Trump before the 2016 election over sexist remarks the candidate was heard saying on a videotape, said he would continue to work with the president, although he has heard from constituents who want him to oppose him.

"Most of the time, someone who is that upset about the presidential election wants me to tell them that I'm never going to work with the president or that I'm going to vote to impeach him. Well, that's not going to be the case," Davis said. "I'm going to work with the president. I already have. And frankly, I've enjoyed working with his administration. A lot of the people there are good people."

The Trump administration, he said, "has had some clear successes." He cited "driving out ISIS," continued economic growth, changes at the Department of Veterans Affairs and passage of the GOP tax plan.

Davis said that Trump has tapped into a broad reservoir of citizen dissatisfaction, including within the 13th District.

"It wasn't just longtime, hardcore Republicans. He touched a nerve with a lot of blue-collar workers that I serve," said the three-term congressman. "Remember, I grew up in a very Democratic area, Christian County. We used to be controlled by Democrats at all levels of government. Today, Republicans have a good number of county offices."

Republican presidential candidates have become increasingly successful in Christian County and other mostly rural areas of the 13th District, Davis said.

"I think President (Barack) Obama and the national Democrats left a lot of the labor Democrats that used to be the Democratic Party's base in central and southwestern Illinois," he said. "It's not a coincidence that Mitt Romney won my district by 800 votes, which was less than a percentage point, and Donald Trump won my district by 5 points, and tens of thousands of votes. That's where my district has actually gotten more Republican."

Davis said he isn't fearful of what's ahead in the 2018 midterm election, the kind of election where traditionally the party in power loses a significant number of seats. Five Democrats are running in the March primary to take on Davis in November.

"I've been told that I wasn't going to get re-elected even before I got sworn in. I've been told since I got to Washington that there is a target on my back. And being a political target is OK," Davis said. "I don't mind that because I'll put my record of working across the aisle and working to govern up against anybody in Congress. Anybody.

"And I'm more than willing to come back and talk about those successes and fight the fringes on both parties to show how we're actually getting things done in Washington that benefit our district."

Sections (2):News, Local

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
APC wrote on January 04, 2018 at 9:01 am

Based on your voting record (e.g., ACA repeal-but-not-replace, tax overhaul benefiting the 1% and damage to CU [university tax issues including grad student waver tax, which was eliminated in committee - not by you]), your lack of town hall meetings in the area, and the number of bumper stickers around here, the appropriate phrase (with apologies to Liam Neeson) is: "Good Luck"

Cheese Flap wrote on January 04, 2018 at 9:01 am

You talk just like one of Trump's kids....Maybe you'll get tossed out with the whole lot!  Crawl back into your hole, we'll let you know if we need any more fertilizer spread.

APC wrote on January 04, 2018 at 10:01 am

Unless you were referring to Davis, I would have to say that this is a nice non-substantive retort.  Nothing about Davis, just insult someone laying out facts. 

Tom Napier wrote on January 04, 2018 at 10:01 am

Two words:  2018, 2020.

JohnRalphio wrote on January 04, 2018 at 2:01 pm

While in general he's smugly uninformed and dishonest, Davis is right about one thing: people who voted for Trump are getting exactly what they voted for. Which is mostly racism and incompetence.

Even if Davis is still likely to win his district, it's worthwhile for his opponents to put up a formidable fight, so the GOP has to send money and resources to this district, rather than ones that are even more purple.

 

JohnRalphio wrote on January 04, 2018 at 2:01 pm

While in general he's smugly uninformed and dishonest, Davis is right about one thing: people who voted for Trump are getting exactly what they voted for. Which is mostly racism and incompetence.

Even if Davis is still likely to win his district, it's worthwhile for his opponents to put up a formidable fight, so the GOP has to send money and resources to this district, rather than ones that are even more purple.

 

dw wrote on January 05, 2018 at 3:01 am

"I think President (Barack) Obama and the national Democrats left a lot of the labor Democrats that used to be the Democratic Party's base in central and southwestern Illinois,"

Yup.  He’s spot-on with that.  But I’d say it was more the post-Obama DNC and HRC.  Comments (clipped out-of-context sound bytes or not) that have “we’re gonna put a lot of coal companies and miners out of business” and Dick Durbin saying nothing could be done about China dumping solar panels below manufacturing cost in the US (personal conversation, constituents breakfast in 2010) , and the TPP...

The Democratic Party has shown little desire to be the Party of the working class at the national level anywhere but the polls.  

It’ll be telling how the Democratic Primary ends up in Illinois governor race:  do Illinois Liberals feel like they need a multi-billionaire candidate to beat a multi-millionaire, or can Bliss pull a Bernie?  Can Champaign-Urbana and the rest of the District show up, pull a ‘bama and Roll Tide over Rodney?

dw wrote on January 05, 2018 at 3:01 am

Duplicate

CallSaul wrote on January 06, 2018 at 1:01 pm

Davis is too afraid to actually meet with his consituents in a normal town hall setting.

He can run scared and hide from the voters but he can't run from our votes or hide from the consequences of being Trump's loyal little lickspittle.

11/2018 keeps getting closer and closer...

Tick...tock...tick...tock...tick...

BruckJr wrote on January 06, 2018 at 7:01 pm

lol. This seat is there for the taking but you guys will put up another clunker candidate.  Maybe this one can top 42%.

CallSaul wrote on January 07, 2018 at 12:01 am

If you Party of Trumpers can't even win in Alabama, perhaps you shouldn't be so arrogant about winning anywhere else...

Annotator wrote on January 08, 2018 at 10:01 am

"If you Party of Trumpers can't even win in Alabama, perhaps you shouldn't be so arrogant about winning anywhere else..."

Alabama was one candidate running against a probable pedophile.  This is Illinois and Davis isn't a pedophile.  That's just the fact of your life up to now.  The benefits of the Republican party legislation, and leadership of Trump, will provide vast improvement of real working people's lives. Your obvious support of the Democratic party and its last president (sorry, Hillary Clinton will be prosecuted and indited under the federal statutes she violated during her tenure as Secretary of State).  Obama will be investigated for his part in the Iranian Nuclear Treaty.  Possibly charged with treason for aiding and abetting the Iranians who have declared war on the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia.

CallSaul wrote on January 08, 2018 at 11:01 am

The lead bozo of the party of Trump is accused by many many women of sexually assaulting them...

He brags about grabbing women by the genitals and that they feel powerless to stop sexual assault...

He brags about barging in on naked  teenage girls...

He's also accused of raping a young girl...

And Davis, while he runs from the voters, enthusiastically runs cover for the Republican perv in chief...

He's one of Trump's most eager and loyal little lickspittles...

People tend to notice these kinds of things.

Just like they did in Alabama...

The rest of your insane rant dripping with delusion, willful ignorance and deliberate stupidity will make good subject matter for future researchers wondering how, even though he's historically unpopular and even more hated now than when he lost the popular vote by 3 million lat November, Trump can still retain the blind loyalty of the fools that make up as much as a third of our population...

He and Davis and the rest of the Party of Trump just picked your pocket clean with their tax scam, but you eagerly support your own robbers because they give you your daily hate fix...

A fool and his money...

Annotator wrote on January 09, 2018 at 10:01 am

Quoting fake news off of the social media websites doesn't make you a credible commenter.

"The rest of your insane rant dripping with delusion, willful ignorance and deliberate stupidity will make good subject matter for future researchers wondering how, even though he's historically unpopular and even more hated now than when he lost the popular vote by 3 million lat November, Trump can still retain the blind loyalty of the fools that make up as much as a third of our population... "

Talk about ranting...  I keep explaining to you that the polls are only conducted by the bias liberal media in just blue states.  When you create a poll, everyone knows you can get any answer you want, by composing the questions to fit your bias thinking.  The popular vote is irrelevant.  Amdendment XII of the US Constitution (1787) has always been the process to elect the President.  Hopefully, you will get past these insane, insulting rants and mature into a responsible adult.

CallSaul wrote on January 09, 2018 at 12:01 pm

You are hardly in a position to scold anyone else commenting on here about 'immature insults.' You do nothing but regurgitate kookoo reactionary rightwing talking points and mindlessly repeat insane conspiracy theories.

You insist that any information that contradicts your Fox 'News' bubble is 'fake news.'

You conveniently demonstrably true information as coming from the 'bias' media.

And your lecture on consitutional law is, uh, unnecessary...

Are you suggesting you believe I was claiming Trump didn't win the electoral college vote...?

I was simply pointing out that the buffoon Trump is even more unpopular now than he was when he lost the popular vote by 3 million. Again, this isn't in dispute except by those willfully ignorant people who dismiss reality because it contradicts their rightwing false information bubble.

But you can of course keep fantasizing about locking up Clinton and Obama all you'd like...

Meanwhile, Mueller will keep investigating Trump's and his campaign's collusion with Putin and their clumsy bumbling attempts to obstruct justice by covering up that collusion...

Tick...tock...tick...tock...tick...

APC wrote on January 08, 2018 at 11:01 am

Let's take these naked assertions one by one:

Every reasonable economist (in fact all but one that I can recall, with the one being linked to a far right think tank) has agreed that the R tax plan is merely a tax cut for the rich and will do nothing in the short or long term for the economy.  It will not pay for itself, the growth rate is likely to bounce at most 0.1% (not 2-3% as the Rs keep saying) and long term, the cut will actually slow down the growth rate.  Look at KS and LA for what the exact same thing did to their economies. After years of crying about the deficit, the Rs have given a $1.5-3 Trillion increase (the latter number if they actually extend the meager cuts for other than the top 1%). The plan will also increase the number of uninsured and drive up costs much more than what they are presently increasing by removing the ACA mandate.

Clean air, water and energy are things of the past.  Cutting stupid regulation is fine, but cutting regulation such as that that regulates safety for offshore oil refineries, regulation of tributaries or (in an entirely different vein) bank regulations enacted to stop the same bank gamesmanship that caused the 2007 catastrophe is just stupid.  Wait until the first spill in coastal waters of FL or over a (non-Indian) populated area, fouling the groundwater.  Cf the TX fertiziler factory blast that claimed the lives and homes of dozens of people - no regulation and the company went out of business, leaving the affected people high and dry.

Clinton is not running for office.  She did, essentially what Powell and other secretary of states before and after have done.  Numerous reports have indicated that the current adminstration (e.g., Tillerson, Ivanka and Jared and staff) is deliberately communicating official (and probably classified) information using private email and servers.  Please also indicate which statutes she violated - one would think that after 47? 48? investigations, any actual crimes would have been at least been prosecuted by the DOJ - which instead repeatedly exonerated her.  In other words, this is just wishful thinking of a persecuting political opponent boogyman.

Obama - cf the above.  What is to be investigated, exactly? The fact that we had frozen Iranian assets and had leverage for a deal? We did not, as Fox and the other media reports, pay them our money - it was theirs in the first place.  It is also incorrect to say that the Iranians have declared war on any of the above.  True that they are antagonistic towards all countries you listed, but Iran and Saudi Arabia have been fighting for covert battles influence for years in the Arabian pennisula.  Everyone is against Israel as it makes a convenient target and serves to focus attention elsewhere.  As for the US, there are reformists (largely pro-US) and conservatives (anti-US) in Iran.  If you don't want the US to be judged only by what the most radical and vociferous here say, don't do the same for other countries.

Annotator wrote on January 09, 2018 at 11:01 am

"Clinton is not running for office.  She did, essentially what Powell and other secretary of states before and after have done.  Numerous reports have indicated that the current adminstration (e.g., Tillerson, Ivanka and Jared and staff) is deliberately communicating official (and probably classified) information using private email and servers.  Please also indicate which statutes she violated - one would think that after 47? 48? investigations, any actual crimes would have been at least been prosecuted by the DOJ - which instead repeatedly exonerated her.  In other words, this is just wishful thinking of a persecuting political opponent boogyman."

Very well.  Hillary Clinton's exact violation is: 18 U.S. Code § 793(e) and (f).  The FBI investigation and Comey's remarks, broadcast live on all news channels, detailed her actions.  The investigation also found multiple emails that were, at the time of composition of the emails and transmission, classified or higher levels.  In addition, multiple committes of Congress are now investigating her staff for aiding or possessing classified or higher level, as well.  Powell never used an unsecured device to transmit or store official communications.  None of the investigations to date have exonerated Hillary Clinton, Abedin or any other staff members of her campaign, they have only verified she violated her oath of office as Secretary of State.  There are currently, ongoing Congressional investigations into the conduct of staff of DOJ and FBI, which is a division of the DOJ, in regard to procedural violations and misconduct.

None of this is at an end, even though you appear to want it to be.

 

APC wrote on January 09, 2018 at 1:01 pm

Same old Fox regurgitation points.  You actually have to look at the statute - e) states unauthorized possession (she had authorized possession), reason to believe would cause injury to the US (they were classified after the fact - leading to a determination of no reason to believe) and willful communication of classified material (not marked as classified when sent and thus no willful communication). Granted that the last requires some knowledge of statutory reading but since all communication is willful, you have to willfully disseminate information that you know is classified - to read it any other way to be to effectively eliminate the "willful" term from the statute - which is absolutely wrong (statutory interpretation means that you must give weight to each word in the statute).

f) is closer but requires both gross negligence and delivery to someone in violation of trust.  An argument could be made for gross negligence, but probably fail as, as above, she did what other secretary of states in other adminstrations have done and would thus probably not fall into the gross negligence category.  For the latter, you need knowledge of delivery to someone in violation of trust - something that has never been proven (there is no evidence her server was hacked or that she knew that the material were delivered other than to the people [who were authorized] she sent them to).

Note that Powell admitted he had done the same things (sent via an unsecured device) in at least one interview. 

In addition, you have to ask at this point, what does exoneration mean? Clinton (and her staff) has been investigated literally almost 60 times over the same matter and has never been actually prosecuted for any offense. Be serious - no R is going to state "HC is hereby exonerated."  Moreover, your statement that it is proved she violated her duties as Secretary of State is a naked assertion - please provide some evidence and let me know why she hasn't been charged (esp with Congress in R hands over the last 7 years and in complete control of the government for the last year).  Could it be that this is merely a political talking point and actually has no substance?

Regarding the DOJ and FBI investigations - I would really like to see the private emails of the many anti-HC people to see whether these investigations are further witchhunts (as well as the current administration email handling) - unlike the Russia investigation, which is clearly going to and has already caused the current administration problems.