Last week I talked about the allegations against Dan Rutherford, that he turned into allegations against Bruce Rauner. More facts have come out since then, but we still don't know whether the allegations have any merit. Biggest update for me, is that I had a one-on-one interview with Rutherford this week.

    So, first things first. For anyone who doesn't know my background, I worked in sales for years. I was successful in that field largely because I have a decent ability to read people. Here's my vibe on Rutherford.... he believes, at least to some degree, that the charges are false.That doesn't mean much, because a lot of very guilty people have believed they were innocent.

    We now know the accuser is male. Obviously this brings up questions about sexual orientation. Rutherford was explaining to me how Rauner was behind all this. I said these allegations include pressure to do political work, which is nothing new in Illinois. He said that's not true for the Treasurer's office under Dan Rutherford. I said the allegations also include sexual harassment from a male employee, so do you think they are attacking your sexual orientation? His answer? "That's up to the Rauner campaign, they're the ones out there spinning this."

    As I have said, I think this situation gives Rutherford the opportunity to go after Rauner for going so low as to smear him by saying he's gay. But to do that, Rutherford needs to say that's what is going on. So far he hasn't.

    I stand by my belief that people over-estimate how much it would hurt a GOP candidate to be gay. However, I think when people, who may at least be a little homophobic(which I feel is a large chunk of the population), hear things like this, they may have a tendency to view the accused as a molester type, which they would not if the alleged victim was a woman, and possibly not if they knew in advance the accused was gay. Not fair by any means, but I think that's the Illinois electorate.

    I'm not saying Rutherford is gay or straight. I'm not outing anyone, because I don't know either way. But I keep feeling like if he is gay, this would cause less damage if he had come out previously. And I don't think someone's sexual orientation is necessarily anyone else's business. But when you are a statewide elected official, and you're running for governor, things change. Whether it's anyone's business or not may not matter.

    But again, we are all talking about Rutherford this week. We weren't two weeks ago. Maybe that has something to do with this. Rutherford told me that clearly he's the only one that threatens Bruce Rauner. If people believe that's true, maybe they suddenly view Rutherford as a front-runner. I did point out to Rutherford that in recent polls, it's Brady who is second to Rauner. Rutherford responded that we know the polls don't mean that much, that he is the only one with the financial resources to challenge Rauner. He does have a point, he's the only other candidate who has raised much money. But even with that, the polls do still have Brady in 2nd.

    I have always said if Brady would have talked less in 2010, he would have won. I think he needed to just keep saying that he wouldn't raise taxes, Quinn would, and shut up about everything else. This year, he seems to maybe be going that route. He's not out there saying much, other than how good the pension reform bill he worked on is helping Illinois. And he's 2nd in most polls. If I had to make a wager today, that someone other than Rauner would win the primary, I would put my money on Brady. It would not shock me at all for a similar situation to 2010, where Chicago and suburban republicans split the vote there, and Brady locks up downstate. For the record, anyone who believes downstate votes are meaningless should go to Colorado and talk to Blagojevich, who has multiple times credited his primary success against Vallas with focusing on downstate. And while I've felt all along that Rutherford should be the strongest candidate(winning Chicago for statewide office in 2010, fairly moderate candidate), I'm starting to believe Brady might have the best chance to beat Quinn. I think Rauner will scare too many people, but there may be some serious voters' remorse over picking Quinn in 2010. Brady was the other choice, maybe this time those voters go with him. I think if the party wants to win this fall, they should have backed Brady. Too many of the established members went for Dillard. But at the same time, if I'm just wagering on who wins the GOP primary, I put my money on Rauner, then Brady.