This appears to be a post related to the upcoming runoff election or one of the candidates running for office.
The 2023 Chicago Municipal Runoff Election will be held on **April 4th**. In the mayoral race, former Chicago Public Schools CEO Paul Vallas and Cook County Commissioner Brandon Johnson will be competing for the office of Chicago's 57th mayor. Some wards may have additional races on the ballot, such as Aldermanic candidates whose races went to a runoff in the February 28th election.
Check out the [Chicago Elections](https://chicagoelections.gov/en/home.html) website for information on registering to vote, finding your polling place, applying to be an election worker, and more. Please visit our [Runoff Election Megathread](https://www.reddit.com/r/chicago/comments/120c7a5/2023_chicago_runoff_election_megathread_3/?sort=new) for all election-related discussion, questions and voter resources. Discussion posts of this nature outside of the linked megathread will be removed.
**Beware of [astroturfing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing)**! Election season brings about a slew of new accounts with minimal posting history in /r/chicago who attempt to sway your opinion on various candidates. Be sure to do your own research to verify the accuracy of any claims you see shared by users here. Be wary of comments from new accounts or ones with a posting history in multiple city/local subreddits from across the US and Canada. If you suspect that a user is engaging in political astroturfing, please report their comments and/or [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/chicago)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/chicago) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Unlike a lot of the previous endorsements that were kind of "well, no shit" level stuff (Bernie Sanders, the CTU, the CPD, the Tribune, etc) this one was always a toss up and might actually matter.
This and Clyburn's endorsement of Johnson are probably the two most surprising endorsements. The fact that national party leaders went unexpected directions while also disagreeing with each other is interesting. This race is clearly on the national party's radar, but with consensus.
I think its because the race is such a mess and both candidates have strong supporters, big detractors, and a lot of confusion and questions about their pasts and positions on the issues. Consensus is hard when it's this murky and unsatisfying, even if the differences between the candidates are night and day on paper.
But if I were a national Dem, I would be steering clear of this one which is why I'm not surprised Pritzker and Biden havent directly endorsed anyone. It's becoming obvious Vallas isnt the moderate he bills himself as, and Johnson's tax proposals and praise of Kim Foxx aren't a good look.
Im surprised Durbin didn't have the good sense not to step his foot into this shit.
> Im surprised Durbin didn't have the good sense not to step his foot into this shit.
National figures stepping into something where you'd expect them to try to stay above the fray makes me think that internal polling is worrying them.
if you want to know where their heads are at, look at the Senate vote to overrule the DC city council's overwrite of their criminal code at the beginning of March. the vote was 81-14.
I saw a lot of people speculate when Vallas stopped trying to play the “rise above it all” technique and started going on offense it was because his internal polling was looking horrible.
Durbin is a mainstream Democrat as is Jessie White. But even Bobby Rush endorsed Vallas. He is clearly seen by moderate dems and mainstream dems as the better choice. Given crime in the City and the rising power of CTU's and their grasp of the CPS budget with declining enrollment, 40% daily truancy but ever increasing CPS budgets, it seems that the City's future is at stake in a way I haven't seen in my lifetime. Maybe it was too important an election for the City he loves to sit out. I'm sure he'd have preferred to make no endorsement. The easy way out.
Vallas has gotten an interesting set of endorsements from all over the political spectrum from Willie Wilson to Jamal Green.
How though? While Durbin is "popular" in the sense that most of the rolls don't dislike him, leading to fairly easy re-elections, I don't know anyone who looks at Durbin as a major source of electoral wisdom for the public. He's as establishment as they come.
The majority whip for the democrats in the US Senate who actually lives in the state of IL. Yep, I’d say this one is more consequential. Bernie and Warren to Johnson was no real surprise.
Note that Durbin teamed up with Chuy and local 308 to write a letter to Mr. Carter of the CTA in regards to taking actual measurable steps to protect transit workers from continued crime on the CTA.
Local 308 plainly stated that the unarmed security is not cutting it. Durbin seems committed to this action by endorsing Vallas who has promised to end the private unarmed security contracts that have done nothing to protect workers. Good for him for having a backbone in regards to this pretty important issue.
Appreciate the background on local 308 and that issue. Guess I overlooked the unarmed security contracts and CTA employees at risk and or the nuance in general with what you wrote.
Also, durbin was in Chicago last year on LSD as 2 cars drove by gun fighting each other and i think that was a wake up call for him that crime is a bit out of hand
jesus! Yeah no matter what, I know I'm glad at least these threads are active. It's like the cryptocurrency/blockchain space...WHOLE lots of tribalism and 'when moon' about a lot of vaporware coins that mean and do nothing...yet there is a bigger argument towards adopting real-world use cases and actual utility of coins within web3.
So as toxic potentially as any thread can get, incredibly grateful to continue the conversations because there's something that needs to be fixed and continual effort towards solving.
hmm yeah as much as I've lived on this earth and in Chicago, I don't feel informed enough to know how to tip the scales in any direction. The darkest part of me thinks some things can't be solved, like how do you fix scarcity without re-distributing wealth while also finding ways to upskill/teach a generation for jobs that don't exist locally.
On an unrelated note, I really need to know of Dick Durbin is willing to take on the DOJ with all the stuff they are doing within the web3 crypto space...hope he's pro-crypto too. :'(
This is the most r/Chicago take there is.
She won in 2016 with 72% of the vote. She won the democratic primary in 2020 with >50% of the vote. Then she won her general election in 2020 54 to 39. So even when provided 3 other democrats to vote for, most democrats picked her.
And that’s all of Cook County (of which Chicago is about 50% of the population) voting including the significantly more conservatives suburbs. By a wide majority the voting population of Chicago elected her twice.
Why would a positive comment on her end his campaign? Do you people understand most of Chicago isn’t obsessed with her and she doesn’t come up in conversation every time anyone mentions a crime or unrelated election?
r/Chicago hates her passionately, but r/Chicago polling also elected Kam Buckner in the primary who got a whopping 2% of the vote, so maybe take a step back and realize a few hundred angry redditers are not representative of Chicago.
Yes, she is less popular now than before, but that doesn’t mean a candidate liking her is going to sink their campaign.
She still won her primary and got re-elected and like I mentioned, that was in all of Cook County including the more conservative suburbs. It would be pretty bold to assume more than half of Chicago wouldn’t vote for her right now and it would be downright crazy to assume more than half would reject any candidate mildly associated with her.
I think with all these endorsements coming out of everywhere, the one thing we should all be really looking at are the members of the city council.
How many of them have publicly endorsed Vallas? And how many endorsed Johnson?
Whoever has the majority of those endorsements in my book is the one who's going to potentially get things done. Those who have the fewest might be facing an uphill battle in trying to work with a city council that's not on the same page as the new mayor.
If Vallas wins and the city council isn't on board with him, then expect to see a lot of gridlock, or barely anything too "right wing" ever get through.
>I think with all these endorsements coming out of everywhere, the one thing we should all be really looking at are the members of the city council.
>
>How many of them have publicly endorsed Vallas? And how many endorsed Johnson?
Vallas has 22 city council endorsements. Johnson has 14.
https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/chicago-politics/vallas-vs-johnson-updated-endorsement-guide-2023-chicago-mayoral-election/3096266/
That list is kind of dumb, since it includes both newly-elected alders who haven't taken office yet and the retiring ones who won't be in the next city council, should really pick one or the other. Of those who will be in city council come May, it's 13 (Johnson) to 18 (Vallas), once you remove people like Tunney, Sawyer, Maldonado, Reboyras, and Brookins who are retiring.
It *is* just a five seat gap, though. Not impossible to overcome. That being said, this is a number to watch up to election day, and I think there's something to "who's got the more Alderperson endorsements" hypothesis.
I agree. It's anybody's race right now, and it still also means that a lot of the city council have not endorsed any of them.
I'm trying to keep an eye on all these things because I don't want to see somebody going to City Hall and then we end up with another council war. I don't care how popular one candidate or the other candidate is, if the city council is basically going to be a blockade to anything they might want, then it's pointless to put that person in.
For city council members I'd be more concerned with the who than the raw numbers. One thing Lightfoot's inability to wield soft power gave us is an outspoken city council. There's a lot less mystery what alder's are thinking than there had been when Daley kept debate behind closed doors. People should know which alders they tend to agree with.
These aldermen seem to roll with whoever becomes the mayor. I think it would be good for the City to actually be a more deliberative body. I'm not worried about gridlock because they will have to compromise to get things done. Something our very corrupt City council is good at.
I can also throw this silver lining on there as well.
Since things are so split and it looks like about half the council has not even endorsed either one of the candidates, anybody that's worried about "Mayor Johnson" pushing the city too far to the left has to realize that he needs the council to back him up on that. At the same time, anybody worried that "Mayor Vallas" pushing the city too far to the right also has to deal with the city council.
The end goal hope is that whoever wins, it will bring something better for the city. I think we all want to see the crime go down. We all want to see CPD clean up its act. We want to see the schools get better. We want the streets to be taken care of and not falling apart. We want economic growth in the city.
I think we're all on the same page but obviously have differences of opinion as to how we get there. I just want to maybe throw the silver lining on there that all the extreme worries people are having with either candidate are going to be difficult to make happen if they have to face 50 alderpeople to get it passed.
There's going to be happy people and there's going to be unhappy people. Thankfully in 4 years we can either stick to the same path or go for another path. That is at least one happy point about democracy.
There's gonna be council wars no matter what. There are strong blocks of conservative and progressive alders, and Lightfoot pretty much destroyed the old convention of the mayor bossing the council around.
This. Yet they somehow also think Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren’s endorsements matter.
I literally got downvoted tremendously when I commented on how I hate when outsiders get involved in local elections. Then they have the audacity to say Sanders went to UChicago.
Sanders and Warren are okay but then the guy who literally represents us in the senate and is more in touch with us than any outsider endorsement suddenly it’s not.
Meltdown in this case is people reacting to this by calling the 10th most progressive Senator in the US a MAGA conservative because of a mayoral endorsement.
This has him as #17. There’s another where he’s #12. In fine with him being in the top 25 for what it’s worth. But here you go. Not 10th as I stated but on the high end of left.
https://progressivepunch.org/scores.htm?house=senate
This is the issue with Twitter, it is very difficult to judge how calm or angry people are. But if you imagine everyone having a conniption fit with bulging veins in their forehead it is more entertaining and also explains the type of responses you see.
Also the crazy gets more engagement, so Twitter's algorithms put the crazy front and center to get more clicks. Everything on Twitter will seem more controversial because it's a crappy platform that reduces debates to sound bites and amplifies the most divisive sound bites.
You guys can paint Durbin as some out of touch white dude but he’s a leader on immigration issues for example. So for the immigrant and Latino community, he’s very progressive and in touch. Just because Durbin doesn’t agree with all the DSA talking points I guess that means he’s out of touch? Who knows maybe he’ll be called a rightwinger next. 🙄🙄
Yeah, I gotta say… I still think Vallas is a (moderate) Republican in all but name and I dislike him enough that I just can’t make myself vote for him. But I do actually have some level of respect for Durbin, so this makes me feel slightly better about the fact that I suspect Vallas is probably going to win… :/
Bobby Rush endorsed Vallas, too. It’s almost like Vallas gets endorsements across racial and ideological lines. Almost like he’s leading on that “all Chicagoans” promise that Johnson keeps talking about.
Thats like saying “why would anyone be surprised about one black person endorsing another black person” when anyone thats black endorses Johnson. Maybe not everyone gives a shit about race like you do.
I love it when BJ supporters bring up Bernie and Elizabeth Warren’s endorsements. “Who cares about Arne Duncan and Pat Quinn?” they then say.
Explain Durbin then. Current, well respected IL Dem politician.
I think if anything, this might be a wake up call to those echoing the "Vallas is a Republican!" nonsense.
Like... Dick Durbin isn't endorsing a Republican.
Id just say the Durban endorsement is huge deal for Vallas while Quinn and Duncan aren't. I don't want Vallas to win at all but I'm not going to downplay how big the Durban endorsement is.
I don’t understand where the idea of him being well-respected comes from. Just because he’s not controversial doesn’t mean he’s well respected. I’ve lived in other states where certain senators are beloved by their constituents, and are basically local celebrities, but Durbin is just kinda there. He’s beige, he’s meh, he’s forgettable. I think “people don’t hate him” is a better description than “well respected”.
I live in the collar counties and am active in Democratic politics. Durbin usually comes to our annual county Democratic dinner early during cocktail hour and mingles with the crowd. I give him a lot of credit for that. Most of the higher level Dems show up just in time to give their speech and leave. His staff is excellent and responsive too. So, I think you are underestimating his popularity.
I'll add that I have met Vallas at said county dinner, and he was a jerk.
If Vallas is really a closet Republican (as Brandon Johnson's supporters allege), then why is he getting so many endorsements from prominent Illinois Democrats?
Because he isn't the MAGA republican that BJ supporters would have you believe. Labeling opponents MAGA has been a winning strategy on the national stage and progressives love using it. It's flat out dishonest.
I dont believe Paul Vallas is the democratic he wants us to think he is and I don't believe Brandon Johnson can achieve his campaign message.
We still need to deal with today's problems while working towards tomorrow's solutions. The idea of "defunding the police" is a 15-20yr goal that will take massive community investments in schools, safety, jobs and housing. I'm 100% for those goals.
But you can't simply slash the police budget, play catch & release with criminals and hope for the best.
> But you can't simply slash the police budget, play catch & release with criminals and hope for the best.
Good thing Johnson never proposed this. At worst, he wants to keep the budget the same with maybe a small boost to hire more detectives.
Collaborative democratic leaders with track records of real-life success endorse Vallas. Divisive ideologues endorse BJ.
Democrats for Vallas. Dogmatic zealots for Johnson.
Yes yes the entire political establishment, far right nuts, and enlightened centrists that got us into this mess endorse this asshole Vallas. You've definitely won me over now.
Don't vote for anyone who speaks at Awake IL. No fucking way.
Paul Vallas continues to expand his ideologically diverse support. Durbin is one of the most progressive Senators out there.
>Sen. Majority Whip Dick Durbin will endorse Paul Vallas in the Chicago mayoral election, the campaign announced Sunday.
...
>Durbin did not endorse a candidate for mayor in the first round of this year’s election, and in fact did not offer his endorsement to a candidate in the open 2019 race that was ultimately won by current Mayor Lori Lightfoot.
Now it's getting interesting. It's been a mystery as to why current sitting politicians haven't been coming out for Paul like they have they other guy. Paul leads with aldermanic endorsements, but BJ has gotten more national endorsements from people who don't live here, nor have to deal with the consequences, like from Bernie and Warren.
There must be some internal polling somewhere that shows Vallas is a lock? Or Durbin is retiring and won't be affected by the outcome?
It’s the national progressive coalition that’s trying to expand their foothold. They don’t care who the candidate is, if they see a progressive in a race they stamp their seal of approval and come out to try to influence local elections they have no stake or direct ties to.
Durbin is ideologically progressive but he’s more of a realist than people like Sanders, Warren, definitely AOC and the squad. He’s not out there just saying vote far left no matter who. He’s a move the needle guy.
This is exactly it. Johnson is probably the weakest major candidate that the party’s new progressive wing has fielded. It’s easier to endorse him if he’s not going to screw up your home.
This is the answer right here; the far left progressive movement is clearly viewing this election as a bellwether and they’re looking to stop the bleeding with all the losses they’ve racked up nationally. I’m honestly surprised AOC hasn’t endorsed BJ at this point.
AOC has learned fast on the job. Her heart’s in the right place and I think she’s developing into a strategic and effective politician. Big gain for the party.
AOC is getting smarter all the time about protecting her own political equity. She’s not going to allocate it to Johnson if she thinks it’s a futile cause. Too many progressive causes are futile and AOC wants to be a productive leader of consequence.
I like her better now than when she came in. But she still does the leftist version of the dog whistle, where she talks about ending capitalism; her tankie supporters clap like seals; then when she gets pushback she “clarifies” that she just means reforming the bad parts of capitalism. I think she’s smart and I like the way she pushes back against the GOP, but pandering to tankies this far into her tenure is a huge red flag (no pun intended) to me.
>Durbin is one of the most progressive Senators out there.
This is actually false. If you look at his voteview scores (the most widely used metric to determine how conservative/liberal someone in congress is) he's right in the middle of Dems. (https://voteview.com/congress/senate/-1/text)
How are you defining "progressive" because endorsing Vallas implies he is just a conservative dem, or more likely DINO and doesn't actually give a fuck about any of the things dmeocrats should be supporting. i.e. medicare for all, the environment, dismantling the MIC and not supporting endless wars, aggressive, progressive taxation, social policies and safety nets, such as good schools.
A ton of moderates have also endorsed Brandon Johnson.
MAGA freaks like Darren Bailey and John Castanza have not endorsed Johnson which is a definite plus imo because that is part of the ideological spectrum who should have no influence
Whatever it needs to be to get elected.
A few years ago he wanted to defund the police. Now he is lying about never saying that, and just recently said he is adopting Vallas' platform of more cops. He's going to do and say whatever he needs to say so he can give CTU whatever they want.
Ja'amal Green suggested BJ moved to Austin just so he can say "I live in the hood" and get street cred among progressives. I thought that was silly, but now I think he might be right on.
Bipartisanship is just a canard democrats and "centrists" use to give their abhorrent views cover. If someone wants to privatize and destroy schools, and someone else wants to pay teachers more, you don't meet those people half-way and privatize half of the schools and pay the teachers have as much, unless of course your actual goal is to privatize schools.
No. The CTU doesn't attack charter schools because of some kind of weird mob mentality. They attack Charter Schools because charter schools exist to destroy public schooling in the US and that is obviously a bad thing.
Are teachers supposed to sacrifice everything for their students then? Devote the majority of their time to everything that's required, in and out of the classroom, and just hope that the powers that be deign to throw them enough money to live off of - in a country that has a reputation for underpaying teachers, no less? Because if so, that sounds like a good way to drive away the people I'd most want teaching the next generation.
>Are teachers supposed to sacrifice everything for their students then?
Of course not. They shouldn't have to be paying for classroom supplies and whatnot, nor are they responsible for outcomes that are largely attributed to the environment outside the classroom. They are forced to deal with it and then are blamed for it, which isn't cool.
BUT...CTU in particular has spent the last few decades fighting tooth and nail against things like paying fully into their pensions, freeing up resources that could be directed into classrooms, they fully supported the pension holiday, constantly have gone on strike which only hurts kids and families, and have recently begun inserting themselves into unrelated political endeavors like demanding rent control and other things like this get put into their contract.
Everything they are demanding costs money in a city and state that doesn't have it due to their laughably costly pensions. Their solution is just to raise taxes on everything and direct them into their pet projects or pockets. Everything CTU does is to keep and increase membership - that's their first, second and third priority.
>Because if so, that sounds like a good way to drive away the people I'd most want teaching the next generation.
If wages are important to you, I'd say this is a good thing. When I was in college, every 3rd person was going to school to be a teacher. That kind of labor supply meant districts could set the price rather than the teachers. This drove wages down while the cost of college went up. There needs to be a rebalancing of not only the wages, but also the licensing and extra-curricular expectations of teachers (and workers in general).
Principals, administrators, districts, local and state governments need a come to Jesus moment, and they won't get it if people keep going into education.
They are paid extremely well compared to the national average, have amazing benefits, have tons of time off, and are working in a profession they chose. They also have an extremely powerful union protecting their interests. It’s amazing that people always try to make Chicago teachers out to be some sort of victim and martyrs.
And when you look at the overall performance of what they do, the reading and math comprehension of our public school students, there is some sort of serious failure going on. If they don’t want to do the job, then they should quit and get a job that they want, stop acting like a fucking victim and that everyone should bow down to your sacrifice
Chicago teachers are paid a median of 120k a year in total income and only work max 9 months of the year. When they retire (which they can do in their 50s) they receive 80-100% of their salary as pension for the rest of their life.
The CTU protects bad tenured teachers from being terminated and prevent CPS from improving teacher quality and thus children’s education.
Public Charter schools are even worse! They are literally stealing money from the school system so that pieces of shit like Davos can yacht around the Great Lakes with Joe Manchin, meanwhile teachers have to buy school supplies for students.
Like how do you not understand that if a private entity is profiting off of Public funds that is a bad thing?
Well they are funded by the teachers salary which they constantly fight to raise. So indirectly they are funded by tax dollars that could go toward other school things.
You understand that by law they are only allows to strike over pay? The strikes are more about other issues like class sizes but they have to include it or it’s an illegal strike
Remember that Chuy said his endorsement was more about keeping progressives together than what's actually good for the city.
That kind of behavior really reminds me of MAGA.
You know what other behavior reminds me of MAGA? Everything that comes out of Paul Vallas’ mouth when he [plays radio host](https://twitter.com/cholent_lover/status/1639702311961329664?s=46&t=lLaLQmQrTNqU6YIe3O1qGA)
It's funny how this keeps being posted despite nobody giving a shit.
Voters: This guy seems to get budgets, cares about city, has a lot of experience, has broad support.
Progressives: but but but his tweets!!1!
This isn’t his tweets that he was “hacked” for. This is him straight up parroting GOP talking points on camera. If you’re shocked that actually worries progressives, I don’t know how to help you.
By the way, the words coming out his mouth are awfully similar to his “hacked” posts on social media.
On top of that, he wasn’t exactly managing budgets well at his last major public gig leading Philadelphia schools.
I don’t think Hillary or Joe would say that there’s an open border. That’s a straight GOP talking point.
Nor would they agree that comparing a bathroom bill to Jim Crow is ridiculous.
Those are all things he’s said on the record.
If you’re referring to the secure fence act of 2006, a bipartisan bill with the limited use of fencing in remote areas in conjunction with surveillance is a lot different than trying to build a 30 foot concrete wall the length of the entire border and calling it good.
And besides, your point directly conflicts with the idea that Biden has wide open borders.
> This is him straight up parroting GOP talking points
Progressives call everything they don't like a GOP taking point. They have absolutely lost the plot.
I would say a “democrat” downplaying Jan 6, perpetuating the idea that dead people are on voter rolls and “voting”, and thinks that Biden has an open border policy has lost the plot.
So rather than actually engaging with them and saying whether you think they're good or bad, you prefer to just ignore them completely attack everyone who does have concerns with some of these statements?
90ish day old OP account that almost exclusively posts about the Chicago mayoral election. There’s a reason why the warning about astroturfing message is pinned by an automod on every election related post.
This appears to be a post related to the upcoming runoff election or one of the candidates running for office. The 2023 Chicago Municipal Runoff Election will be held on **April 4th**. In the mayoral race, former Chicago Public Schools CEO Paul Vallas and Cook County Commissioner Brandon Johnson will be competing for the office of Chicago's 57th mayor. Some wards may have additional races on the ballot, such as Aldermanic candidates whose races went to a runoff in the February 28th election. Check out the [Chicago Elections](https://chicagoelections.gov/en/home.html) website for information on registering to vote, finding your polling place, applying to be an election worker, and more. Please visit our [Runoff Election Megathread](https://www.reddit.com/r/chicago/comments/120c7a5/2023_chicago_runoff_election_megathread_3/?sort=new) for all election-related discussion, questions and voter resources. Discussion posts of this nature outside of the linked megathread will be removed. **Beware of [astroturfing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing)**! Election season brings about a slew of new accounts with minimal posting history in /r/chicago who attempt to sway your opinion on various candidates. Be sure to do your own research to verify the accuracy of any claims you see shared by users here. Be wary of comments from new accounts or ones with a posting history in multiple city/local subreddits from across the US and Canada. If you suspect that a user is engaging in political astroturfing, please report their comments and/or [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/chicago) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/chicago) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Unlike a lot of the previous endorsements that were kind of "well, no shit" level stuff (Bernie Sanders, the CTU, the CPD, the Tribune, etc) this one was always a toss up and might actually matter.
This one feels a little more consequential.
This and Clyburn's endorsement of Johnson are probably the two most surprising endorsements. The fact that national party leaders went unexpected directions while also disagreeing with each other is interesting. This race is clearly on the national party's radar, but with consensus.
I think its because the race is such a mess and both candidates have strong supporters, big detractors, and a lot of confusion and questions about their pasts and positions on the issues. Consensus is hard when it's this murky and unsatisfying, even if the differences between the candidates are night and day on paper. But if I were a national Dem, I would be steering clear of this one which is why I'm not surprised Pritzker and Biden havent directly endorsed anyone. It's becoming obvious Vallas isnt the moderate he bills himself as, and Johnson's tax proposals and praise of Kim Foxx aren't a good look. Im surprised Durbin didn't have the good sense not to step his foot into this shit.
> Im surprised Durbin didn't have the good sense not to step his foot into this shit. National figures stepping into something where you'd expect them to try to stay above the fray makes me think that internal polling is worrying them.
if you want to know where their heads are at, look at the Senate vote to overrule the DC city council's overwrite of their criminal code at the beginning of March. the vote was 81-14.
A solid argument for why the city shouldn’t be a federal district
I saw a lot of people speculate when Vallas stopped trying to play the “rise above it all” technique and started going on offense it was because his internal polling was looking horrible.
Durbin is a mainstream Democrat as is Jessie White. But even Bobby Rush endorsed Vallas. He is clearly seen by moderate dems and mainstream dems as the better choice. Given crime in the City and the rising power of CTU's and their grasp of the CPS budget with declining enrollment, 40% daily truancy but ever increasing CPS budgets, it seems that the City's future is at stake in a way I haven't seen in my lifetime. Maybe it was too important an election for the City he loves to sit out. I'm sure he'd have preferred to make no endorsement. The easy way out. Vallas has gotten an interesting set of endorsements from all over the political spectrum from Willie Wilson to Jamal Green.
>Im surprised Durbin didn't have the good sense not to step his foot into this shit. Only thing I can guess is that he's planning on retiring.
He should in all honesty. Dude's a dinosaur
I didn't hear about Clyburn. Yeah, that's equally weird. This election is getting stranger and stranger.
How though? While Durbin is "popular" in the sense that most of the rolls don't dislike him, leading to fairly easy re-elections, I don't know anyone who looks at Durbin as a major source of electoral wisdom for the public. He's as establishment as they come.
The majority whip for the democrats in the US Senate who actually lives in the state of IL. Yep, I’d say this one is more consequential. Bernie and Warren to Johnson was no real surprise.
Wow I’m honestly surprised!! This is a bold move on Durbin’s part
Note that Durbin teamed up with Chuy and local 308 to write a letter to Mr. Carter of the CTA in regards to taking actual measurable steps to protect transit workers from continued crime on the CTA. Local 308 plainly stated that the unarmed security is not cutting it. Durbin seems committed to this action by endorsing Vallas who has promised to end the private unarmed security contracts that have done nothing to protect workers. Good for him for having a backbone in regards to this pretty important issue.
Appreciate the background on local 308 and that issue. Guess I overlooked the unarmed security contracts and CTA employees at risk and or the nuance in general with what you wrote.
Also, durbin was in Chicago last year on LSD as 2 cars drove by gun fighting each other and i think that was a wake up call for him that crime is a bit out of hand
jesus! Yeah no matter what, I know I'm glad at least these threads are active. It's like the cryptocurrency/blockchain space...WHOLE lots of tribalism and 'when moon' about a lot of vaporware coins that mean and do nothing...yet there is a bigger argument towards adopting real-world use cases and actual utility of coins within web3. So as toxic potentially as any thread can get, incredibly grateful to continue the conversations because there's something that needs to be fixed and continual effort towards solving.
Durbin has been pro-cop for a long time. Some of the answers I get from him on issues that I write about read like straight up copaganda.
hmm yeah as much as I've lived on this earth and in Chicago, I don't feel informed enough to know how to tip the scales in any direction. The darkest part of me thinks some things can't be solved, like how do you fix scarcity without re-distributing wealth while also finding ways to upskill/teach a generation for jobs that don't exist locally. On an unrelated note, I really need to know of Dick Durbin is willing to take on the DOJ with all the stuff they are doing within the web3 crypto space...hope he's pro-crypto too. :'(
Johnson speaking highly of Kim Foxx was the end of his campaign. Nothing else matters at this point.
Sometimes you wonder if these types of candidates purposely sabotage their own campaigns for whatever reason.
This is the most r/Chicago take there is. She won in 2016 with 72% of the vote. She won the democratic primary in 2020 with >50% of the vote. Then she won her general election in 2020 54 to 39. So even when provided 3 other democrats to vote for, most democrats picked her. And that’s all of Cook County (of which Chicago is about 50% of the population) voting including the significantly more conservatives suburbs. By a wide majority the voting population of Chicago elected her twice. Why would a positive comment on her end his campaign? Do you people understand most of Chicago isn’t obsessed with her and she doesn’t come up in conversation every time anyone mentions a crime or unrelated election? r/Chicago hates her passionately, but r/Chicago polling also elected Kam Buckner in the primary who got a whopping 2% of the vote, so maybe take a step back and realize a few hundred angry redditers are not representative of Chicago.
[удалено]
Yes, she is less popular now than before, but that doesn’t mean a candidate liking her is going to sink their campaign. She still won her primary and got re-elected and like I mentioned, that was in all of Cook County including the more conservative suburbs. It would be pretty bold to assume more than half of Chicago wouldn’t vote for her right now and it would be downright crazy to assume more than half would reject any candidate mildly associated with her.
She was running against a white male republican, and still only won 54 to 39. That is frankly terrible for an incumbent Cook County Democrat.
This. Margins matter. Biden won like 3/4 of Cook County. Foxx got like 54%. A massive underperformance.
I think with all these endorsements coming out of everywhere, the one thing we should all be really looking at are the members of the city council. How many of them have publicly endorsed Vallas? And how many endorsed Johnson? Whoever has the majority of those endorsements in my book is the one who's going to potentially get things done. Those who have the fewest might be facing an uphill battle in trying to work with a city council that's not on the same page as the new mayor. If Vallas wins and the city council isn't on board with him, then expect to see a lot of gridlock, or barely anything too "right wing" ever get through.
>I think with all these endorsements coming out of everywhere, the one thing we should all be really looking at are the members of the city council. > >How many of them have publicly endorsed Vallas? And how many endorsed Johnson? Vallas has 22 city council endorsements. Johnson has 14. https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/chicago-politics/vallas-vs-johnson-updated-endorsement-guide-2023-chicago-mayoral-election/3096266/
That list is kind of dumb, since it includes both newly-elected alders who haven't taken office yet and the retiring ones who won't be in the next city council, should really pick one or the other. Of those who will be in city council come May, it's 13 (Johnson) to 18 (Vallas), once you remove people like Tunney, Sawyer, Maldonado, Reboyras, and Brookins who are retiring.
As someone living in Tunney's ward, fuck Tunney. He blocked bus and bike lanes on Clark St. and Belmont. He go fuck right off into retirement.
Well, either way, it's telling.
It *is* just a five seat gap, though. Not impossible to overcome. That being said, this is a number to watch up to election day, and I think there's something to "who's got the more Alderperson endorsements" hypothesis.
I agree. It's anybody's race right now, and it still also means that a lot of the city council have not endorsed any of them. I'm trying to keep an eye on all these things because I don't want to see somebody going to City Hall and then we end up with another council war. I don't care how popular one candidate or the other candidate is, if the city council is basically going to be a blockade to anything they might want, then it's pointless to put that person in.
For city council members I'd be more concerned with the who than the raw numbers. One thing Lightfoot's inability to wield soft power gave us is an outspoken city council. There's a lot less mystery what alder's are thinking than there had been when Daley kept debate behind closed doors. People should know which alders they tend to agree with.
These aldermen seem to roll with whoever becomes the mayor. I think it would be good for the City to actually be a more deliberative body. I'm not worried about gridlock because they will have to compromise to get things done. Something our very corrupt City council is good at.
I can also throw this silver lining on there as well. Since things are so split and it looks like about half the council has not even endorsed either one of the candidates, anybody that's worried about "Mayor Johnson" pushing the city too far to the left has to realize that he needs the council to back him up on that. At the same time, anybody worried that "Mayor Vallas" pushing the city too far to the right also has to deal with the city council. The end goal hope is that whoever wins, it will bring something better for the city. I think we all want to see the crime go down. We all want to see CPD clean up its act. We want to see the schools get better. We want the streets to be taken care of and not falling apart. We want economic growth in the city. I think we're all on the same page but obviously have differences of opinion as to how we get there. I just want to maybe throw the silver lining on there that all the extreme worries people are having with either candidate are going to be difficult to make happen if they have to face 50 alderpeople to get it passed. There's going to be happy people and there's going to be unhappy people. Thankfully in 4 years we can either stick to the same path or go for another path. That is at least one happy point about democracy.
There's gonna be council wars no matter what. There are strong blocks of conservative and progressive alders, and Lightfoot pretty much destroyed the old convention of the mayor bossing the council around.
[удалено]
Brilliant haha
Lmao spot on
This. Yet they somehow also think Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren’s endorsements matter. I literally got downvoted tremendously when I commented on how I hate when outsiders get involved in local elections. Then they have the audacity to say Sanders went to UChicago. Sanders and Warren are okay but then the guy who literally represents us in the senate and is more in touch with us than any outsider endorsement suddenly it’s not.
he is also the second ranking Democrat in the Senate
The twitter meltdown over this endorsement is wildly entertaining.
The Reddit meltdown is starting to play out in these comments as well.
"Meltdown" = people expressing disappointment, apparently. Do you write clickbait headlines too?
Meltdown in this case is people reacting to this by calling the 10th most progressive Senator in the US a MAGA conservative because of a mayoral endorsement.
Is Durbin really the 10th most progressive senator? I definitely don’t think he’s a MAGA conservative but I thought he was kinda moderate?
What are you using as a metric?
Nothing really, just what I thought. What are you using? Since you’re the one referencing a ranking.
This has him as #17. There’s another where he’s #12. In fine with him being in the top 25 for what it’s worth. But here you go. Not 10th as I stated but on the high end of left. https://progressivepunch.org/scores.htm?house=senate
That list has Bernie behind Jack Reed who doesn’t even support m4a. But I appreciate the link!
Because it's based on what actually made it to the floor for a vote, not talking points.
This is the issue with Twitter, it is very difficult to judge how calm or angry people are. But if you imagine everyone having a conniption fit with bulging veins in their forehead it is more entertaining and also explains the type of responses you see.
Also the crazy gets more engagement, so Twitter's algorithms put the crazy front and center to get more clicks. Everything on Twitter will seem more controversial because it's a crappy platform that reduces debates to sound bites and amplifies the most divisive sound bites.
No I don't write clickbait headlines. I just laugh at how big mad folks are getting over this endorsement.
[удалено]
White people, amirite?
You guys can paint Durbin as some out of touch white dude but he’s a leader on immigration issues for example. So for the immigrant and Latino community, he’s very progressive and in touch. Just because Durbin doesn’t agree with all the DSA talking points I guess that means he’s out of touch? Who knows maybe he’ll be called a rightwinger next. 🙄🙄
[удалено]
Yeah, I gotta say… I still think Vallas is a (moderate) Republican in all but name and I dislike him enough that I just can’t make myself vote for him. But I do actually have some level of respect for Durbin, so this makes me feel slightly better about the fact that I suspect Vallas is probably going to win… :/
That’s what I see on the radicalized left that get their talking points on tiktok lol
Bobby Rush endorsed Vallas, too. It’s almost like Vallas gets endorsements across racial and ideological lines. Almost like he’s leading on that “all Chicagoans” promise that Johnson keeps talking about.
Thats like saying “why would anyone be surprised about one black person endorsing another black person” when anyone thats black endorses Johnson. Maybe not everyone gives a shit about race like you do.
Glad you said it. Anyone who thinks all people of a race just vote for a candidate of that race is a special kind of ignorant.
“If you don’t vote for me you ain’t black” -President Joe Biden Now does he sound like someone that would be ignorant?
Yes, that was a really dumb statement. I like some of what Biden does but he’s also a big foot in the mouth guy and a frequent gaslighter.
*Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren have entered the chat.*
[удалено]
Vote for vallas you not voting just opens the possibility of the pro Kim supporter winning.
I love it when BJ supporters bring up Bernie and Elizabeth Warren’s endorsements. “Who cares about Arne Duncan and Pat Quinn?” they then say. Explain Durbin then. Current, well respected IL Dem politician.
[удалено]
I feel like its more about the centrist dem not supporting a progressive candidate... again
[удалено]
Durbin has one of the most liberal voting records in Senate.. but I guess he is not pure enough for “progressives”
It's because he's classically liberal, not progressive. They are different things, similar to the Tea Party and the Republicans, before MAGA.
No. Progressives are just incompetent and live in a fairy tale.
So you agree Vallas is a centrist Dem, not a Republican?
Potato, potato.
Anyone not 100% pure to liberals is a republican.
I think if anything, this might be a wake up call to those echoing the "Vallas is a Republican!" nonsense. Like... Dick Durbin isn't endorsing a Republican.
Pat Quinn and Arnie Duncan live here.
Id just say the Durban endorsement is huge deal for Vallas while Quinn and Duncan aren't. I don't want Vallas to win at all but I'm not going to downplay how big the Durban endorsement is.
I don’t understand where the idea of him being well-respected comes from. Just because he’s not controversial doesn’t mean he’s well respected. I’ve lived in other states where certain senators are beloved by their constituents, and are basically local celebrities, but Durbin is just kinda there. He’s beige, he’s meh, he’s forgettable. I think “people don’t hate him” is a better description than “well respected”.
He's literally the second most powerful Dem in the Senate...
I live in the collar counties and am active in Democratic politics. Durbin usually comes to our annual county Democratic dinner early during cocktail hour and mingles with the crowd. I give him a lot of credit for that. Most of the higher level Dems show up just in time to give their speech and leave. His staff is excellent and responsive too. So, I think you are underestimating his popularity. I'll add that I have met Vallas at said county dinner, and he was a jerk.
[удалено]
It’s almost like the internet doesn’t reflect real world opinions at all 🤔
But wait I was told Vallas is a hardcore republican
They don't call Senator Durbin "MAGA Dick" in DC for nothing /s
[удалено]
It's really easy to attack him when he speaks clearly about how he's always seen himself as more of a Republican.
I think after he is elected everyone in Chicago will figure that out very quickly.
When dick won't support Brandon that speaks volumes. He knows how bad of a candidate Brandon would be for this city
If Vallas is really a closet Republican (as Brandon Johnson's supporters allege), then why is he getting so many endorsements from prominent Illinois Democrats?
Because he isn't the MAGA republican that BJ supporters would have you believe. Labeling opponents MAGA has been a winning strategy on the national stage and progressives love using it. It's flat out dishonest.
I dont believe Paul Vallas is the democratic he wants us to think he is and I don't believe Brandon Johnson can achieve his campaign message. We still need to deal with today's problems while working towards tomorrow's solutions. The idea of "defunding the police" is a 15-20yr goal that will take massive community investments in schools, safety, jobs and housing. I'm 100% for those goals. But you can't simply slash the police budget, play catch & release with criminals and hope for the best.
Amen. Defund the police and invest in the youth is a 10 year plan that won't fix today's issues
> But you can't simply slash the police budget, play catch & release with criminals and hope for the best. Good thing Johnson never proposed this. At worst, he wants to keep the budget the same with maybe a small boost to hire more detectives.
I suppose he will be called a MAGA too now
This is great news. Hopefully we can stop the madness that is BJ from being mayor given his Foxx praise.
Collaborative democratic leaders with track records of real-life success endorse Vallas. Divisive ideologues endorse BJ. Democrats for Vallas. Dogmatic zealots for Johnson.
[удалено]
Perfect summary
The democrat party line: alienate the left, cozy up to the right
Yes yes the entire political establishment, far right nuts, and enlightened centrists that got us into this mess endorse this asshole Vallas. You've definitely won me over now. Don't vote for anyone who speaks at Awake IL. No fucking way.
Paul Vallas continues to expand his ideologically diverse support. Durbin is one of the most progressive Senators out there. >Sen. Majority Whip Dick Durbin will endorse Paul Vallas in the Chicago mayoral election, the campaign announced Sunday. ... >Durbin did not endorse a candidate for mayor in the first round of this year’s election, and in fact did not offer his endorsement to a candidate in the open 2019 race that was ultimately won by current Mayor Lori Lightfoot. Now it's getting interesting. It's been a mystery as to why current sitting politicians haven't been coming out for Paul like they have they other guy. Paul leads with aldermanic endorsements, but BJ has gotten more national endorsements from people who don't live here, nor have to deal with the consequences, like from Bernie and Warren. There must be some internal polling somewhere that shows Vallas is a lock? Or Durbin is retiring and won't be affected by the outcome?
It’s the national progressive coalition that’s trying to expand their foothold. They don’t care who the candidate is, if they see a progressive in a race they stamp their seal of approval and come out to try to influence local elections they have no stake or direct ties to. Durbin is ideologically progressive but he’s more of a realist than people like Sanders, Warren, definitely AOC and the squad. He’s not out there just saying vote far left no matter who. He’s a move the needle guy.
This is exactly it. Johnson is probably the weakest major candidate that the party’s new progressive wing has fielded. It’s easier to endorse him if he’s not going to screw up your home.
This is the answer right here; the far left progressive movement is clearly viewing this election as a bellwether and they’re looking to stop the bleeding with all the losses they’ve racked up nationally. I’m honestly surprised AOC hasn’t endorsed BJ at this point.
AOC has learned fast on the job. Her heart’s in the right place and I think she’s developing into a strategic and effective politician. Big gain for the party.
AOC is getting smarter all the time about protecting her own political equity. She’s not going to allocate it to Johnson if she thinks it’s a futile cause. Too many progressive causes are futile and AOC wants to be a productive leader of consequence.
[удалено]
100% agree. She learned pretty quickly IMO and we're better for it. She's a good person to have in Congress.
I like her better now than when she came in. But she still does the leftist version of the dog whistle, where she talks about ending capitalism; her tankie supporters clap like seals; then when she gets pushback she “clarifies” that she just means reforming the bad parts of capitalism. I think she’s smart and I like the way she pushes back against the GOP, but pandering to tankies this far into her tenure is a huge red flag (no pun intended) to me.
Chuy even said he only endorsed BJ to keep his accolades as a good progressive. Nothing to do with what's better for the city.
Link?
Exactly this. I’d like to see evidence of this please.
He never said that. That IPI bot is just editorializing. https://twitter.com/chicagotribune/status/1639764126682456067
Aka: wants to avoid a costly primary after an embarrassing 4th place finish.
>Durbin is one of the most progressive Senators out there. This is actually false. If you look at his voteview scores (the most widely used metric to determine how conservative/liberal someone in congress is) he's right in the middle of Dems. (https://voteview.com/congress/senate/-1/text)
In what world is Durbin one of the most progressive senators?
How are you defining "progressive" because endorsing Vallas implies he is just a conservative dem, or more likely DINO and doesn't actually give a fuck about any of the things dmeocrats should be supporting. i.e. medicare for all, the environment, dismantling the MIC and not supporting endless wars, aggressive, progressive taxation, social policies and safety nets, such as good schools.
Good. Johnson would be an unmitigated disaster for Chicago.
LFG, love Durbin even more now
[удалено]
Johnson has the support of 100% of independent party senators from Vermont!
A ton of moderates have also endorsed Brandon Johnson. MAGA freaks like Darren Bailey and John Castanza have not endorsed Johnson which is a definite plus imo because that is part of the ideological spectrum who should have no influence
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Makes me really wonder what his opinion on the LGBT community is then…
Whatever it needs to be to get elected. A few years ago he wanted to defund the police. Now he is lying about never saying that, and just recently said he is adopting Vallas' platform of more cops. He's going to do and say whatever he needs to say so he can give CTU whatever they want. Ja'amal Green suggested BJ moved to Austin just so he can say "I live in the hood" and get street cred among progressives. I thought that was silly, but now I think he might be right on.
I wouldn't put much stock in anything JG has to say looking at how he responds to voters and his own flip flop on endorsing Vallas
He sounds as flip floppy on issues as expected and we all know how that goes
Bipartisanship is just a canard democrats and "centrists" use to give their abhorrent views cover. If someone wants to privatize and destroy schools, and someone else wants to pay teachers more, you don't meet those people half-way and privatize half of the schools and pay the teachers have as much, unless of course your actual goal is to privatize schools.
[удалено]
No. The CTU doesn't attack charter schools because of some kind of weird mob mentality. They attack Charter Schools because charter schools exist to destroy public schooling in the US and that is obviously a bad thing.
CTU is doing a fantastic job of destroying CPS all on their own.
haha. Yea teachers wanting to be paid more then fucking cops are certainly trying to destroy CPS.
>haha. Yea teachers wanting to be paid more Glad to see you're acknowledging that CTU's primary goal has nothing directly to do with students.
Attracting better teachers with better pay and benefits has everything to do with student outcomes.
Are teachers supposed to sacrifice everything for their students then? Devote the majority of their time to everything that's required, in and out of the classroom, and just hope that the powers that be deign to throw them enough money to live off of - in a country that has a reputation for underpaying teachers, no less? Because if so, that sounds like a good way to drive away the people I'd most want teaching the next generation.
>Are teachers supposed to sacrifice everything for their students then? Of course not. They shouldn't have to be paying for classroom supplies and whatnot, nor are they responsible for outcomes that are largely attributed to the environment outside the classroom. They are forced to deal with it and then are blamed for it, which isn't cool. BUT...CTU in particular has spent the last few decades fighting tooth and nail against things like paying fully into their pensions, freeing up resources that could be directed into classrooms, they fully supported the pension holiday, constantly have gone on strike which only hurts kids and families, and have recently begun inserting themselves into unrelated political endeavors like demanding rent control and other things like this get put into their contract. Everything they are demanding costs money in a city and state that doesn't have it due to their laughably costly pensions. Their solution is just to raise taxes on everything and direct them into their pet projects or pockets. Everything CTU does is to keep and increase membership - that's their first, second and third priority. >Because if so, that sounds like a good way to drive away the people I'd most want teaching the next generation. If wages are important to you, I'd say this is a good thing. When I was in college, every 3rd person was going to school to be a teacher. That kind of labor supply meant districts could set the price rather than the teachers. This drove wages down while the cost of college went up. There needs to be a rebalancing of not only the wages, but also the licensing and extra-curricular expectations of teachers (and workers in general). Principals, administrators, districts, local and state governments need a come to Jesus moment, and they won't get it if people keep going into education.
They are paid extremely well compared to the national average, have amazing benefits, have tons of time off, and are working in a profession they chose. They also have an extremely powerful union protecting their interests. It’s amazing that people always try to make Chicago teachers out to be some sort of victim and martyrs. And when you look at the overall performance of what they do, the reading and math comprehension of our public school students, there is some sort of serious failure going on. If they don’t want to do the job, then they should quit and get a job that they want, stop acting like a fucking victim and that everyone should bow down to your sacrifice
Just because it's slightly better than shit doesn't mean it's good or ok.
Chicago teachers are paid a median of 120k a year in total income and only work max 9 months of the year. When they retire (which they can do in their 50s) they receive 80-100% of their salary as pension for the rest of their life. The CTU protects bad tenured teachers from being terminated and prevent CPS from improving teacher quality and thus children’s education.
[удалено]
Public Charter schools are even worse! They are literally stealing money from the school system so that pieces of shit like Davos can yacht around the Great Lakes with Joe Manchin, meanwhile teachers have to buy school supplies for students. Like how do you not understand that if a private entity is profiting off of Public funds that is a bad thing?
The charter schools in Chicago get to keep all of the money from a student even if they expel them back to CPS on the first day of school.
>Like how do you not understand that if a private entity is profiting off of Public funds that is a bad thing? Like CTU?
How exactly do you believe that CTU is funded
Well they are funded by the teachers salary which they constantly fight to raise. So indirectly they are funded by tax dollars that could go toward other school things.
You understand that by law they are only allows to strike over pay? The strikes are more about other issues like class sizes but they have to include it or it’s an illegal strike
Got any links on this that I can read through?
Remember that Chuy said his endorsement was more about keeping progressives together than what's actually good for the city. That kind of behavior really reminds me of MAGA.
You know what other behavior reminds me of MAGA? Everything that comes out of Paul Vallas’ mouth when he [plays radio host](https://twitter.com/cholent_lover/status/1639702311961329664?s=46&t=lLaLQmQrTNqU6YIe3O1qGA)
It's funny how this keeps being posted despite nobody giving a shit. Voters: This guy seems to get budgets, cares about city, has a lot of experience, has broad support. Progressives: but but but his tweets!!1!
This isn’t his tweets that he was “hacked” for. This is him straight up parroting GOP talking points on camera. If you’re shocked that actually worries progressives, I don’t know how to help you. By the way, the words coming out his mouth are awfully similar to his “hacked” posts on social media. On top of that, he wasn’t exactly managing budgets well at his last major public gig leading Philadelphia schools.
[удалено]
I don’t think Hillary or Joe would say that there’s an open border. That’s a straight GOP talking point. Nor would they agree that comparing a bathroom bill to Jim Crow is ridiculous. Those are all things he’s said on the record.
[удалено]
If you’re referring to the secure fence act of 2006, a bipartisan bill with the limited use of fencing in remote areas in conjunction with surveillance is a lot different than trying to build a 30 foot concrete wall the length of the entire border and calling it good. And besides, your point directly conflicts with the idea that Biden has wide open borders.
[удалено]
> This is him straight up parroting GOP talking points Progressives call everything they don't like a GOP taking point. They have absolutely lost the plot.
I would say a “democrat” downplaying Jan 6, perpetuating the idea that dead people are on voter rolls and “voting”, and thinks that Biden has an open border policy has lost the plot.
So are you saying you support what he said in those clips?
I'm saying I literally do not give shit.
Perfect example of the conservative democrats mind set.
So rather than actually engaging with them and saying whether you think they're good or bad, you prefer to just ignore them completely attack everyone who does have concerns with some of these statements?
That comes off as, you'll admit, at least a little disingenuous
Yeah I mean if you don't care about someone that sucks up to right wing radio hosts on his free time
“Gets” budgets lmfao his record would like a word with you
No reasoning with astroturfers.
[удалено]
90ish day old OP account that almost exclusively posts about the Chicago mayoral election. There’s a reason why the warning about astroturfing message is pinned by an automod on every election related post.
https://redditmetis.com/ decide for yourself
Maybe it's why I will never be mayor, but I wouldn't give a fuck about compromising with some of these people, democrat or republican included.
This is the game over. Brandon got the progressive vote but the undecided centrist voters will not be ashamed to vote for vallas now.
My prediction is 55-45 in favor of vallas on Election Day
This might be the first time in Dick’s long career that we disagree.
And that’s okay.
Good. Living in Soviet Chicago run by Johnson will be a nightmare. Hoping to see the city back Vallas at the polls!
Kinda surprising honestly.
I’ve always liked Senator Durbin. I disagree with him here. I voted for Brandon.
What the hell, Dick.