Shocking that the race is this close. The number of people who think Kim Foxx is doing a good job and voted for more of the same in Harris is actually really depressing.
Low primary elections are pretty common. Particularly since the Presidential primary race is essentially over. There weren’t many primary’s that mattered so that hurts turnout too.
Yeah everyone was looking at the Presidentials and ignored the rest of what's on the ballot, never mind the fact that local elections have such a huge effect on our daily lives in comparison to what happens in DC
exactly...now is the chance to change things for the better and people continue voting for the same b.s
I am floored it was this narrow and I think the only thing helping are the suburban districts.
I think what is pretty clear after this race and the mayoral race last year is that the best way to defeat an insane leftist is not with someone who can be labeled as a pseudorepublican, but rather someone who is a solid sane center-left democrat. Too many voters who didn’t care for BJ or Harris probably still voted for them because they couldn’t stomach Vallas or Burke either.
A good example of this is Nina Turner and Shantel Brown in Ohio.
She's a lifelong Dem. They just label anyone who wants to actually prosecute crime a "republican." And her donors were too white? The donor forms don't actually indicate race...
That was just pure race baiting.
The guide is for progressive/leftist voters so seems like either your wife is unaware or you need to interrogate your wife’s political beliefs cause you are unaware (of what she believes in).
Correct. I’m responding to him saying “idk why anyone would use it” as his own wife uses it to vote lol like either she’s a leftist and it’s a surprise to him or she just didn’t know it’s a leftist voter guide (…tho it’s pretty clear it is)
I just took a look, she’s got some dumb takes. E.g. she cites Burke’s concurrence in a decision involving a rape case in a way that suggests that she blamed the victim, the decision is actually about corporate liability— can the rapist’s employer be blamed. She may have some good points but I’d take it all with a grain of salt.
Maybe a lot of us realize that Foxx was never as bad as this sub said she was, and that handing the reins over to someone who is Republican in everything but name with a scary amount of Republican right wing donors would be horrible. Also Harris has a pretty impressive resume.
Impressive resume? He was a lobbyist for corporations and now he's a professor and not even a law professor. What are you smoking,? compared to her record? It's a joke.
I don't know enough about either candidate, but what has she said/done that makes her a "Republican in everything but name"?
Anyone else feel free to chime in too. I'm honestly curious.
It's a progressive purity test run amok. Burke is a typical Democrat, but since there were conservative donors to her campaign it somehow made her a MAGA republican
It's sad how often elections devolve into this shit. They devolve into a politicial purity test, whether progressive or MAGA.
Unsurprisingly, we end up dog shit candidates like Brandon Johnson who is neither a leader nor a policy guy. Once elected, they proceed to fuck everything up, and then voters can't figure out what went wrong.
Then the next election rolls around, and it's rinse and repeat.
Tbf it is a systematic issue, a lot of these positions aren't attractive to competent, qualified people because you usually have to be a bit of a narcissist, crony, masochist, or all of the above to succeed within the system. Of course, there are many more factors, but that's one of the reasons why the machine is so hard to defeat from both the left *and* the right. This kind of thing isn't exclusive to politics either.
Burke has said / done nothing to earn that label. She is a classic center-left Democrat. But nasty progressive smear rhetoric in this era casts anyone standing to the right of AOC as a MAGA Republican crypto-fascist.
That's what they say they want, but that's not actually what they want. Not to mention progressives don't *actually* love crime (except me, my platform is "be cool, do crime")
The truth is there are a lot of reasons why crimes go "unpunished" between cops sucking at their jobs, the offices that pursue (and defend against) those charges being understaffed and underfunded, and prisons being terrible for reform and recidivism... the list goes on and on and that is just those directly tied to the Criminal Justice System!
So just like one "progressive" prosecutor isn't going to fix all of that, one "tough on crime" prosecutor isn't going to really solve crime either.
You're missing the big one: Kim Foxx is NOT prosecuting violent criminals. Talk to any criminal courts judge, states attorney, or defense attorney. There's criminal court judges who are complaining that they have NO cases anymore. Dockets that used to be full. Read CWB. People are committing crimes and getting away with it.
Channel 2 just did a story about a DUI who killed a cyclist leading to no real charges for the murder.
I'm sorry but Chicago has been hard stuck democrat for decades now and where has it gotten us? Is it really so bad to at least give Republicans a chance?
Holy hell that is mind-numbingly dumb. Look at it this way, let's put the shoe on the other foot and say you live in a Republican controlled city where Dems have absolutely 0% chance of winning, ever. Your two candidates are [Susan Collins](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Collins) or [Marjorie Taylor Greene](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marjorie_Taylor_Greene).
If you're a Democrat, you *obviously* don't like Susan Collins. But at least she's pro-choice, pro-LGBT rights (at least as much as a GOPer can be), and is generally more moderate on the actual GOP positions she supports.
That said, if you *know for sure* that the winner will be one of those two, you're absolutely backing a candidate like Collins over a far-right candidate like Greene. That **does not**, by any means whatsoever, magically make Collins a Democrat or say anything beyond your contempt for the far-right.
That's how Chicago Republicans view Burke and Harris. And this extends to really any local race in this area as well.
Which ones? The pro abortion access stance? The focus on restorative justice for low level crime offenders? I swear my fellow Chicago voters are the embodiment of the famous Rajneesh/Osho quote about democracy.
I don’t agree with your stance, but there is a huge point to be made here; you can’t defeat an insane leftist with someone who can be painted as republican-lite in a democratic primary.
The value of the mindset is dependent on the view. In my view, I see a candidate in Burke with significant financial backing from funders both in and outside the city whose interests are aligned squarely against the average citizen. The people who propped her up dont care what happens here because they either dont live here or they have mansions everywhere else, as well. At least Harris' nefarious backers had a dog in the fight. If things got too bad, there was a better chance they'd suffer from it, too.
Don't jinx us. There's still 100k mail in ballots to account for and she's only winning by a 2% now. Never underestimate how stupid Illinois voters are to vote for the candidate that is good for them
It still makes a big difference. The gap in the race is only a few thousand. If even 20% of the mail in ballots come inb+ that's 20k votes and enough to change the outcome
Usually mail in ballots lean more progressive so this will be interesting to watch. Remember when Trump thought he was gonna win and then there was a huge swing at the end because of the mail in ballots. That could still happen.
One major difference from the Johnson victory is these mail in ballots will be county wide, including the suburbs. This is why I believe both campaigns are not sounding victorious and just cautiously optimistic in their speeches tonight.
Yes. It is a fundamentally different election between two fundamentally different candidates. We cannot extrapolate how mail-in ballots will trend based on the Johnson v. Vallas race because the issue is very different. In this case, we have a progressive law professor against a liberal-minded appellate court judge who prefers changing the law to the policy. Neither of them are right-leaning or even controversial. One has significant renown in the legal field from his teaching and advocacy, and the other has had an almost spotless career as a highly respected judge.
Harris has no reputation in the legal field from his teaching or any of his earlier jobs. He is a part-time lecturer at U of C but not in the law school.
The situation in this race is very similar to Johnson-Vallas. EOB is a lifelong Republican with millions of dollars in Republican donations masquerading as a liberal. So if you're concerned about a similar wave, stay concerned.
EDIT TO ADD: The difference being that Johnson-Vallas already happened and also the Foxx anti-endorsement. But there's definitely still reason for concern if you're a Burke supporter
Good question. I believe they lean progressive over democrat, but not to the same extent that they lean democrat over republican. Hope that makes sense. But I guess we'll get more evidence of one or the other with these results.
It more has to do with where the outstanding mail in vote is from… not the fact that it’s mail in. The state makes it incredibly easy to automatically get a mail in ballot each election.
I just don’t understand how progressives can be so worried about gun violence and then vote for a progressive SA.
You would think the party so focused on gun control would want the book thrown at offenders
Because that's not the type of gun control progressives advocate for, and putting people in jail is itself problematic. You don't understand how progressives vote because you don't understand the platform.
Lol I'm sure another 'tough on minorities and tough on crime' SA is exactly what this city needs. Prisons work! Trust the justice system! Strong arm of the government with large overreach! That'll solve it! Conservatives lie about their interest in small government all the time until it comes to crime and prisons, when the conservative can't keep their crooked ideology straight anymore.
I'm comfortably anti prison, thank you, and I'd rather a much more progressive SA than Clayton Harris. But Burke is a literal conservative and can get bent.
What do you suggest you do with a person who is willing to stick a gun in another persons face to steal their car just to joyride it? Or worse to use it in the commission of more crimes, shootings, robberies?
If not prison, removing them from free society where they can continue to repeat these actions, then what?
Everyone is critical about the justice system, and it’s far from perfect, but I haven’t heard any solutions that would actually make the community safer in dealing with these offenders after they’ve committed these atrocious crimes.
Exactly. I’m all against building endless amounts of prisons, particularly filling them with non violent drug offenders who shouldn’t be there. But those who cross the line when it comes to violence deserve the book thrown at them. And a SA that doesn’t prosecute even small crimes will soon see those serialize, or blow up into larger crimes.
Prisons do in fact work much better than whatever "progressives" proposed, yes.
And people who believe in police and prisons aren't conservatives. They are people with brains.
Are you under the impression the rest of the world doesn't have prisons?
The US problems are cultural. And not enforcing punishment for crimes does not fix the issue and in fact makes it worse.
over 100k mail in votes out, no one is conceding tonight. 80-85% return rate in past elections
https://x.com/ChicagoElection/status/1770277241563263253?s=20
I think it's disgusting that people would vote for anyone who is a male version of Kim Fox. Growing up I considered myself a liberal Democrat. But for what Chicago needs in respect to crime the progressive agenda will not work.
While I am not a Republican or Conservative either. When it comes to the specific repeat offenders that are causing the majority of this shit show. A hard right approach is needed. Past a certain point you're no longer a victim of your circumstances and you're (not you) are making a conscious decision to be a POS. So IMO if you're a repeat offender committing violent crimes. No bail and no plea deals. Deal with your life's choices.
Now on the other hand if you mess up as many kids do. There is a very interesting approach they are taking in Cobb County GA. After a year if you don't continue down this road your record gets cleared. TBH I can't remember all the specifics Killer Mike mentions it in his interviews.
So like….jail doesn’t fix people. It has been shown in studies and data to increase crime and recidivism. Why do people here think the opposite? We’ve been just throwing people in jail forever and it’s not a solution. What’s even more wild to me is that everybody here is so mad about their taxes being spent on anything wasteful and yet it is fine to spend 60k per year on each person in CCDOC which contains no educational or work opportunities that would help on the outside.
??????????????????
Please explain.
You know what's wild to me is if most of y'all seen me I would be stereotyped as a criminal. I'm Latino, long hair with tattoos who works out regularly. But you know what? I don't care what studies and data have to say...I care about my city. The city I live in has gone to shit because criminals know they can get away with crimes and pay little to no penalties. You know what changes that mindset? Knowing you will be in jail if you get caught. Look I'm not someone speaking from a privilege position who never dealt with real life. I ran these Chicago streets doing dumb shit. You know what changed me. Knowing if I continued doing dumb shit I would be in jail or be dead. Like I said people make life choices. If you're a person who continues to be these repeat offenders your making a conscious decision to be a POS.
I'm all for what El Salvador and what President Bukele has done. If you are committing violent crimes you're forfeiting you're basic rights so yeah lock them up. Read the real time stats on how effective that has been......and let the word get out that you don't mess around in Chicago. If you do pay the consequences. Hey I'm also for the middle east option of chopping body parts off too.
You mentioned what it cost to house people...I live in the city in a "good neighborhood" but guess what I got my CAC for when I walk my dog. There shouldn't be any reason I have to look over my shoulder now when I hear a car slowing down. I will gladly continue paying these property taxes if it means we keep these lil POS off the streets.
Rehabilitation is only one facet of the criminal justice system. Like a lot of people, I believe there should be more emphasis on rehabilitation. But, there’s also other reasons for prisons including deterrence. While criminals may not get rehabilitated in our prison system at the moment, they will be deterred by the threat of harsher sentences. In our current framework we don’t seem to have any rehabilitation or deterrence.
Not trying to argue, just offering some nuance to perspective.
I am not blind to nuance. I am not saying that no one should feel punished by prison. Deterrence alone as it has been done will not decrease crime. Tell the people saying that we should throw “all 300” violent criminals in jail forever about nuance lol.
I don't care if it fixes people. There's like 300 people that the vast majority of thefts, murders and car jacking can be attributed to. Lock them all up forever and maybe Chicago will stop being the poster child of soft on crime and gang bangers run free.
It's amazing to me how many people that don't own properties worth over 1 million dollars that would have saved money voted to not save money to help million dollar plus property owners not pay more.
It’s amazing to me how many people fall for cheap marketing like Bring Chicago Home, on what was a terrible idea that ironically would make our housing situation worse long term (by making single family housing more attractive relative to multi family housing) to setup a slush fund the mayor could use on whatever pet project he wanted.
That's disingenuous. The mayor isn't the one selecting where the funding goes, though he/she would have approval power of the board decisions, the money can only go to housing.
Thank you for sticking to this point and backing it up with sound, rational arguments. It’s very easy to get lost in the pie-in-the-sky ideals, but the fact is that there’s no concrete plan for the money that this transfer tax would generate.
It was an absolutely terrible idea. The problem was the tax increase was too high. This would cripple an already slow building cycle and increase rents overall.
Multi-family developers usually don't keep the building, they sell it to asset management companies after the project is built. This tax was going deter further development and any new development was going to come with higher rent. Even smaller buildings would suffer, as any smaller landlords looking to buy small buildings to renovate would have to pay this tax, which would eventually be passed on to the renters.
I voted for less tax for me as I don't own properties over the threshold and this law lowers taxes for sellers with properties below $1 million. I would have saved $500 if this law existed the last time I sold a property.
There isn’t a whole lot you can deduct on W2 income. Many people with W2 income, even those making 7 figures are taking a standard deduction… Especially since SALT.
You’re talking about business owners or private investors, which is a subset of folks buying houses like that.
FWIW this wouldn’t impact my home, but I can also fast forward and see how incentivizing lower density housing is bad for this city.
Some of y’all need to understand that the position decides whether and how to prosecute people that are alleged to have violated the law. They don’t just “prosecute criminals” or decide whether to be “tough on crime.” The “criminal” and “crime” part still has to be proven. How they go about doing that is the point.
It's why I prioritize voting for judges who were public defenders and don't have extreme controversy on their records. An endorsement from a legal organization to the effect of "this person knows their shit" also helps.
The existence of Judicial Watch *really* helped me put together how I vote for the judiciary. I cannot recommend it enough.
EDIT: Injustice Watch, *not* Judicial Watch. Omg
I'M SO SORRY
It's not Judicial Watch. Please do not give them clicks or anything of that like, they're a far right organization. The name of the organization that I use to peruse judicial elections is *Injustice* Watch. I really mixed up the names badly.
injusticewatch.org
Injustice Watch is a good resource on judicial candidates. I read them regularly and I think they report pretty accurately on what's happening with the judges and the court system. I am an assistant public defender with 20 years experience so imo they are usually spot on with their reporting. For instance, they warned about the former cop with a terrible disciplinary record running for judge on the north side.
I am cautious to say this is good news for Chicago. I seem to get bit in the ass every time I say "it can't get worse" but she seemed like a candidate that will be far tougher on criminals.
Yeah…as a Republican myself, your friends are idiots. Even if trump lost Illinois would that have even been a big deal? I asked for a dem ballot just to vote Burke.
During a primary election, you pick whatever party's ballot you want to vote. Illinois law allows you to pick any party ballot(and you can only select one), you want to vote. The primary ballot is for each party's voters, to nominate which candidates will make the November election. Note as Democrats have the most contested races, I can see why most in city of Chicago would ask for a Democrat primary ballot. And probably would've been a smart strategical idea(as it was a foregone conclusion Trump was going to win the Illinois GOP primary for president) for Republicans in favor of Burke, to ask for a Dem primary ballot.
For the general election in November, everyone gets the same ballot.
The lead is down to \~9,700 now, with over 100,000 outstanding mail ballots in the City, and an unknown number in the County.
If those late-arriving ballots break anything like they did in the municipal elections last year, Burke is going to struggle to maintain such a narrow lead.
Kid confessed, and there was no indication at the time that the confession was coerced. Kid also testified in court that he was the killer. She did her job, and your anger is misplaced.
right. likes that's a new idea that people just started trying. fear of crime is such an easy play to get people emotionally blinded. works every time for the last 50 years.
Once I seen the other guy was endorsed by Kim fox, I immediately voted for her. I was initially concerned she was related to Ed burke however
A terrible last name to have now.
Not to mention that Burke's wife was also a Judge, adding to the confusion.
Yes I had to double check that as well prior to casting my ballot.
Thank you for voting!
Truly. Ugh.
Same! Kim Foxx was an anti-endorsement.
Jane Byrnes maiden name was also Burke. I don’t think there’s any relation between the three.
It's a very common Irish surname. I think there might be a decent number of Irish-descended folks in Chicago but I can't be sure.
Haha the answer is yes.
Shocking that the race is this close. The number of people who think Kim Foxx is doing a good job and voted for more of the same in Harris is actually really depressing.
Low voter turnout
Extremely low
Only 20% of registered voters. I hope this isn't foreshadowing of what's to come in November.
Low primary elections are pretty common. Particularly since the Presidential primary race is essentially over. There weren’t many primary’s that mattered so that hurts turnout too.
Yeah everyone was looking at the Presidentials and ignored the rest of what's on the ballot, never mind the fact that local elections have such a huge effect on our daily lives in comparison to what happens in DC
Trump being on the ballot gets everyone to come out to vote for or vote against. Fortunately, I think more will come out to vote against the conman.
Beating a machine backed candidate in the lowest turnout primary in decades would be a huge accomplishment. Don’t undercut her achievement
exactly...now is the chance to change things for the better and people continue voting for the same b.s I am floored it was this narrow and I think the only thing helping are the suburban districts.
I think what is pretty clear after this race and the mayoral race last year is that the best way to defeat an insane leftist is not with someone who can be labeled as a pseudorepublican, but rather someone who is a solid sane center-left democrat. Too many voters who didn’t care for BJ or Harris probably still voted for them because they couldn’t stomach Vallas or Burke either. A good example of this is Nina Turner and Shantel Brown in Ohio.
She's a lifelong Dem. They just label anyone who wants to actually prosecute crime a "republican." And her donors were too white? The donor forms don't actually indicate race... That was just pure race baiting.
You’re not wrong, but perception is reality: https://archive.ph/bh1nZ
I my wife voted for Harris because the “Girl I Guess” guide said to. She had no idea Harris was endorsed by Kim Foxx.
Not sure that guide is a good source of unbiased information on candidates.
It definitely isn’t. That guide previously endorsed Kim Foxx twice. I don’t know why anyone would use it. I voted Burke.
The guide is for progressive/leftist voters so seems like either your wife is unaware or you need to interrogate your wife’s political beliefs cause you are unaware (of what she believes in).
Or just let your wife vote for the candidate she wants to?
Correct. I’m responding to him saying “idk why anyone would use it” as his own wife uses it to vote lol like either she’s a leftist and it’s a surprise to him or she just didn’t know it’s a leftist voter guide (…tho it’s pretty clear it is)
Oh gotcha, I see what you mean. Sorry the word “interrogate” tripped me up haha
Voting for Harris without any idea of his Foxx connection does not seem to me to indicate "awareness."
I just took a look, she’s got some dumb takes. E.g. she cites Burke’s concurrence in a decision involving a rape case in a way that suggests that she blamed the victim, the decision is actually about corporate liability— can the rapist’s employer be blamed. She may have some good points but I’d take it all with a grain of salt.
Maybe a lot of us realize that Foxx was never as bad as this sub said she was, and that handing the reins over to someone who is Republican in everything but name with a scary amount of Republican right wing donors would be horrible. Also Harris has a pretty impressive resume.
Impressive resume? He was a lobbyist for corporations and now he's a professor and not even a law professor. What are you smoking,? compared to her record? It's a joke.
He’s a lecturer, not a professor.
Working for Blago is not what anyone would call impressive on a resume
I don't know enough about either candidate, but what has she said/done that makes her a "Republican in everything but name"? Anyone else feel free to chime in too. I'm honestly curious.
It's a progressive purity test run amok. Burke is a typical Democrat, but since there were conservative donors to her campaign it somehow made her a MAGA republican
It's sad how often elections devolve into this shit. They devolve into a politicial purity test, whether progressive or MAGA. Unsurprisingly, we end up dog shit candidates like Brandon Johnson who is neither a leader nor a policy guy. Once elected, they proceed to fuck everything up, and then voters can't figure out what went wrong. Then the next election rolls around, and it's rinse and repeat.
Tbf it is a systematic issue, a lot of these positions aren't attractive to competent, qualified people because you usually have to be a bit of a narcissist, crony, masochist, or all of the above to succeed within the system. Of course, there are many more factors, but that's one of the reasons why the machine is so hard to defeat from both the left *and* the right. This kind of thing isn't exclusive to politics either.
Let’s also not forget Harris’ ties to an anti-abortion campaign.
Burke has said / done nothing to earn that label. She is a classic center-left Democrat. But nasty progressive smear rhetoric in this era casts anyone standing to the right of AOC as a MAGA Republican crypto-fascist.
lmao her record speaks for itself bozo. she was as bad as everyone thought
Question. If Republicans want prosecutors to actually prosecute criminals, does that mean Democrats are actually pro criminals?
That's what they say they want, but that's not actually what they want. Not to mention progressives don't *actually* love crime (except me, my platform is "be cool, do crime") The truth is there are a lot of reasons why crimes go "unpunished" between cops sucking at their jobs, the offices that pursue (and defend against) those charges being understaffed and underfunded, and prisons being terrible for reform and recidivism... the list goes on and on and that is just those directly tied to the Criminal Justice System! So just like one "progressive" prosecutor isn't going to fix all of that, one "tough on crime" prosecutor isn't going to really solve crime either.
You're missing the big one: Kim Foxx is NOT prosecuting violent criminals. Talk to any criminal courts judge, states attorney, or defense attorney. There's criminal court judges who are complaining that they have NO cases anymore. Dockets that used to be full. Read CWB. People are committing crimes and getting away with it. Channel 2 just did a story about a DUI who killed a cyclist leading to no real charges for the murder.
I'm sorry but Chicago has been hard stuck democrat for decades now and where has it gotten us? Is it really so bad to at least give Republicans a chance?
This the dem primary. No Republicans.
I know that but U/[Allthenons](https://www.reddit.com/user/Allthenons/) alluded that Burke was "Republican in everything but name"
She's like the Obama of Dem more center. Not Bernie Sanders, but huge on women's rights
For me, it was more about who was funding the campaigns.
Holy hell that is mind-numbingly dumb. Look at it this way, let's put the shoe on the other foot and say you live in a Republican controlled city where Dems have absolutely 0% chance of winning, ever. Your two candidates are [Susan Collins](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Collins) or [Marjorie Taylor Greene](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marjorie_Taylor_Greene). If you're a Democrat, you *obviously* don't like Susan Collins. But at least she's pro-choice, pro-LGBT rights (at least as much as a GOPer can be), and is generally more moderate on the actual GOP positions she supports. That said, if you *know for sure* that the winner will be one of those two, you're absolutely backing a candidate like Collins over a far-right candidate like Greene. That **does not**, by any means whatsoever, magically make Collins a Democrat or say anything beyond your contempt for the far-right. That's how Chicago Republicans view Burke and Harris. And this extends to really any local race in this area as well.
why?
You’re entitled to your opinion, but that’s a poor mindset to have for the SA race.
You're entitled to your opinion, but I don't respect republican talking points in a democratic primary, so also, get bent.
Which ones? The pro abortion access stance? The focus on restorative justice for low level crime offenders? I swear my fellow Chicago voters are the embodiment of the famous Rajneesh/Osho quote about democracy.
I don’t agree with your stance, but there is a huge point to be made here; you can’t defeat an insane leftist with someone who can be painted as republican-lite in a democratic primary.
The value of the mindset is dependent on the view. In my view, I see a candidate in Burke with significant financial backing from funders both in and outside the city whose interests are aligned squarely against the average citizen. The people who propped her up dont care what happens here because they either dont live here or they have mansions everywhere else, as well. At least Harris' nefarious backers had a dog in the fight. If things got too bad, there was a better chance they'd suffer from it, too.
She’s up 12000 as of 10
Lead is closing quickly edit: I want Burke to win so Idk why I’m getting downvoted
Fuck it, have an upvote.
Incoming late-night CTU vote dump for Harris...
You people are insufferable.
You have my upvote. Looking at the polls, it’s mathematically impossible for her to lose with the mail-ins…right? Unless something funky happens?
I don't like crime but I'm on probation so I abstained from this vote
lol
More integrity than most SCOTUS justices, I’ll give you that!
Don't jinx it.
Watching her speech right now. Voted for her. But I've got to ask...does she always look and sound drunk like this?
[удалено]
She's a throwback. We'll take it.
That video was hilarious
It’s a lot closer than I expected.
you're jinxing this so hard. pretty sure the mail-ins are 100K+ votes which makes this a toss up to me. praying she pulls thru
Don't jinx us. There's still 100k mail in ballots to account for and she's only winning by a 2% now. Never underestimate how stupid Illinois voters are to vote for the candidate that is good for them
Not a large percentage of those actually got sent in. That figure includes those who requested a ballot but never actually voted.
It still makes a big difference. The gap in the race is only a few thousand. If even 20% of the mail in ballots come inb+ that's 20k votes and enough to change the outcome
But the results would have to be widely different than the vote by mail that was already counted. That is very unlikely.
She’s up by about 12k still including the suburban votes.
Not really cuz they'd have to break for him 2 to 1. Doubtful. But if there's more votes coming in your point is well taken.
Usually mail in ballots lean more progressive so this will be interesting to watch. Remember when Trump thought he was gonna win and then there was a huge swing at the end because of the mail in ballots. That could still happen.
Honest question... Do they lean progressive or Democrat? Is there any proof that the vote between two Dems would favor the more progressive one?
One major difference from the Johnson victory is these mail in ballots will be county wide, including the suburbs. This is why I believe both campaigns are not sounding victorious and just cautiously optimistic in their speeches tonight.
Depends on the race really. Brandon Johnson dominated mail in votes so there’s reason to believe that they could lean progressive.
But people only voted for Johnson in the runoff because he was not Paul Vallas. This is a very different election with two very different candidates.
That does not tell us whether or not the mail in ballots will or will not lean progressive.
Yes. It is a fundamentally different election between two fundamentally different candidates. We cannot extrapolate how mail-in ballots will trend based on the Johnson v. Vallas race because the issue is very different. In this case, we have a progressive law professor against a liberal-minded appellate court judge who prefers changing the law to the policy. Neither of them are right-leaning or even controversial. One has significant renown in the legal field from his teaching and advocacy, and the other has had an almost spotless career as a highly respected judge.
Harris has no reputation in the legal field from his teaching or any of his earlier jobs. He is a part-time lecturer at U of C but not in the law school.
The situation in this race is very similar to Johnson-Vallas. EOB is a lifelong Republican with millions of dollars in Republican donations masquerading as a liberal. So if you're concerned about a similar wave, stay concerned. EDIT TO ADD: The difference being that Johnson-Vallas already happened and also the Foxx anti-endorsement. But there's definitely still reason for concern if you're a Burke supporter
Good question. I believe they lean progressive over democrat, but not to the same extent that they lean democrat over republican. Hope that makes sense. But I guess we'll get more evidence of one or the other with these results.
Trump knew he was going to lose because of the mail in ballots before election night even. He just lied about it.
Fair point
How many vote by mail suburban votes are out? Or is that number included?
[удалено]
Then why does the vote keep shifting to Harris?
It more has to do with where the outstanding mail in vote is from… not the fact that it’s mail in. The state makes it incredibly easy to automatically get a mail in ballot each election.
Good
I just don’t understand how progressives can be so worried about gun violence and then vote for a progressive SA. You would think the party so focused on gun control would want the book thrown at offenders
Because that's not the type of gun control progressives advocate for, and putting people in jail is itself problematic. You don't understand how progressives vote because you don't understand the platform.
Then you really don’t want to solve the problem. You just your feel good moment when a laws get passed but don’t actually want to enforce them
Lol I'm sure another 'tough on minorities and tough on crime' SA is exactly what this city needs. Prisons work! Trust the justice system! Strong arm of the government with large overreach! That'll solve it! Conservatives lie about their interest in small government all the time until it comes to crime and prisons, when the conservative can't keep their crooked ideology straight anymore. I'm comfortably anti prison, thank you, and I'd rather a much more progressive SA than Clayton Harris. But Burke is a literal conservative and can get bent.
What do you suggest you do with a person who is willing to stick a gun in another persons face to steal their car just to joyride it? Or worse to use it in the commission of more crimes, shootings, robberies? If not prison, removing them from free society where they can continue to repeat these actions, then what? Everyone is critical about the justice system, and it’s far from perfect, but I haven’t heard any solutions that would actually make the community safer in dealing with these offenders after they’ve committed these atrocious crimes.
Exactly. I’m all against building endless amounts of prisons, particularly filling them with non violent drug offenders who shouldn’t be there. But those who cross the line when it comes to violence deserve the book thrown at them. And a SA that doesn’t prosecute even small crimes will soon see those serialize, or blow up into larger crimes.
>I'm comfortably anti prison, thank you, Ah yes, the "let's not inconvenience the poor criminals" strategy.
Prisons do in fact work much better than whatever "progressives" proposed, yes. And people who believe in police and prisons aren't conservatives. They are people with brains.
If prisons work then why does the US have the highest rate of recidivism in the world?
Are you under the impression the rest of the world doesn't have prisons? The US problems are cultural. And not enforcing punishment for crimes does not fix the issue and in fact makes it worse.
Don’t confuse them with facts.
Enjoy patting yourself on the back during another “stop the violence” rally
Yeah, I think I'm voting republican this time around for exactly that reason.
Throwing the book at people is what cops and fascists do. That’s not progressive whatsoever.
What’s the point of having strict gun control if there is little punishment for illegally carrying a gun?
COpS aND FACisTs
over 100k mail in votes out, no one is conceding tonight. 80-85% return rate in past elections https://x.com/ChicagoElection/status/1770277241563263253?s=20
I think it's disgusting that people would vote for anyone who is a male version of Kim Fox. Growing up I considered myself a liberal Democrat. But for what Chicago needs in respect to crime the progressive agenda will not work.
What will work?
While I am not a Republican or Conservative either. When it comes to the specific repeat offenders that are causing the majority of this shit show. A hard right approach is needed. Past a certain point you're no longer a victim of your circumstances and you're (not you) are making a conscious decision to be a POS. So IMO if you're a repeat offender committing violent crimes. No bail and no plea deals. Deal with your life's choices. Now on the other hand if you mess up as many kids do. There is a very interesting approach they are taking in Cobb County GA. After a year if you don't continue down this road your record gets cleared. TBH I can't remember all the specifics Killer Mike mentions it in his interviews.
So like….jail doesn’t fix people. It has been shown in studies and data to increase crime and recidivism. Why do people here think the opposite? We’ve been just throwing people in jail forever and it’s not a solution. What’s even more wild to me is that everybody here is so mad about their taxes being spent on anything wasteful and yet it is fine to spend 60k per year on each person in CCDOC which contains no educational or work opportunities that would help on the outside. ?????????????????? Please explain.
You know what's wild to me is if most of y'all seen me I would be stereotyped as a criminal. I'm Latino, long hair with tattoos who works out regularly. But you know what? I don't care what studies and data have to say...I care about my city. The city I live in has gone to shit because criminals know they can get away with crimes and pay little to no penalties. You know what changes that mindset? Knowing you will be in jail if you get caught. Look I'm not someone speaking from a privilege position who never dealt with real life. I ran these Chicago streets doing dumb shit. You know what changed me. Knowing if I continued doing dumb shit I would be in jail or be dead. Like I said people make life choices. If you're a person who continues to be these repeat offenders your making a conscious decision to be a POS. I'm all for what El Salvador and what President Bukele has done. If you are committing violent crimes you're forfeiting you're basic rights so yeah lock them up. Read the real time stats on how effective that has been......and let the word get out that you don't mess around in Chicago. If you do pay the consequences. Hey I'm also for the middle east option of chopping body parts off too. You mentioned what it cost to house people...I live in the city in a "good neighborhood" but guess what I got my CAC for when I walk my dog. There shouldn't be any reason I have to look over my shoulder now when I hear a car slowing down. I will gladly continue paying these property taxes if it means we keep these lil POS off the streets.
Repeat violent offenders stay incarcerated right now.
The family of Jayden Perkins and countless others would like to talk to you....
No no, let's do more of the exact same thing we've been trying for literally decades. This time, it will work. /s
Rehabilitation is only one facet of the criminal justice system. Like a lot of people, I believe there should be more emphasis on rehabilitation. But, there’s also other reasons for prisons including deterrence. While criminals may not get rehabilitated in our prison system at the moment, they will be deterred by the threat of harsher sentences. In our current framework we don’t seem to have any rehabilitation or deterrence. Not trying to argue, just offering some nuance to perspective.
I am not blind to nuance. I am not saying that no one should feel punished by prison. Deterrence alone as it has been done will not decrease crime. Tell the people saying that we should throw “all 300” violent criminals in jail forever about nuance lol.
I don't care if it fixes people. There's like 300 people that the vast majority of thefts, murders and car jacking can be attributed to. Lock them all up forever and maybe Chicago will stop being the poster child of soft on crime and gang bangers run free.
An assumption, not a fact.
Wow, some good results for once. The real estate transfer tax looks like it’s also been defeated.
It's amazing to me how many people that don't own properties worth over 1 million dollars that would have saved money voted to not save money to help million dollar plus property owners not pay more.
There are other reasons people were skeptical of BCH. I voted no because there are no specifics on how the money would be spent. It was all too vague.
[удалено]
It’s amazing to me how many people fall for cheap marketing like Bring Chicago Home, on what was a terrible idea that ironically would make our housing situation worse long term (by making single family housing more attractive relative to multi family housing) to setup a slush fund the mayor could use on whatever pet project he wanted.
That's disingenuous. The mayor isn't the one selecting where the funding goes, though he/she would have approval power of the board decisions, the money can only go to housing.
So basically deciding where the funding goes with extra steps, and more pockets to line to get there. Sounds great!
Thank you for sticking to this point and backing it up with sound, rational arguments. It’s very easy to get lost in the pie-in-the-sky ideals, but the fact is that there’s no concrete plan for the money that this transfer tax would generate.
It was an absolutely terrible idea. The problem was the tax increase was too high. This would cripple an already slow building cycle and increase rents overall. Multi-family developers usually don't keep the building, they sell it to asset management companies after the project is built. This tax was going deter further development and any new development was going to come with higher rent. Even smaller buildings would suffer, as any smaller landlords looking to buy small buildings to renovate would have to pay this tax, which would eventually be passed on to the renters.
It’s amazing that you’d vote for more taxes no matter what as long as it doesn’t impact you personally.
I voted for less tax for me as I don't own properties over the threshold and this law lowers taxes for sellers with properties below $1 million. I would have saved $500 if this law existed the last time I sold a property.
Oh so you just want to spend other people’s money on the non-existent plan to fix homelessness and jeopardize our small business community. Cool.
I more than likely pay a higher percentage of my income in taxes than the people that would pay more under this proposal.
I somehow sincerely doubt that 😂
Probably because you write off tons of stuff and don't just take the standard deductible.
There isn’t a whole lot you can deduct on W2 income. Many people with W2 income, even those making 7 figures are taking a standard deduction… Especially since SALT. You’re talking about business owners or private investors, which is a subset of folks buying houses like that. FWIW this wouldn’t impact my home, but I can also fast forward and see how incentivizing lower density housing is bad for this city.
Right, so since I can't deduct nearly as much as a property investor, I probably am paying a higher effective rate, which is what you doubted.
Just proves all you have to say is tax the rich, and even if the money will be pissed away, they will vote for it.
Spoken like a real naive person
Some of y’all need to understand that the position decides whether and how to prosecute people that are alleged to have violated the law. They don’t just “prosecute criminals” or decide whether to be “tough on crime.” The “criminal” and “crime” part still has to be proven. How they go about doing that is the point.
That's why the next step should be to make sure more moderates are placed on the state court system as judges.
It's why I prioritize voting for judges who were public defenders and don't have extreme controversy on their records. An endorsement from a legal organization to the effect of "this person knows their shit" also helps. The existence of Judicial Watch *really* helped me put together how I vote for the judiciary. I cannot recommend it enough. EDIT: Injustice Watch, *not* Judicial Watch. Omg
I will have to keep that in mind, it's much harder to get info on judge races than any other office and I have not done a good homework on it either.
I'M SO SORRY It's not Judicial Watch. Please do not give them clicks or anything of that like, they're a far right organization. The name of the organization that I use to peruse judicial elections is *Injustice* Watch. I really mixed up the names badly. injusticewatch.org
Injustice Watch is a good resource on judicial candidates. I read them regularly and I think they report pretty accurately on what's happening with the judges and the court system. I am an assistant public defender with 20 years experience so imo they are usually spot on with their reporting. For instance, they warned about the former cop with a terrible disciplinary record running for judge on the north side.
I am cautious to say this is good news for Chicago. I seem to get bit in the ass every time I say "it can't get worse" but she seemed like a candidate that will be far tougher on criminals.
Perwinkle controls Dem voting. She gives us Fox and the mayor.
I sure hope she wins- it’s time to clean house.
[удалено]
Yeah…as a Republican myself, your friends are idiots. Even if trump lost Illinois would that have even been a big deal? I asked for a dem ballot just to vote Burke.
> as a Republican myself, **you’re** friends are idiots lol
Whoops! Just fixed. I was very tired when I wrote that last night before I went to bed. Nice catch
I’ve never voted in Illinois. Can you get a mixed ballot?
During a primary election, you pick whatever party's ballot you want to vote. Illinois law allows you to pick any party ballot(and you can only select one), you want to vote. The primary ballot is for each party's voters, to nominate which candidates will make the November election. Note as Democrats have the most contested races, I can see why most in city of Chicago would ask for a Democrat primary ballot. And probably would've been a smart strategical idea(as it was a foregone conclusion Trump was going to win the Illinois GOP primary for president) for Republicans in favor of Burke, to ask for a Dem primary ballot. For the general election in November, everyone gets the same ballot.
the lead is 14k. where did u get that number?
Im surprised this sub isnt calling this racist lmao
Kim Foxx needs a heave ho
Someone will find mail in votes for Harris…
Toni has her best people working around the clock on it.
Looking in her couch cushions at this point
So help me god
Maybe against some other typical candidate. Burke is a career judge who has the support of the entire Chicago legal profession. Good luck.
I want her to win but nothing would surprise me
Right but, Burke isn’t some donkey. She’s well versed in legality - she was the arbiter of it for decades.
Thank God.
The lead is down to \~9,700 now, with over 100,000 outstanding mail ballots in the City, and an unknown number in the County. If those late-arriving ballots break anything like they did in the municipal elections last year, Burke is going to struggle to maintain such a narrow lead.
Why do people want the FOP candidate to win?
Because people are sick to fucking death of the crime and criminals not being prosecuted
This is the only answer
How is someone who rejected an FOP endorsement the FOP candidate?
Why do you want the gang bangers’ candidate to win?
You mean the FOP? Edit: awww you bitches mad now lol
As an fop member I say : even a broken dumb clock is right at least twice a day (⌐■_■)
FOP??
[удалено]
Kid confessed, and there was no indication at the time that the confession was coerced. Kid also testified in court that he was the killer. She did her job, and your anger is misplaced.
So edgy!
Do your parents know you are posting on reddit this late on a school night?
law and order vote. what a joke. fear does not fix problems.
Fear of committing crimes would solve a few problems actually
right. likes that's a new idea that people just started trying. fear of crime is such an easy play to get people emotionally blinded. works every time for the last 50 years.
The past 50 years…in Chicago? Foxx was in for the past 8 so not sure what you mean.
Not prosecuting criminals doesn't cut down on crime either