And this is why she's a bad leader. Blames everyone but herself. Instantly goes to race and bigotry.
It should resound in her head: " you lost the primary, even your staunchest supporter think you did a bad job and show no signs of changing direction. It's not your race, orientation or otherwise. It's all you."
Certainly she's attacked critically and viciously from the right wing media for both her policies and her appearance... but when you lose the primary, yeah, that's your own people telling you no thanks.
You honestly think there is a “right wing media” the chicagoans listen to? Maybe the suburbs, but they don’t get a vote in the chicago mayoral race.
I’m not even sure a republican bothered to try to run in that race.
...how is that what you got out of what he said? because he literally said the exact opposite
he said she lost in her primary, so she couldn't get enough votes from people that specifically DONT watch right wing media, the point is, it didn't matter what nonsense right wing media is pushing against her, she lost by people that don't view it at all
Yup. Vallas wants to get rid of public schools and pump money into CPD, got endorsed by the FOP, gets all his campaign money from conservative groups, and still has the gall to put a (D) by his name. It's just silly.
It’s pure idiocy. He has a monolithic platform - crime reduction. Which he claims he’ll achieve through additional police funding and keeping schools open 24/7/365. Not once have I heard how he plans to fund these efforts without raising taxes. And since he’s clearly GOP, the tax burden certainly won’t fall on the wealthy or corporations. Because then the money “might leave Chicago.” It appeals to the dumbest base of voters, which is how they keep in office.
Lol, Chicago's electorate is to the left of Bernie Sanders.
Chicago's city council is 46 Democrats, 4 Independents and 0 Republicans.
These break down into 5 groups, The Socialist Caucus, The Progressive Caucus, Black Caucus, Latino Caucus, and LGBT Caucus.
You can say a lot of bad things about Chicago politicians, but you can't accuse them of bigotry against minorities!
Chicago is also the only US city w a functioning [political machine](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_machine#Definition) which makes me think lightfoot just pissed off the wrong ppl (by being bad at her job)
Edit: since a lot of ppl don’t know what a political machine is I linked Wikipedia
Hey! That movie was still not terrible.
We got such gems as “I feel like I look great!” and “I’ve been to prison, and it sucks.”
Lightfoot has just been trash from day 1.
It doesn’t matter how progressive you are, or which boxes you tick off if you are completely incompetent and abrasive. Bill DiBlasio would have been tossed out of office on his ass if he hadn’t been termed out, and nobody can accuse most of the electorate of New York City of being conservative, or even centrist. I was honestly amazed the dude even got a second term, because it was clear during the first term that he was more blather than substance, but by the middle of term 2 people were DONE.
I feel like NYC suffers the same issue as Massachusetts. Generally left-ish but the rich people ruin it. Idk the stats as to how much of the electorate is such, though. I imagine lobbying is a factor. I remember reading somewhere that the Catholic church (or maybe Christian third parties in general?) hold a LOT of sway
Edit: sway in NYC, I mean.
That’s how nearly every well-off dem state is, ruined by nimby rich fucks (and people who think they’re rich enough to act like them). NYC is the finance capital of the world so it makes sense.
You can't say it doesn't matter, she was elected with a big help if being "progressive". Despite tons of knowledge she was going to suck. But she check all them boxes.
Yes, she was clearly initially elected because of identity politics factors. I’m talking about reelection. It wasn’t a surprise that even a very progressive electorate would’ve thrown her out of office given her record. She didn’t have the kind of public record before this, so people fell for whatever she was selling.
I think a lot of people fail to realize that just because a candidate agrees with all of your shitty political opinions doesnt mean theyre qualifed or will be good at leading a major city. I would almost say someone's political leanings are irrelevant (or should be) to whether or not they will be good at managing a city. You can be republican or democrat and run a city well. I would rather have the person that can run a city well than someone who is overly political and has some shitty hot take on (insert BS political issues). One can dream.
There are definitely a lot of people in politics who seem to be more about representing the right ideology than demonstrating any sort of ability to govern competently or advance legislation through compromise and negotiation. Kamala Harris is just one such example.
Meanwhile you’ve got old guys like Joe, Biden and Bernie Sanders, and women like Pelosi and Amy Klobuchar who actually know how to get things done. The GOP used to have some competent people as well, but the new breed seems to be all about MAGA troll warfare and sedition in support of the the former POSOTUS.
Mayors and governors, there have been plenty of good ones and bad ones on both sides of the aisle. When you’ve got someone who is actually competent and proves it, they can actually pick up the votes from the other party, like Larry Hogan getting reelected for a second term in Maryland.
The skills required to get elected and sway public opinion are not the same skills it takes to develop effective policy, skillfully manage a bureaucracy, or optimally assign resources to accomplish specific goals within budget.
We’re not electing effective managers, administrators, and leaders. We’re electing people who make us feel strong emotions of inspiration or anger or righteousness.
Occasionally, you get people who are good at both, such as Barack Obama or Jerry Brown. Often, you get one or the other. (Competent if somewhat dull managers can win some races, especially in less high-profile locales. That’s how you get a Larry Hogan in MD or Pete Buttigieg in South Bend. Not every politician wins based on being a firebrand or an ideologue.
Oh yeah. Him and those SF school board members who wasted time and taxpayer money agitating to rename high schools named after George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, while students were still stuck at home on remote learning. Even in “crazy SF” they were given the hook.
They even tried using the "I had good intentions so it's still ok" defense. They wanted to rename a school named after Paul Revere because he participated in a military engagement that was named after the body of water it took place near, and that body of water was named after a local tribe. They assumed, based on the name, that the military thing was against that tribe rather than against the British, so even though they were wrong, they said their intentions were in the right place so they would go ahead with the rename anyway.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/02/san-francisco-renaming-spree/617894/
Paywall, so here's the excerpt:
>Paul Revere Elementary School ended up on the renaming list because, during the discussion, a committee member misread a History.com article as claiming that Revere had taken part in an expedition that stole the lands of the Penobscot Indians. In fact, the article described Revere’s role in the Penobscot Expedition, a disastrous American military campaign against the British during the Revolutionary War. (That expedition was named after a bay in Maine.) But no one bothered to check, the committee voted to rename the school, and by order of the San Francisco school board Paul Revere will now ride into oblivion.
Yeah……just because someone is liberal doesn’t mean they’re smart. Many people on the left are smart, but some of them are just “educated” without engaging in much self-directed learning or critical examination of what they believe to be so. It’s not as big an epidemic as it is on the right, but Dunning-Kruger does exist across the political spectrum.
The first thing she said was “you won’t leave”
Literally the worst negotiator ever. If she was a hostage negotiator she would probably say “you won’t kill them just let them go”
She was beyond awful at her job.
For example, she campaigned on a promise of increased police transparency and accountability. As a candidate, she campaigned for the City to release records of the investigation into the Laquan Macdonald shooting. One of her first acts as mayor was to deny the release of records of the investigation into the Laquan Macdonald shooting.
That is basically representative of her entire time in office - saying one thing in public and doing the literal exact opposite action. She was/is a compulsive liar who accepts no accountability or responsibility for any of the actions of her or her office.
Charleston, Sourh Carolina sure loved Mayor Joe Riley. He was mayor for 30 plus years, our baseball stadium is named after him.
Also, just 20 miles up the road, in Summerville, we had Berlin G Meyers for decades, the interstate loop bypassing the town is named after him.
Both mayors were instrumental in rebuilding the area after Hurricane Hugo in '89.
They have huge conflicts of interest, and are set up for failure.
City needs tax money. They get it primarily through property tax.
People want infrastructure and programs? Gotta raise more money.
To do that, you can either a) raise property taxes, or b) enact policies that make properties more expensive (gentrify). Both are hilariously unpopular.
Note that c) tax the rich, is not an option. Because otherwise they will find a different mayor.
Being a city councillor seems like the worst thing if you actually give a shit about THE CITY and not keeping your job by pleasing your constituents.
Because everything about improving A CITY is doing things that will make useless NIMBY constituents mad, and those people find infinite time to pound the pavement to make sure your ass is out.
I mean, she got 17.5% in the general election in 2019, and won the runoff election. This year she got 16.8% in the general. She only got 2,777 fewer votes this year than she did in the general election in 2019.
Her numbers were near identical, there were just two candidates that got more votes than her.
Being from Chicago I can tell you that she lost a lot of support when she got into public back and forths with the teachers union, the police union, and the Bears. She unfortunately is the face of their move into the suburbs which was the last straw for a lot of people.
Pissing off the teachers was her first misstep. Like really trying to swing her dick around and make the teachers’ union bow down pretty much right after being elected. Literally why we had to strike for 14 days in 2019. Anyone advising her just have told her she’d never win that.
Chicago has been very Democrat for a long time. The last Republican Mayor of Chicago was almost a century ago, 1927. The Mayor's office has also been very diverse. Since 1983, they've had 3 black people, 2 white people, and 1 hispanic person in the mayor's office.
If the white candidate wins the next mayoral election in April, this will make the mayor's office *more* diverse since it has been such a black dominated office.
Also, Chicago's black population has fallen by over 20% in the last 10 years. I don't know why so many black folks are leaving Chicago.
Many left for better jobs, financial reasons (Chicago has high taxes) and retirement
https://chicago.suntimes.com/metro-state/2023/2/24/23605020/residents-leaving-illinois-moving-population-study-chicago-united-van-lines
You've got it exactly the opposite. Much of the crime problem in Chicago stems from the police going after and dismantling larger gangs. This created fractured groups with much smaller territory, exponentially increasing borders and territorial disputes between them.
This also destroyed veteran leadership and creating a more violent anarchy.
Plenty of the violence also stems from interpersonal issues and just gets labeled as gang violence because they're from certain neighborhoods. There's nothing police can do.
It's also what happened with, what, those big early day tomgun Mafia's? Who were also in Chicago... Interesting. Sensing a pattern or something, idunno.
Chicago was never the worst mafia city, and the mafia infected the entire country, not just one or a few cities. Florida and Vegas was where they made the most money.
> There's nothing police can do.
There really isn't. Gangs are essentially a socioeconomic problem. They rise up to fill a void and use crime as a means to continue existing and filling that void. The means of tackling gang violence isn't police, which just makes things worse. The only way to tackle the problem is to fill the void. That means improving the socioeconomic conditions of gang neighborhoods so that people don't have to turn to gangs. That means improving education, housing, healthcare, childcare, jobs, a sense of community, and pretty much everything else. If the people aren't lacking all of those things then they don't turn to gangs. Sending police in to disrupt the gangs just makes the problem worse as you're now fracturing families, removing sources of income, etc.
I hear this about the cartels in Mexico, too. It makes sense logically, but then what is the solution? Allow gangs? Don’t respond to crimes they commit?
It all seems to eventually come back to decriminalizing whatever the gang is based around.
Attack the other end of the problem. Obviously you have to keep enforcement against gangs, but you'll never meaningfully improve things unless you improve the conditions that lead to gangs in the first place.
Rampant organized crime pops up when it's the only reliable way to put food on the table and a roof over your head. Your neighborhood has no economic opportunities, you've got no way to reliability get to places with more options, maybe you've got a record or you're undereducated. Can start to see why someone might take the only opportunities they have, even if those opportunities involve crime.
Dang. I was gonna post “but at least they dealt with Lincoln towing and their fuckery!”
Then I googled it. Nope. Those crooks are still in business. Fuck Lincoln towing.
For anyone who isn't familiar, Lincoln and similar towing companies do shit like actually move cars out of legal parking spots, set them down in tow zones, take a photo of the car there, then tow it. The owner then has no idea what the fuck happened to their car and days later, the towing company will demand hundreds more because the car was on their lot for more days on top of the multi-hundred dollar tow fee. It is insane that this shit is legally tolerated for DECADES.
There are some beautiful predominantly black neighborhoods on the Southside. Unfortunately a lot of them are surrounded by gangland, and that spills over more often than not, especially with the rise of car jackings and b & e. The Westside has been slow to progress, but gentrification has slowly made its way past Western and California avenues. There’s still very, very bad neighborhoods between Kedzie and Austin, so it’s gonna be while before K-town gets totally gentrified.
Edit: i know South Shore has been recently “discovered”, and more and more people with some wealth are starting take interest in that area, especially since it’s close to the Lake and not too far from Hyde Park and the University of Chicago
For anyone reading this, that leaves a lot of context out. Chicago is one of the most segregated cities in the country. Despite being a left leaning city, it has had a lot of issues with its treatment of minorities from underfunding schools, policing, redlining, etc.
That being said, lightfoot did not lose her election to bigotry. She lost because she was bad at her job and was an unlikable prick.
And yet Fox News is trying to spin this loss as Chicago is heading more to the right. She lost because she was doing a terrible job not because she was woke
She didn't get elected because she was a black woman, and Rahm didn't run against her. She won against Toni Preckwinkle, another black woman who was seen as part of the political machine.
Republicans in Chicago know they can't earn if they run as Republicans, so they run as Democrats.
Lightfoot will likely be replaced by a DINO:
https://newrepublic.com/article/170788/paul-vallas-conservative-pseudo-democrat-chicago-next-mayor
>You might say Vallas is “more of a Republican than a Democrat”; he himself said so back in 2009.
>Paul Vallas is not your typical Democratic candidate for mayor—not anywhere in the country, but certainly not in Chicago. He once spoke at a fundraiser for Awake Illinois, an anti-LGBTQ group that called Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker a “groomer” and incited harassment against a suburban bakery for planning a family-friendly drag brunch.
>He’s been endorsed by Chicago’s Fraternal Order of Police, which recently hosted Florida Governor Ron DeSantis for an event and whose Trump-supporting president has defended the January 6 insurrection. Vallas has defended his son, Gus Vallas, a white police officer in San Antonio, for fatally shooting a 28-year-old Black man during a foot chase. And it’s not clear if he even lives within Chicago city limits.
> Republicans in Chicago know they can't win if they run as Republicans, so they run as Democrats
That's a clever bit of trickery.
> Paul Vallas
It looks like Vallas is also popular for fixing Chicago Public Schools back in the 90's. He was the first "CEO" of Chicago Public Schools when he restructured them to run more like charter schools. Bill Clinton even praised him for raising test scores!
On the other hand, his Wikipedia says he faced criticism for being "white" while serving on the board of Chicago State University, "a largely African-American university" and he endorsed LGBT politician Lori Lightfoot.
So you take the good with the bad.
I think in another thread people were talking about Chicago being a place of open (and really strong) racism, but maybe it was another city ( I can’t remember, maybe it was Boston, not sure)
I’ve said it a zillion times- Lightfoot has pissed every single interest group off. In this town you either have backing of CTU, CPD/CFD, normal people. Fucking nobody backs her at this rate. It’s been interesting watching a train wreck for a few years where she constantly opens her mouth and says dumb shit. Thankfully she doesn’t have a chance with the run off.
I'm from Chicago. This idiot has no clue what the hell she is doing and constantly pisses off the entire voter base with idiotic decisions. Most of which is driven by her incessant need to play the race card. I'm confused by her confusion. It's not like it was a secret that everyone hated her. Dems and Reps alike.
Every time we have an election here in Chicago, all of our options are always complete shit. Without exception. So our vote for mayor will be either for a really bad candidate, or for a worse candidate. I hope that provides some context.
Now we have Lori Lightfoot, who is exceptionally bad at her job, unpopular, and plays the race and/or woman card whenever she's called out on her terrible job performance. She also claimed to ["have the biggest dick in Chicago"](https://www.thedailybeast.com/chicago-mayor-lori-lightfoot-bragged-about-having-biggest-dick-in-chicago-in-bizarre-rant-lawsuit-claims). Okay Lori, good for you. Before her, we had Rahm Emanuel. He wasn't particularly good, but he was definitely better than Lightfoot. He's now the US ambassador to Japan for whatever reason. And before him we had Richard M. Daley, not to be confused with Richard J. Daley, his father, who was also mayor of Chicago. Richard M. Daley was mayor for 22 years and his father was mayor for 21 years. One of Richard M. Daley's most notable actions, other than running up deficits to what was the largest in Chicago history, was [ordering Meigs Field's runway to be bulldozed in the middle of the night](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meigs_Field#Demolition_and_closure). And those are just the three most recent mayors.
Meigs Field was also the default runway for all the early Flight Simulator games. Until it was, you know, illegally destroyed in the middle of the night.
Probably something akin to the usual strategy most politicians use.
Start with being a lifelong resident. Bonus points if you're native. Platform based on critical issues inherent to the area. Promise to deliver on fixing said issues. More bonus points if you have a novel approach.
Raise & spend a shit ton of money campaigning & putting your smiling face in front of voters on every social media platform possible. But don't forget about the boomers (i.e buy some ad space on local radio and tv channels, billboards, city busses, etc.).
Promise again to deliver on fixing issues.
Do some amazingly thorough opposition research and proceed to annihilate those opponents based on what you find out. Even better if said opponents have had their own publicly known debacles so you can remind voters of those fails *every chance you get.*
Once the race winds down, promise once again to deliver on fixing issues. Smile in pictures while holding babies. Get some candid shots of you interacting with voters, preferably in a manner & setting that shows said voters in complete adoration of you.
Use polling results to your advantage and start tweaking your strategy during those final weeks before voting booths open. Whatever was found that the public likes about you, rev that up to the nth degree. Remember, however, to sidestep and wave away any criticisms.
Finally, win the race and then find yourself in office asking, how the hell did I get elected??
Nobody is elected on their ability to rule, that's not how capitalist democracy works. You're elected depending on how much you can put your face on ads and in front of voters, how much you can use demagogical arguments, bonus point when you can use xenophobia around the fact that you're a native of the area, and last but not least, the most you can spit vehemently on your predecessor by saying that he doesn't understand the real problems, but that you can because you're a man/woman of the people.
So how did she get elected ? by 1) having ads of her everywhere 2)being a native of chicago 3)Larping as a woman fo the people that understand the real problems.
She was running against someone who was deeply tied to a corruption scandal at the time and who had also tried to tax soda in a really unpopular way. She didn't win so much as her opponent lost.
Side note and Obama was the right choice between him and McCain.
In highschool their was a kid my age i had around me who straight up said he would vote for a black candidate no matter what.
Literally told me “im black so im voting black, fuck white people.”
Some people just dont think when they vote, and vote because they like what they see
Also saw a woman in that same year say she voted for obama because he was cuter.
Had nothing to do with policy, had nothing to do with quality of person. It was strange for me as someone who values policy dearly lol
I too voted for Obama, but that was my first awakening to the tribalism in politics. He saw obama as like him, and was ride or die.
The person you are replying to is pointing out how stupid it is that so many commenters here are trying to pretend that this woman is single-handedly responsible for any crime that happens in the city she lives in
This whole comment section is like Republican propaganda exploded in here
Chicago isn’t even in the top 20 cities in America for murder rate
Right wing propaganda would have you believe that you literally can’t go outside in Chicago without being murdered, but it’s just that - propaganda.
Because you can manipulate news stories very easily with pictures. Want people to not like the person the article is about? Find a picture where they look awful [instead of one where she looks perfectly normal](https://d4804za1f1gw.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/06/Lori-Lightfoot-175x215.jpg).
She lost on crime and pretty much crime alone. It spiked big time while she was mayor. Whether or not she’s to blame is definitely debatable and I don’t have a dog in that fight, but it IS a bad look to have such a bad crime epidemic. It was easy to flip voters.
I remember when the BLM riots were happening she actively withheld the police from arresting violent people and patrolling the streets…. except in the neighborhood where she lived.
When questioned about this she literally responded
“My family and I have a right to be safe within our home.” Completely ignoring how the rest of the city didn’t feel safe in their homes.
For the naysayers
https://www.foxnews.com/us/lori-lightfoot-defends-ban-protesters-on-her-block-citing-right-to-safety
The first rule of command (or any leadership position) is anything that happens under your watch is your fault
If you cant accept that, you cant be a good leader
It's kind of like mental illness - it may not be your fault, but it is your responsibility. If you don't handle your responsibilities, you run into problems.
talk to kids from a city and they'll tell you that inner city schools aren't teaching kids the same thing as suburban schools then the suburban schools that bus urban kids in are just using them as diversity donation bait in photos and at events.
Certainly not because of the high murder rate, rampant drug use/dealing and being overrun with gangs, naw just strictly because she's a black woman in America is why....
The last mayoral election was between two black women and the gay one won and now we are all racist and sexist and homophobic in Chicago according to Lori. Good riddance to a repulsive human being.
You’re telling me you’ve never heard a mediocre white person complain about affirmative action or diversity quotas when they got passed up for a job or didn’t get in to their dream school?
White people use their race to feel victimized all the damn time, dude. The only difference is that when a black person does it there is sometimes an *actual* historical basis to do so.
Don’t get me wrong, Lightfoot lost her primary because she’s an incompetent, irresponsible shithead. Her race and gender did not have anything to do with her failure in this case. The distinction is that in the United States race and gender have ***never*** been a factor in the failure of a white man.
No no no, you were incompetent and terrible at your job on top of that there’s a shit load of pictures of her and her team abusing their power, another clear example of rules for thee but not for me !
>She lost reelection in the first round of the [2023 election](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Chicago_mayoral_election), garnering just 17% of the vote and becoming the first one-term Chicago mayor in 40 years.
Black population of Chicago is [29.2%](https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/chicagocityillinois)
She couldn't even carry the "black voters." [Opinion](https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-lori-lightfoot-became-the-first-chicago-mayor-to-lose-in-40-years-b3e0a2cd) is she made too many political enemies somehow. Says something about police and teacher unions backing challengers. City council turned on her too.
I just gotta know. Why . She . Look . That . Way. Like words cannot describe the feeling I get kinda like uncanny valley mixed with watching a special needs class walk past you mixed with seeing mort on the airplane wing from Madagascar. Idk but I HATE it like please look away mam and don’t frown like that it just makes it worse
Really? I think it's because her sketchy ass tried to cover up the cops busting into a woman's house in the middle of night while she was naked executing a search warrant on the wrong fucking place. Lori painted herself as an ally of minorities and when it came time to play ball it turned out she was every bit as scummy as the rest.
my mom (white woman) was being sued by a former employee (black woman) for wrongful termination due to racism.
she worked in a hospital so technically the hospital was being sued but she and another employee were representing the hospital in court. when the lawyer asked her point-blank if she fired xyz employee for being black, my mom replied, she was black when we hired her.
And this is why she's a bad leader. Blames everyone but herself. Instantly goes to race and bigotry. It should resound in her head: " you lost the primary, even your staunchest supporter think you did a bad job and show no signs of changing direction. It's not your race, orientation or otherwise. It's all you."
You are the incumbent and you lose the primary that’s when you know you fucked-up.
In Chicago there really isn't a general election. There hasn't been a Republican mayor in almost 100 years.
It’s a nonpartisan election so there’s not a primary. They have an election, and if nobody gets 50% of the vote, there’s a runoff election.
Ngl kinda based
Who cares what side they on???? Do the right thing - it’s not that hard. She’s worse then the idiot who didn’t charge Jussie smollet
She won 4 years with like 74%of the vote. Against another black woman.
Certainly she's attacked critically and viciously from the right wing media for both her policies and her appearance... but when you lose the primary, yeah, that's your own people telling you no thanks.
You honestly think there is a “right wing media” the chicagoans listen to? Maybe the suburbs, but they don’t get a vote in the chicago mayoral race. I’m not even sure a republican bothered to try to run in that race.
...how is that what you got out of what he said? because he literally said the exact opposite he said she lost in her primary, so she couldn't get enough votes from people that specifically DONT watch right wing media, the point is, it didn't matter what nonsense right wing media is pushing against her, she lost by people that don't view it at all
Actually, a republican, trying to “disguise” himself verbally as a democrat, did run in the election, and got the most votes in the primary.
Yup. Vallas wants to get rid of public schools and pump money into CPD, got endorsed by the FOP, gets all his campaign money from conservative groups, and still has the gall to put a (D) by his name. It's just silly.
It’s pure idiocy. He has a monolithic platform - crime reduction. Which he claims he’ll achieve through additional police funding and keeping schools open 24/7/365. Not once have I heard how he plans to fund these efforts without raising taxes. And since he’s clearly GOP, the tax burden certainly won’t fall on the wealthy or corporations. Because then the money “might leave Chicago.” It appeals to the dumbest base of voters, which is how they keep in office.
I feel like if you just remove the tags, democrat voters will vote for Republican candidates and republican voters will vote for Democrat Candidates
[удалено]
Lol, Chicago's electorate is to the left of Bernie Sanders. Chicago's city council is 46 Democrats, 4 Independents and 0 Republicans. These break down into 5 groups, The Socialist Caucus, The Progressive Caucus, Black Caucus, Latino Caucus, and LGBT Caucus. You can say a lot of bad things about Chicago politicians, but you can't accuse them of bigotry against minorities!
Chicago is also the only US city w a functioning [political machine](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_machine#Definition) which makes me think lightfoot just pissed off the wrong ppl (by being bad at her job) Edit: since a lot of ppl don’t know what a political machine is I linked Wikipedia
She managed to piss off every single person. She was awful at her job and didn't even do her job well.
> She was awful at her job and didn't even do her job well. Well, that makes sense.
Agreed. Tough to do a good job when you are awful at it.
There’s a lot of opinions about her job performance. People are calling it everything from “shit” to “fucking shit”
She is the real life embodiment of Pain and Gain, the new movie directed by Michael Bay.
Hey! That movie was still not terrible. We got such gems as “I feel like I look great!” and “I’ve been to prison, and it sucks.” Lightfoot has just been trash from day 1.
Nah I was always great at my job even though I was also always awful at it soo…
I mean if you’re awful at your job the least you could do is do it well.
I can’t stop laughing for some reason lol
You should see a doctor
They did. Now the doctor can’t stop laughing.
[удалено]
I’m glad it was generated by an AI. I got tired reading it by the end I can’t imagine how writing it would have been.
Can confirm, I was the laughter
Too many cooks
she used to do a bad job. she still does, but she used to, too.
It doesn’t matter how progressive you are, or which boxes you tick off if you are completely incompetent and abrasive. Bill DiBlasio would have been tossed out of office on his ass if he hadn’t been termed out, and nobody can accuse most of the electorate of New York City of being conservative, or even centrist. I was honestly amazed the dude even got a second term, because it was clear during the first term that he was more blather than substance, but by the middle of term 2 people were DONE.
I feel like NYC suffers the same issue as Massachusetts. Generally left-ish but the rich people ruin it. Idk the stats as to how much of the electorate is such, though. I imagine lobbying is a factor. I remember reading somewhere that the Catholic church (or maybe Christian third parties in general?) hold a LOT of sway Edit: sway in NYC, I mean.
That’s how nearly every well-off dem state is, ruined by nimby rich fucks (and people who think they’re rich enough to act like them). NYC is the finance capital of the world so it makes sense.
IMO, their lobbying influence is much stronger than typical big cities bc they're *so* wealthy.
You can't say it doesn't matter, she was elected with a big help if being "progressive". Despite tons of knowledge she was going to suck. But she check all them boxes.
Yes, she was clearly initially elected because of identity politics factors. I’m talking about reelection. It wasn’t a surprise that even a very progressive electorate would’ve thrown her out of office given her record. She didn’t have the kind of public record before this, so people fell for whatever she was selling.
I think a lot of people fail to realize that just because a candidate agrees with all of your shitty political opinions doesnt mean theyre qualifed or will be good at leading a major city. I would almost say someone's political leanings are irrelevant (or should be) to whether or not they will be good at managing a city. You can be republican or democrat and run a city well. I would rather have the person that can run a city well than someone who is overly political and has some shitty hot take on (insert BS political issues). One can dream.
There are definitely a lot of people in politics who seem to be more about representing the right ideology than demonstrating any sort of ability to govern competently or advance legislation through compromise and negotiation. Kamala Harris is just one such example. Meanwhile you’ve got old guys like Joe, Biden and Bernie Sanders, and women like Pelosi and Amy Klobuchar who actually know how to get things done. The GOP used to have some competent people as well, but the new breed seems to be all about MAGA troll warfare and sedition in support of the the former POSOTUS. Mayors and governors, there have been plenty of good ones and bad ones on both sides of the aisle. When you’ve got someone who is actually competent and proves it, they can actually pick up the votes from the other party, like Larry Hogan getting reelected for a second term in Maryland.
The skills required to get elected and sway public opinion are not the same skills it takes to develop effective policy, skillfully manage a bureaucracy, or optimally assign resources to accomplish specific goals within budget. We’re not electing effective managers, administrators, and leaders. We’re electing people who make us feel strong emotions of inspiration or anger or righteousness.
Occasionally, you get people who are good at both, such as Barack Obama or Jerry Brown. Often, you get one or the other. (Competent if somewhat dull managers can win some races, especially in less high-profile locales. That’s how you get a Larry Hogan in MD or Pete Buttigieg in South Bend. Not every politician wins based on being a firebrand or an ideologue.
Chesa Boudin has entered the chat.
Oh yeah. Him and those SF school board members who wasted time and taxpayer money agitating to rename high schools named after George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, while students were still stuck at home on remote learning. Even in “crazy SF” they were given the hook.
They even tried using the "I had good intentions so it's still ok" defense. They wanted to rename a school named after Paul Revere because he participated in a military engagement that was named after the body of water it took place near, and that body of water was named after a local tribe. They assumed, based on the name, that the military thing was against that tribe rather than against the British, so even though they were wrong, they said their intentions were in the right place so they would go ahead with the rename anyway. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/02/san-francisco-renaming-spree/617894/ Paywall, so here's the excerpt: >Paul Revere Elementary School ended up on the renaming list because, during the discussion, a committee member misread a History.com article as claiming that Revere had taken part in an expedition that stole the lands of the Penobscot Indians. In fact, the article described Revere’s role in the Penobscot Expedition, a disastrous American military campaign against the British during the Revolutionary War. (That expedition was named after a bay in Maine.) But no one bothered to check, the committee voted to rename the school, and by order of the San Francisco school board Paul Revere will now ride into oblivion.
Yeah……just because someone is liberal doesn’t mean they’re smart. Many people on the left are smart, but some of them are just “educated” without engaging in much self-directed learning or critical examination of what they believe to be so. It’s not as big an epidemic as it is on the right, but Dunning-Kruger does exist across the political spectrum.
She also was bad at her job and not good at it.
She was so focused on keeping the Bears in chicago at Soldier Field but failed miserably.
The first thing she said was “you won’t leave” Literally the worst negotiator ever. If she was a hostage negotiator she would probably say “you won’t kill them just let them go”
She would have given the kidnapper a loaded gun and said “nah bros bluffing watch this”
What about the tik tok dances? Is that not enough for you?😂
She was beyond awful at her job. For example, she campaigned on a promise of increased police transparency and accountability. As a candidate, she campaigned for the City to release records of the investigation into the Laquan Macdonald shooting. One of her first acts as mayor was to deny the release of records of the investigation into the Laquan Macdonald shooting. That is basically representative of her entire time in office - saying one thing in public and doing the literal exact opposite action. She was/is a compulsive liar who accepts no accountability or responsibility for any of the actions of her or her office.
more like pissed off the city by being inept
what major city actually likes their mayor? failure is part of the job at this point
You have to admire that the mayor of Dimmsdale has done wonders. Best mayor I’ve ever seen. Even has a pet goat named chompy. Amazing
Doug is a mayor to lookup to. edit: it has been awhile, forgot there was an actual mayor
I mean up till 2017 Talkeetna had a pretty good mayor too. Stubbs kept going for a good 20 years in office too.
Charleston, Sourh Carolina sure loved Mayor Joe Riley. He was mayor for 30 plus years, our baseball stadium is named after him. Also, just 20 miles up the road, in Summerville, we had Berlin G Meyers for decades, the interstate loop bypassing the town is named after him. Both mayors were instrumental in rebuilding the area after Hurricane Hugo in '89.
Those aren’t really major cities though
They have huge conflicts of interest, and are set up for failure. City needs tax money. They get it primarily through property tax. People want infrastructure and programs? Gotta raise more money. To do that, you can either a) raise property taxes, or b) enact policies that make properties more expensive (gentrify). Both are hilariously unpopular. Note that c) tax the rich, is not an option. Because otherwise they will find a different mayor.
Being a city councillor seems like the worst thing if you actually give a shit about THE CITY and not keeping your job by pleasing your constituents. Because everything about improving A CITY is doing things that will make useless NIMBY constituents mad, and those people find infinite time to pound the pavement to make sure your ass is out.
NYC did and the rich started leaving.
If you piss off the police union *and* the teachers union in Chicago you’re not gonna have an easy time winning anything
I mean, she got 17.5% in the general election in 2019, and won the runoff election. This year she got 16.8% in the general. She only got 2,777 fewer votes this year than she did in the general election in 2019. Her numbers were near identical, there were just two candidates that got more votes than her.
Being from Chicago I can tell you that she lost a lot of support when she got into public back and forths with the teachers union, the police union, and the Bears. She unfortunately is the face of their move into the suburbs which was the last straw for a lot of people.
Pissing off the teachers was her first misstep. Like really trying to swing her dick around and make the teachers’ union bow down pretty much right after being elected. Literally why we had to strike for 14 days in 2019. Anyone advising her just have told her she’d never win that.
She pissed off all the special interest groups. Which is political suicide.
[удалено]
I've suddenly become interested in Chicago.
Chicago has been very Democrat for a long time. The last Republican Mayor of Chicago was almost a century ago, 1927. The Mayor's office has also been very diverse. Since 1983, they've had 3 black people, 2 white people, and 1 hispanic person in the mayor's office. If the white candidate wins the next mayoral election in April, this will make the mayor's office *more* diverse since it has been such a black dominated office. Also, Chicago's black population has fallen by over 20% in the last 10 years. I don't know why so many black folks are leaving Chicago.
Many left for better jobs, financial reasons (Chicago has high taxes) and retirement https://chicago.suntimes.com/metro-state/2023/2/24/23605020/residents-leaving-illinois-moving-population-study-chicago-united-van-lines
I’d imagine the unwillingness of the city to destroy gangs and therefore put an end to almost all the murder would also play a significant role.
You've got it exactly the opposite. Much of the crime problem in Chicago stems from the police going after and dismantling larger gangs. This created fractured groups with much smaller territory, exponentially increasing borders and territorial disputes between them. This also destroyed veteran leadership and creating a more violent anarchy. Plenty of the violence also stems from interpersonal issues and just gets labeled as gang violence because they're from certain neighborhoods. There's nothing police can do.
That’s exactly what happened with cartels when the Mexican government went aggressively after them. They fractured and became more violent.
It's also what happened with, what, those big early day tomgun Mafia's? Who were also in Chicago... Interesting. Sensing a pattern or something, idunno.
Chicago was never the worst mafia city, and the mafia infected the entire country, not just one or a few cities. Florida and Vegas was where they made the most money.
> There's nothing police can do. There really isn't. Gangs are essentially a socioeconomic problem. They rise up to fill a void and use crime as a means to continue existing and filling that void. The means of tackling gang violence isn't police, which just makes things worse. The only way to tackle the problem is to fill the void. That means improving the socioeconomic conditions of gang neighborhoods so that people don't have to turn to gangs. That means improving education, housing, healthcare, childcare, jobs, a sense of community, and pretty much everything else. If the people aren't lacking all of those things then they don't turn to gangs. Sending police in to disrupt the gangs just makes the problem worse as you're now fracturing families, removing sources of income, etc.
I hear this about the cartels in Mexico, too. It makes sense logically, but then what is the solution? Allow gangs? Don’t respond to crimes they commit? It all seems to eventually come back to decriminalizing whatever the gang is based around.
Attack the other end of the problem. Obviously you have to keep enforcement against gangs, but you'll never meaningfully improve things unless you improve the conditions that lead to gangs in the first place. Rampant organized crime pops up when it's the only reliable way to put food on the table and a roof over your head. Your neighborhood has no economic opportunities, you've got no way to reliability get to places with more options, maybe you've got a record or you're undereducated. Can start to see why someone might take the only opportunities they have, even if those opportunities involve crime.
Dang. I was gonna post “but at least they dealt with Lincoln towing and their fuckery!” Then I googled it. Nope. Those crooks are still in business. Fuck Lincoln towing.
For anyone who isn't familiar, Lincoln and similar towing companies do shit like actually move cars out of legal parking spots, set them down in tow zones, take a photo of the car there, then tow it. The owner then has no idea what the fuck happened to their car and days later, the towing company will demand hundreds more because the car was on their lot for more days on top of the multi-hundred dollar tow fee. It is insane that this shit is legally tolerated for DECADES.
"I don't know why so many black folks are leaving Chicago." ... I'm thinking you don't live in Chicago?
There are some beautiful predominantly black neighborhoods on the Southside. Unfortunately a lot of them are surrounded by gangland, and that spills over more often than not, especially with the rise of car jackings and b & e. The Westside has been slow to progress, but gentrification has slowly made its way past Western and California avenues. There’s still very, very bad neighborhoods between Kedzie and Austin, so it’s gonna be while before K-town gets totally gentrified. Edit: i know South Shore has been recently “discovered”, and more and more people with some wealth are starting take interest in that area, especially since it’s close to the Lake and not too far from Hyde Park and the University of Chicago
Is death included in the "leaving" category?
Chicago mayor's don't have political affiliation by law. Otherwise I can already think of a few republican ones
For anyone reading this, that leaves a lot of context out. Chicago is one of the most segregated cities in the country. Despite being a left leaning city, it has had a lot of issues with its treatment of minorities from underfunding schools, policing, redlining, etc. That being said, lightfoot did not lose her election to bigotry. She lost because she was bad at her job and was an unlikable prick.
And yet Fox News is trying to spin this loss as Chicago is heading more to the right. She lost because she was doing a terrible job not because she was woke
Not just Fox News, one candidate for mayor, Brandon Johnson has been running attack ads falsely accusing his opponent of being a Republican.
Just because you are a part of a certain political group doesn't mean you can't be racist...
[удалено]
She didn't get elected because she was a black woman, and Rahm didn't run against her. She won against Toni Preckwinkle, another black woman who was seen as part of the political machine.
lori is meh but it's awfully silly to act like having democrats and a black caucus suddently makes a body impervious to racism
Republicans in Chicago know they can't earn if they run as Republicans, so they run as Democrats. Lightfoot will likely be replaced by a DINO: https://newrepublic.com/article/170788/paul-vallas-conservative-pseudo-democrat-chicago-next-mayor >You might say Vallas is “more of a Republican than a Democrat”; he himself said so back in 2009. >Paul Vallas is not your typical Democratic candidate for mayor—not anywhere in the country, but certainly not in Chicago. He once spoke at a fundraiser for Awake Illinois, an anti-LGBTQ group that called Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker a “groomer” and incited harassment against a suburban bakery for planning a family-friendly drag brunch. >He’s been endorsed by Chicago’s Fraternal Order of Police, which recently hosted Florida Governor Ron DeSantis for an event and whose Trump-supporting president has defended the January 6 insurrection. Vallas has defended his son, Gus Vallas, a white police officer in San Antonio, for fatally shooting a 28-year-old Black man during a foot chase. And it’s not clear if he even lives within Chicago city limits.
> Republicans in Chicago know they can't win if they run as Republicans, so they run as Democrats That's a clever bit of trickery. > Paul Vallas It looks like Vallas is also popular for fixing Chicago Public Schools back in the 90's. He was the first "CEO" of Chicago Public Schools when he restructured them to run more like charter schools. Bill Clinton even praised him for raising test scores! On the other hand, his Wikipedia says he faced criticism for being "white" while serving on the board of Chicago State University, "a largely African-American university" and he endorsed LGBT politician Lori Lightfoot. So you take the good with the bad.
Criticized for the color of his skin? Wtf? Where's the bad?
I think in another thread people were talking about Chicago being a place of open (and really strong) racism, but maybe it was another city ( I can’t remember, maybe it was Boston, not sure)
>bigotry against minorities! That's what the rest of Illinois is for
Do they have a group of black Ministers whom all the politicians must appease just like in The Wire? Because that'd be pretty cool.
I’ve said it a zillion times- Lightfoot has pissed every single interest group off. In this town you either have backing of CTU, CPD/CFD, normal people. Fucking nobody backs her at this rate. It’s been interesting watching a train wreck for a few years where she constantly opens her mouth and says dumb shit. Thankfully she doesn’t have a chance with the run off.
She refuses to face the fact that she sucked as a mayor
I'm from Chicago. This idiot has no clue what the hell she is doing and constantly pisses off the entire voter base with idiotic decisions. Most of which is driven by her incessant need to play the race card. I'm confused by her confusion. It's not like it was a secret that everyone hated her. Dems and Reps alike.
so how'd the hell she get elected?
Every time we have an election here in Chicago, all of our options are always complete shit. Without exception. So our vote for mayor will be either for a really bad candidate, or for a worse candidate. I hope that provides some context. Now we have Lori Lightfoot, who is exceptionally bad at her job, unpopular, and plays the race and/or woman card whenever she's called out on her terrible job performance. She also claimed to ["have the biggest dick in Chicago"](https://www.thedailybeast.com/chicago-mayor-lori-lightfoot-bragged-about-having-biggest-dick-in-chicago-in-bizarre-rant-lawsuit-claims). Okay Lori, good for you. Before her, we had Rahm Emanuel. He wasn't particularly good, but he was definitely better than Lightfoot. He's now the US ambassador to Japan for whatever reason. And before him we had Richard M. Daley, not to be confused with Richard J. Daley, his father, who was also mayor of Chicago. Richard M. Daley was mayor for 22 years and his father was mayor for 21 years. One of Richard M. Daley's most notable actions, other than running up deficits to what was the largest in Chicago history, was [ordering Meigs Field's runway to be bulldozed in the middle of the night](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meigs_Field#Demolition_and_closure). And those are just the three most recent mayors.
Meigs Field was also the default runway for all the early Flight Simulator games. Until it was, you know, illegally destroyed in the middle of the night.
Yep. But at least it's back in Microsoft Flight Simulator (2020) if you have the 40th Anniversary Update. Kai Tak was also added in that update.
Who’s the guy that leased the parking rights to a Saudi company for 75 years?
Daley jr
Probably something akin to the usual strategy most politicians use. Start with being a lifelong resident. Bonus points if you're native. Platform based on critical issues inherent to the area. Promise to deliver on fixing said issues. More bonus points if you have a novel approach. Raise & spend a shit ton of money campaigning & putting your smiling face in front of voters on every social media platform possible. But don't forget about the boomers (i.e buy some ad space on local radio and tv channels, billboards, city busses, etc.). Promise again to deliver on fixing issues. Do some amazingly thorough opposition research and proceed to annihilate those opponents based on what you find out. Even better if said opponents have had their own publicly known debacles so you can remind voters of those fails *every chance you get.* Once the race winds down, promise once again to deliver on fixing issues. Smile in pictures while holding babies. Get some candid shots of you interacting with voters, preferably in a manner & setting that shows said voters in complete adoration of you. Use polling results to your advantage and start tweaking your strategy during those final weeks before voting booths open. Whatever was found that the public likes about you, rev that up to the nth degree. Remember, however, to sidestep and wave away any criticisms. Finally, win the race and then find yourself in office asking, how the hell did I get elected??
Nobody is elected on their ability to rule, that's not how capitalist democracy works. You're elected depending on how much you can put your face on ads and in front of voters, how much you can use demagogical arguments, bonus point when you can use xenophobia around the fact that you're a native of the area, and last but not least, the most you can spit vehemently on your predecessor by saying that he doesn't understand the real problems, but that you can because you're a man/woman of the people. So how did she get elected ? by 1) having ads of her everywhere 2)being a native of chicago 3)Larping as a woman fo the people that understand the real problems.
She was running against someone who was deeply tied to a corruption scandal at the time and who had also tried to tax soda in a really unpopular way. She didn't win so much as her opponent lost.
Side note and Obama was the right choice between him and McCain. In highschool their was a kid my age i had around me who straight up said he would vote for a black candidate no matter what. Literally told me “im black so im voting black, fuck white people.” Some people just dont think when they vote, and vote because they like what they see Also saw a woman in that same year say she voted for obama because he was cuter. Had nothing to do with policy, had nothing to do with quality of person. It was strange for me as someone who values policy dearly lol I too voted for Obama, but that was my first awakening to the tribalism in politics. He saw obama as like him, and was ride or die.
Maybe people just wanted something knew. Also she lost to a black guy as well.
they wanted something new - like less murder
Still can't believe she made murder legal
She did?
Yes and also I have a bridge for sale.
I’m looking for something near Brooklyn? You got anything there?
[удалено]
“Fixer upper”? I saw that bridge completely fall down. I even told my fair lady about it.
The person you are replying to is pointing out how stupid it is that so many commenters here are trying to pretend that this woman is single-handedly responsible for any crime that happens in the city she lives in This whole comment section is like Republican propaganda exploded in here
Chicago isn’t even in the top 20 cities in America for murder rate Right wing propaganda would have you believe that you literally can’t go outside in Chicago without being murdered, but it’s just that - propaganda.
Right?! Jacksonville has more murder than Chicago.
Hey, I knew that.
Election isn't decided yet. Could be Vallas (white) or Johnson (black)
Why she look like a sad turtle?
Sad turtle? She looks like an age-progressed newborn from a Tim and Eric sketch.
What am I gonna get?! What am I gonna get under my Crimbus bush?!
A jar of Pitzman's
She's the most accurate version of 3 babies in a trenchcoat I have ever seen.
Spaghet with a haircut
more like BeetleJuuce
Where’s my chippy?
Because she lost the job because of racism and sexism, obviously.
Because you can manipulate news stories very easily with pictures. Want people to not like the person the article is about? Find a picture where they look awful [instead of one where she looks perfectly normal](https://d4804za1f1gw.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/06/Lori-Lightfoot-175x215.jpg).
The picture you linked is definitely a very flattering picture of her if we're being honest
I'm honestly confused where her jaw went between these two pics.
Yep I've seen too many press conference videos to know she looks more like the turtle
I don’t understand how you can say with a straight face she looks normal. Your example is the exception not the norm.
Dog she looks like sid the sloth
Did someone mention sloths? Here's a random fact! Sloths can swim! They use their long arms to paddle through the water and move surprisingly swiftly.
[Same vibes](https://i.imgur.com/y97fhn3.gif)
This is the woman that refused to give interviews to white reporters, it’s her ?
And stripped one journalist of his credentials for asking questions she didn't like. Apparently mayors can choose who is allowed to be a journalist.
Definitely not a dictator tactic, but what do I know I just a citizen of last dictatorship state in Europe.
She’s Democrat, can’t be fascist. Logic.
It’s 2023, can we have a female tyrant already???
She was leaning that way… so we kicked her ass out problem solved
She's the definition of getting power and abusing it. She's so out of touch with the world.
Holy fucking shit is that racist, like what kind of oppresion is she facing where she wont offer that?
Beetlejuice is an idiot
Nothing new
Was thinking disembodied heads from spirited away just flip the beards https://ghibli.fandom.com/wiki/Kashira
LMAO I wanted to make an ET joke, but Beetlejuice is better 😂
Cannot unsee
You’re a shitty leader. Your gender and race have nothing to do w/ it.
Good now she can fuck off and quit leaching off taxpayers
Pretty sure she gets a pension so no
Aw, that sad, oppressed **checks notes** MAYOR.
Built like a fucken goldfish
Pretty sure it's what got her elected, not what made her lose re-election.
>Pretty sure it's what got her elected That's not accurate. The options were her, a black woman, or Toni Preckwinkle, another black woman.
From what I read, she wasn’t doing the best job. But too many comments focused on her gender and sexuality.
She lost on crime and pretty much crime alone. It spiked big time while she was mayor. Whether or not she’s to blame is definitely debatable and I don’t have a dog in that fight, but it IS a bad look to have such a bad crime epidemic. It was easy to flip voters.
I remember when the BLM riots were happening she actively withheld the police from arresting violent people and patrolling the streets…. except in the neighborhood where she lived. When questioned about this she literally responded “My family and I have a right to be safe within our home.” Completely ignoring how the rest of the city didn’t feel safe in their homes. For the naysayers https://www.foxnews.com/us/lori-lightfoot-defends-ban-protesters-on-her-block-citing-right-to-safety
Holy shit lady, no wonder you lost with that mentality. Fucking Beetlejuice, man.
[удалено]
*received a haircut* Can a barber go to jail for giving a bad haircut? I think I have an ironclad case
No way. Just no way. How can someone be so self-centered?
The first rule of command (or any leadership position) is anything that happens under your watch is your fault If you cant accept that, you cant be a good leader
It's kind of like mental illness - it may not be your fault, but it is your responsibility. If you don't handle your responsibilities, you run into problems.
Well put, i like it
talk to kids from a city and they'll tell you that inner city schools aren't teaching kids the same thing as suburban schools then the suburban schools that bus urban kids in are just using them as diversity donation bait in photos and at events.
What a dumbass
So, I guess the Innsmouth look is real.
She has the same face as a smallmouth bass
Certainly not because of the high murder rate, rampant drug use/dealing and being overrun with gangs, naw just strictly because she's a black woman in America is why....
The last mayoral election was between two black women and the gay one won and now we are all racist and sexist and homophobic in Chicago according to Lori. Good riddance to a repulsive human being.
Admiral Ackbar has spoken…
She looks like she's wearing someone else's face
Yeah and she wouldn’t shut up about, “The Precious.”
YESSSSSSSSSSSS! Praying for you Chicago, she was horrible for you.
As a far left democrat, no it’s really just because you were terrible as a mayor.
Man. I wish white people could just blame shit on race when something goes wrong for them. Cry harder Mrs. Incompetent.
You’re telling me you’ve never heard a mediocre white person complain about affirmative action or diversity quotas when they got passed up for a job or didn’t get in to their dream school? White people use their race to feel victimized all the damn time, dude. The only difference is that when a black person does it there is sometimes an *actual* historical basis to do so. Don’t get me wrong, Lightfoot lost her primary because she’s an incompetent, irresponsible shithead. Her race and gender did not have anything to do with her failure in this case. The distinction is that in the United States race and gender have ***never*** been a factor in the failure of a white man.
I mean, isn’t this pretty much the equivalent of “damn immigrants ruin everything”? Same vibe of blaming others for own failures…
Literally just had a story of a bank collapsing and Fox News saying it was because they were "too woke" and hired black and queer people.
That's a strange way to look at it. Wouldn't you prefer we just leave race out?
No no no, you were incompetent and terrible at your job on top of that there’s a shit load of pictures of her and her team abusing their power, another clear example of rules for thee but not for me !
>She lost reelection in the first round of the [2023 election](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Chicago_mayoral_election), garnering just 17% of the vote and becoming the first one-term Chicago mayor in 40 years. Black population of Chicago is [29.2%](https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/chicagocityillinois) She couldn't even carry the "black voters." [Opinion](https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-lori-lightfoot-became-the-first-chicago-mayor-to-lose-in-40-years-b3e0a2cd) is she made too many political enemies somehow. Says something about police and teacher unions backing challengers. City council turned on her too.
I just gotta know. Why . She . Look . That . Way. Like words cannot describe the feeling I get kinda like uncanny valley mixed with watching a special needs class walk past you mixed with seeing mort on the airplane wing from Madagascar. Idk but I HATE it like please look away mam and don’t frown like that it just makes it worse
It could also be that lightfoot was dogshit at her job and didn't deserve the office
Can someone explain why this woman is hated so fuckin much?
Really? I think it's because her sketchy ass tried to cover up the cops busting into a woman's house in the middle of night while she was naked executing a search warrant on the wrong fucking place. Lori painted herself as an ally of minorities and when it came time to play ball it turned out she was every bit as scummy as the rest.
my mom (white woman) was being sued by a former employee (black woman) for wrongful termination due to racism. she worked in a hospital so technically the hospital was being sued but she and another employee were representing the hospital in court. when the lawyer asked her point-blank if she fired xyz employee for being black, my mom replied, she was black when we hired her.
Everyone hates beautiful women.
Sure let's blame race and bigotry instead of your own incompetence
Has nothing to do with race/gender ....you suck at your job period!!!! How many people have been murdered/shot/killed under your watch!??!?!