CHICAGO | Politics and Current Events

[tjp]

Originally Posted by Kngkyle

Looks like Chuy is the only one with a chance at taking down Vallas in the runoff and even that is more unlikely than likely. Lightfoot is almost certainly toast.

Weird sample. It's like 50% white, 25% black, and 10% hispanic. Definitely not representative of the city as as whole, but maybe of voter turnout?

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by tjp

Weird sample. It's like 50% white, 25% black, and 10% hispanic. Definitely not representative of the city as as whole, but maybe of voter turnout?

Yes. You have to look at who can actually vote. The city may be around 30% Hispanic for example, but the Hispanic voter population could be half that percentage (no idea if that's true. Just a made up example).

[SamInTheLoop]

Actually, what is a reasonable estimate of Latino % of Chicago electorate? I'm seeing everything from 8 to 20%!

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by tjp

Weird sample. It's like 50% white, 25% black, and 10% hispanic. Definitely not representative of the city as as whole, but maybe of voter turnout?

I assume like any reputable poll they must have resampled to a turnout model? (But the modeling is always fraught with peril since turnout can strongly depend on who is on the ballot).

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by tjp

Weird sample. It's like 50% white, 25% black, and 10% hispanic. Definitely not representative of the city as as whole, but maybe of voter turnout?

Probably not that far off if you look at where voter turnout is high or low.

[bnk]

im on a site that updates every min

The NYT is good for a general election but every site has zero returns.


Anyone able to post live returns tonight would be appreciated.


This will most likely def end up in a runoff

The Big question is will lori make it in the top two?

I hope not

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by bnk

im on a site that updates every min

The NYT is good for a general election but every site has zero returns.


Anyone able to post live returns tonight would be appreciated.


This will most likely def end up in a runoff

The Big question is will lori make it in the top two?

I hope not

Block Club Chicago has a tracker. With about 10% of precincts reporting, Vallas has a sizable lead. In 2nd place is Brandon Johnson with a small lead over Lightfoot. Chuy in 4th not a ton behind LL. Still a ways to go and a number of mail in votes.

[ChiSoxRox]

The direct source.

With 75% of precincts in:

Vallas 36.0%
Johnson 20.0%
Lightfoot 15.7%
Garcia 14.0%

374k cast so far

[Steely Dan]

With 75% of precincts reporting, the sun-times reports the following:

Vallas: 36.0%

Johnson: 20.0%

Lightfoot: 15.7%

Garcia: 14.0%

Wilson: 8.8%



Looks like it might be Vallas vs. Johnson in April.

Lord help our city if that CTU puppet wins.

[Kngkyle]

Seems that a lot of the undecided broke for Vallas as he's outperforming the polls by a pretty wide margin. Making the jump from 20% to 50% is a tall order for Johnson in the runoff.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Kngkyle

Seems that a lot of the undecided broke for Vallas as he's outperforming the polls by a pretty wide margin. Making the jump from 20% to 50% is a tall order for Johnson in the runoff.

I was undecided until last night and voted for Vallas. Glad that LL might potentially be knocked out, but Brandon Johnson is just as bad.

[marothisu]

Lightfoot just conceded. She will officially be a 1 term mayor.

[skysoar]

Originally Posted by Kngkyle

Seems that a lot of the undecided broke for Vallas as he's outperforming the polls by a pretty wide margin. Making the jump from 20% to 50% is a tall order for Johnson in the runoff.

Hope you are right, but in a city with this percentage of diversity, it could get tricky. But Vallas should win, turn out once again will be the key.

[Vlajos]

Well Vallas, the best candidate won, but Johnson, the worst candidate came in second. The runoff will be nasty, but the city can't afford a tax and spend criminal coddler like Johnson.

[Klippenstein]

Originally Posted by marothisu

I was undecided until last night and voted for Vallas. Glad that LL might potentially be knocked out, but Brandon Johnson is just as bad.

I will probably regret asking, but since Johnson is now in the run-off and people on this forum keep expressing their disapproval for him, what do you find so objectionable about him that disqualifies him from consideration?

I'd really appreciate real criticisms, not just "tax and spend criminal coddler" or "CTU puppet". Thanks in advance.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by Klippenstein

I will probably regret asking, but since Johnson is now in the run-off and people on this forum keep expressing their disapproval for him, what do you find so objectionable about him that disqualifies him from consideration?

I'd really appreciate real criticisms, not just "tax and spend criminal coddler" or "CTU puppet". Thanks in advance.

He literally wants to tax just about everything. Commuter tax, employee head tax, higher real estate taxes, financial transaction tax on the exchanges.... His entire campaign was funded by the CTU. Who do think he will funnel that new tax money towards? I assume you don't have kids in CPS? The CTU kept our kids out of school longer than just about anywhere in the state, and probably the entire country. They strike all the time. CPS is losing about 10,000 kids per year and spending increases We keep funneling money into a mostly failing school system.

Finally, Defund the Police. That's his thing.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Klippenstein

I will probably regret asking, but since Johnson is now in the run-off and people on this forum keep expressing their disapproval for him, what do you find so objectionable about him that disqualifies him from consideration?

I'd really appreciate real criticisms, not just "tax and spend criminal coddler" or "CTU puppet". Thanks in advance.

I am socially liberal but more fiscally moderate/conservative. And social issues are a vicious cycle at times. Things like public safety can at times be made worse by poor fiscal conditions and lack of economic opportunity. What I see with Johnson is his willingness to apparently enact various things that is bad for business in the city. If some businesses are driven away, it's less opportunity for people which can still lead to social issues even if you are changing the way these various things are dealt with. They'll still be there. You need a good economic engine of all types at the end of the day. Nothing exists in a vacuum. And I don't think that taxing your way out is a sustainable solution either. There is a tipping point where it becomes counter productive, which is why I don't align at all with Johnson. Businesses are going to be put off by him wanting to tax them even more to even operate here. Illinois already has high business taxes so this is starting from a losing condition. The advantages that Chicago had industry wise for a long time have lessened lately too. Businesses have more options these days to relocate elsewhere. Whether you like it or not, some decisions are governed by margins and its not changing anytime soon. If a company is in trouble with its shareholders and moving out of state to save millions on taxes will make it better then businesses are going to consider it. And this in turn on a larger scale leads to less opportunity for residents which cam amplify some social issues anyway.

Also things like rising crime need both short and long term solutions. Not just 1 or the other. While I do believe that the root causes of crime actually need to be dealt with, drastically cutting a police force day 1 isn't an answer. Perhaps you can eventually do that if your reforms work, but I think of that as more of a medium to long term goal. I don't have a problem with the main idea around this Asa long term solution but thinking that day 1 you can make drastic changes and there's no major issues that arise is just ignorance to the max. For as much crap as Lightfoot gets, she at least understands things like that. I think many of the candidates get that. Johnson - I don't think he understands that.

[ardecila]

Both candidates have a case to make between now and the runoff in April and may moderate their positions to lure the other 50% of voters. But there's no guarantee of that. Depends on what strategy they try to run.

For Vallas, he may tone down the crime/cops talk since he's already got that issue locked up. But many Lightfoot, Garcia and Wilson voters care about crime too, so there could be a payoff for keeping his foot on the gas. Hopefully Vallas comes forward with some real solutions/ideas, which shouldn't be too hard for him if he's as wonky as he claims to be.

Johnson has a harder road. He dominated the progressive lane, but that's only 20-25% of the city max. I think he hinted at his strategy in his speech tonight - he will try to mop up the Black vote from Lightfoot, Wilson, Green, Buckner, King, Sawyer. That progressive/Black coalition is how Harold Washington won... But key to that is getting the votes from more conservative elements in the Black community. So he'll probably stress Black solidarity over the next month and focus on feel-good stuff in the community instead of divisive politics.

I'm probably leaning Johnson now, I really hate Johnson's tax plans but he has some great parts of his platform. Vallas has given me nothing to like, his platform is vaporware and buzzwords except for the crime & cops talk. Johnson's CTU support is problematic, but Vallas has basically an identical relationship with FOP at this point which is just as bad or worse. (Only one union is out there killing Chicagoans, and it ain't CTU)

[marothisu]

Nm

[marothisu]

And honestly, if it weren't for his tax plan, it would be a little easier for me personally to align with Johnson. But that tax plan belongs in another year and not 2023. A lot of these things can lead to regression. At least he does seem to recognize that rising property taxes are a big issue. But he seems to think that raising other taxes won't have a negative impact which is short sighted IMO. Raising hotel taxes when Chicago is already the highest in the country isn't good and neither is more taxes on jet fuel. That will drive tourism and also convention business further away from here. Charging a financial transaction tax will hurt the thriving financial industry here too - some financial companies have made it clear they have no problems investing their business in historically non traditional financial centers such as Miami, Tampa, and Dallas. Chicago's competitive advantage in this regard has waned as we have become too complacent. The employee head tax thing may be a wash if it's just $4 per employee per year. Chicago still has an advantage when it comes to this just due to COL but these things slowly chip away at that. Charging commuters in from the suburbs via Metra more will either deter them from coming into the city or cause even more people to drive. I have coworkers in the suburbs who now drive into downtown because it's cheaper than the Metra. This could be a regression in plans for a greener city/area.

On the topic of public safety, I do agree with a long term plan of actually addressing root causes. Always have. But the issue of crime is so complex and nothing is going to be fixed within a year or 2. You cannot just have massive reductions quickly in a police force and expect that were all going to be safe. These things need to be gradual and in proportion to any success of the overall plan. That's my big gripe with these things. At least Lightfoot appeared to understand this.