CHICAGO | Politics and Current Events

[schwerve]

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

So, has Rahm come out and bashed Rauner's budget yet? If so, I can't imagine why not - the politics for it would certainly be overwelming, and with four days to go and closing in on avoiding a run-off Tuesday, he probably should go ahead and do so......

Emanuel slams Rauner budget

[LouisVanDerWright]

^^^ Lol, you guys actually think Rauners budget is serious. The article above says it all, do you really think Rauner didn't go over this with Rahm first? It's clearly an engineered political move to give the governor leverage and probably, as a side benefit to Rahm he gets to railroad the governor for being a naughty Republican immediately before an election where he is having challenges reaching out to the more liberal voters in the city.

Rauner is basically saying "I can be a Scott Walker or we can work together". Anyone who thinks he doesn't know how ridiculous what he is proposing is doesn't understand how politics works. Now Rauner can "give ground" to the Democrats (after the Chicago election of course!) and eventually reach a compromise position.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

^^^ Lol, you guys actually think Rauners budget is serious. The article above says it all, do you really think Rauner didn't go over this with Rahm first? It's clearly an engineered political move to give the governor leverage and probably, as a side benefit to Rahm he gets to railroad the governor for being a naughty Republican immediately before an election where he is having challenges reaching out to the more liberal voters in the city.

Rauner is basically saying "I can be a Scott Walker or we can work together". Anyone who thinks he doesn't know how ridiculous what he is proposing is doesn't understand how politics works. Now Rauner can "give ground" to the Democrats (after the Chicago election of course!) and eventually reach a compromise position.

I agree. The budget proposal was a negotiating tactic.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

I agree. The budget proposal was a negotiating tactic.

Yup, they are all in on it too. Funny how the papers make a big hullabaloo at just the right times when Rahm needs the parks to turn over land or when he needs to raise a fit right before an election. Of course it's no coincidence that the papers all endorsed him as well. The fact is that the powers that be know Rahm is the only acceptable candidate and, as is always the case with politics, it's all one big game from there.

[Steely Dan]

so tomorrow is the big day.

will obama's pullman visit be enough to nudge rahm to a 50% + 1 victory?

i predict yes.

[SamInTheLoop]

^ Aye Aye. Sticking with my predicted % tallies as of last week....

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

^^^ Lol, you guys actually think Rauners budget is serious. The article above says it all, do you really think Rauner didn't go over this with Rahm first? It's clearly an engineered political move to give the governor leverage and probably, as a side benefit to Rahm he gets to railroad the governor for being a naughty Republican immediately before an election where he is having challenges reaching out to the more liberal voters in the city.

Rauner is basically saying "I can be a Scott Walker or we can work together". Anyone who thinks he doesn't know how ridiculous what he is proposing is doesn't understand how politics works. Now Rauner can "give ground" to the Democrats (after the Chicago election of course!) and eventually reach a compromise position.

So, I think we've all - or most have - acknowledged that this could very well be a far right wing opening salvo. And if Rauner has indeed been meeting with Rahm frequently since his election, then clearly Rahm is coaching him on political strategy here (Rauner would need it, as he's no longer dealing with small-time, wanna-get-rich-quck business types) - plotting strategy against/negotiating with the likes of Madigan and Cullerton qualifies as graduating to the big leagues for him....

You're point on "I can be Scott Walker, or ' '' '' " obviously makes no sense. This is Illinois and the democrats hold legislative supermajorities. Rauner actually maintains no optionality to in fact be a Scott Walker - it's not an available menu item for him, and everybody of any position of influence on the state political scene knows this....

But again, Ardecila's point was a salient one: We really just don't know at this point. Rauner does not have a political track record here.....so, we'll sure learn tons more in the months ahead....

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

So, I think we've all - or most have - acknowledged that this could very well be a far right wing opening salvo. And if Rauner has indeed been meeting with Rahm frequently since his election, then clearly Rahm is coaching him on political strategy here (Rauner would need it, as he's no longer dealing with small-time, wanna-get-rich-quck business types) - plotting strategy against/negotiating with the likes of Madigan and Cullerton qualifies as graduating to the big leagues for him....

You're point on "I can be Scott Walker, or ' '' '' " obviously makes no sense. This is Illinois and the democrats hold legislative supermajorities. Rauner actually maintains no optionality to in fact be a Scott Walker - it's not an available menu item for him, and everybody of any position of influence on the state political scene knows this....

But again, Ardecila's point was a salient one: We really just don't know at this point. Rauner does not have a political track record here.....so, we'll sure learn tons more in the months ahead....

Right.

And the thing is, as far as I can tell, Dems in Illinois don't display the pathological opposition towards Rauner that national Republicans have towards Obama since before the man's presidency even begun, which is to say a good faith, honest effort at achieving some sort of bipartisan consensus from the get-go (a la Obama at the beginning of his first term) might actually yield results here. The ridiculous strategy Obama has been forced to employ—and which LVDW seems to believe Rauner is likewise following—characterized by patently absurd opening gambits is one of the worst ways of getting things accomplished.

[ardecila]

Well, it establishes Rauner's conservative credentials and defines the territory for negotiations. Why would Cullerton and Madigan bother to play ball with Rauner if he doesn't establish his 'testicular fortitude'?

[the urban politician]

So far Rahm is at 45%

I'm feeling a runoff....

[Steely Dan]

With 70% of precincts reporting, Rahm is only at 45%.

Looks like a run-off is in the works.

[the urban politician]

^ Actually, Chuy is doing way better than I expected. He is at around 34%. He's a viable contender in a runoff. Chicago could very well have its first Hispanic mayor...

[the urban politician]

80% of precincts reporting and still at 45%.

Unless they haven't started counting the north lakefront, this is almost certainly going to be a run off election.

When is the last time Chicago has had a runoff?

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

When is the last time Chicago has had a runoff?

I can't remember there ever being a run-off for mayor before.

There's a 1st time for everything.

[Randomguy34]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

I can't remember there ever being a run-off for mayor before.

There's a 1st time for everything.

Yup, WGN confirmed that this is Chicago's first runoff. Odd to think that this is the first one for Chicago even though the city is more than 175 years old.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Randomguy34

Yup, WGN confirmed that this is Chicago's first runoff. Odd to think that this is the first one for Chicago even though the city is more than 175 years old.

The city only switched to the non-partisan 50%+1 or there's a run-off format for mayoral elections sometime in the 1990s.

[Via Chicago]

Woo, another 2 months of fliers clogging my mailbox.

Guess Ill have to cut chuy a check. He's gonna need it. Actually interested to see him lay out his plan over the coming weeks. Anti Rahm isn't enough, even if I identify with it

[the urban politician]

It's interesting to see how these two will duke it out.

My guess is that Rahm is going to strike a very conciliatory, liberal, pro-union tone while Chuy is going to just attack the shit out of Rahm over the next 6 weeks.

[SamInTheLoop]

^ Generally agree. Also am surprised at Chuy's 34%, which I think was much better than his polling in the 20s - at most 25ish%......

Which actually makes me think that the conventional wisdom (I was thinking this earlier as well) going in - that lower turnout would help wrong might indeed have been dead-wrong......if you think about it, the most motivated voters in this contest probably have either anti-Rahm in general or anti-Rahm, pro-Chuy sentiment, so lower turnout (and by all accounts this one seemed to be exceptionally low) specifically hurt Rahm and helped Chuy I think.....my guess is that Rahm's people also now truly realize this - if they hadn't previously - and will do everything they can to encourage a much higher turnout in the runoff....

At any rate, I'm glad Chicago might actually have a real election/some real democracy/an actual choice and a good debate/discussion of the issues (well, we'll see on that one!) for a change.......

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by Ch.G, Ch.G

Right.

And the thing is, as far as I can tell, Dems in Illinois don't display the pathological opposition towards Rauner that national Republicans have towards Obama since before the man's presidency even begun, which is to say a good faith, honest effort at achieving some sort of bipartisan consensus from the get-go (a la Obama at the beginning of his first term) might actually yield results here. The ridiculous strategy Obama has been forced to employ—and which LVDW seems to believe Rauner is likewise following—characterized by patently absurd opening gambits is one of the worst ways of getting things accomplished.

I very much agree except for the part where you're making an apparent comparison between Obama's opening offers and Rauner's. The difference is huge and it has to do with the actual quality of the policy contents. Obama's might be non-starters in that he knows the republican congress won't go for them, but there is this little detail that for the most part they are reasonable, pretty centrist and more-or-less good public policy (not in entirety perhaps but the very solid majority). Sure, Rauner likewise knows that the IL dem-controlled legislature won't buy his gambit, but the quality of the policy contents is absolutely horrendous, and of course politically it's quite extremist.....