1. "RE: Chicago: CHUY LOST." In response to Reply # 0
I was surprised it was this close. I just moved here about a year and a half ago and am still registered in Ohio. But did people think Chuy had a real shot of beating Rahm?
2. "Not really. In the progressive echo chamber, yes... " In response to Reply # 1
I think folks wanted Chuy to be more than what he was which is why he got the votes he did. But at the end of the day, he didn't have a plan and he couldn't solidify a base bigger than people that were upset at Rahm.
Now, the black business community needs to get from Rahm what it's got coming for the support.
4. "CHUY AIN'T HAVE NO PLAN, MAN!" In response to Reply # 3
I could understand if he came in with a slate of progressive ideas and said, "And we're gonna pay for it with a surcharge on public transportation, an added tax on downtown parking, a sales tax on domestic and professional services and by designating a cap on red light camera revenues that go to the general fund and the excess to be spent on pensions..."
BUT HE DIDN'T DO THAT.
All he did was carry water for the unions and say he was going to be the mayor for the neighborhoods, all the while not saying how he was gonna get it done.
At least with Rahm we know what we're getting and it ain't that bad. He's an asshole, but he's an asshole who is tasked with cleaning up the fiscal mess that the Daley Empire left behind and that someone with a lower mineral count might have run away from.
Them schools that got closed aren't reopening. Chuy couldn't reopen them because there's no money to pay for them.
The police department needs to deploy its resources more effectively, not hire more cops. Hiring 1000 more cops to do the same thing that they're doing now is an expensive way to not get results.
Raising property taxes to cover the pension shortfall is going to harm poor neighborhoods before they harm wealthy ones. It'll stunt home ownership and lower the incentive for current MDU owners to put more money into their properties. But Chuy never took that off the table.
Blaming millionaires and billionaires for shitty contract obligations from the Daley administration sounds great, but it isn't the truth. Rahm is cleaning up the mess and making the city a better place to live (was Chuy calling up the CEO of Whole Foods to get Englewood a store?) and folks are just mad at his style.
7. "Chuy won 44% of the vote." In response to Reply # 6
And if he had not allowed the Rahm campaign to define him (as a 'career politician') and had run on his work on the county board he may have had a better shot. He works closely with Preckwinckle who most anti-Rahm voters like. Plus if there was real drama or scandal there Rahm's campaign would've used it instead of digging up Chuy's vote for a tax increase 19 years ago.
But really it was Karen Lewis who had the best chance against Rahm but she couldn't run. Oh well.
10. "You're such a winner, bro." In response to Reply # 8
You voted for the winner that means you are a winner too! Bc elections are a competition - not just among the candidates but also the voters. The point of voting is to pick a winner - it's like horse racing. It's not about selecting a candidate based on principles or shit like that it's about picking the winner. You voted for the winner that makes you a winner. Meanwhile I'm a loser bc I voted for the losing candidate. Even though I knew he would lose I still voted for him bc I don't understand the point of voting. Plus I'm a loser generally. So of course I don't get it. And you are a winner at life as you are at voting. You totally get it. What matters here is that you voted for the winner. You are a winner.
12. "This is true, but I also studied the issues... " In response to Reply # 10
And, as a person who is for pro-growth policies, Rahm fits what I'm looking for.
At a time when the city is facing fiscal calamity, you can't propose a whole slate of redistributive ideas that aren't founded in some kind of rational plan to make them work. It's not as easy as saying, "We should reopen the closed schools and put more cops on the street" when there's a real issue lurking that needs real answers.
There's a place for progressive ideas in municipal government, but now just isn't that time. The city's coffers aren't fat enough to fund them. With an expanded tax base and a core of good and sustainable jobs, then you have a foundation for more aggressive progressive plans. DeBlasio can run New York in a different way because he's spending Wall St. money in a redistributive manner and he doesn't have the burden of unfunded liabilities from the cops, teachers, and city workers.
Until the city is back on firmer financial footing (which could take up to a decade), we can't afford to try to tax our way into prosperity.
That's the thing I never got about Chuy supporters. I never understood how they planned on paying for all of the things that we "should" be doing vs how we're playing for ways to grow the economy.
17. "You don't have a kid in CPS, I do... " In response to Reply # 16
Your garbage will get picked up, your snow will get plowed, and your Ventra card will annoy you.
But unless you have a kid in CPS, own a home worth more than $600,000, receive CHA housing vouchers, speed in weird places/run red lights in the hood, or plan on relocating a business with more than 50 employees, or are a gang member the differences are marginal in the long run.
9. "Chuy didn't have a straight answer in his entire campaign" In response to Reply # 7
That's what did him in. Instead of talking about Preckwinkle...he went digging up Harold Washington...which is great if your voter is like 40 something.
In short...his campaign was horrible. It isn't enough to not have a scandal in Chicago...Rahm is a powerhouse and he's going to be heading towards Daley length of service if he isn't hit early.
14. "Bingo, and he didn't take advantege of his "win" in February... " In response to Reply # 9
He had about a week or two after the first election to solidify his positions, come with some solid proposals and get folks over to his side who were undecided (which was like 17% at the time).
But he waffled too much and offered up vague answers when pressed on the issues early.
For the folks who were willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, they could trust he was being sincere. But for those undecideds who already had their concerns about him, he confirmed their fears.
And he doubled down on union support and ignored the business community. That put him too far to the left for a lot of black folks who are small business owners and wanted to know what he was going to do for them.
Printer-friendly copy 
Email this topic to a friend
General Discussion
