Miserable right-wing curmudgeon (to put it politely) Dan Kelly does not "have a point." After nominee after nominee lying about their views on critical issues, we had a nominee in Wisconsin who said clearly that her view was that WI's abortion ban was unconstitutional and wrong and that the extreme gerrymandering in the state was unconstitutional and wrong and won decisively against an opponent who believed neither. What could be more democratic?
Ironic (hypocritical?) to consider that my Evangelical church (like many of those across Texas) do not themselves post the 10 commandments anywhere in their church buildings but want to require them to be posted in all classrooms!!
I must also report the oddity that I have 50 years of affiliation (as student, employee and volunteer) with an exceptional Evangelical Collegiate institution which has no crosses (let alone 10 commandments) anywhere on campus except for my natatorium. BTW, I love Laurie Higgins' kids who swam for me as college students!!
"Laurie Higgins, a strong contender for Illinois’ most batty conservative..."
Won't someone think of our wonderful natural resources and wildlife. Bats should be valued for their contributions to society - not ostracized nor compared to Laurie Higgins in a derogatory manner.
I think you should have voted. I totally understand your position, but I don't think you can complain about Johnson unless you voted. Voting "present' is a cop out, IMHO
Brandon Johnson has many flaws, but I was pleased to see that the citizens of Chicago did not give in to white paranoia about crime. I came to the University of Chicago in 1971 from the rarefied atmosphere of Eastern Idaho, and lived in the city from the 70s through the 80s. Those were some crimes heavy years; I had plenty of personal experiences of it. Yes, it's worse now than before covid, but nowhere near those years' levels. Don't get me started on Citadel moving to Miami!!! because of crime. We all know, Ken, its because Florida has no state income tax.
Aha! So in the end you completely validated my deep distress about voting for either candidate. I feel so seen! :-)
I was re-mapped out of my ward of 20 years, so my polling place is far away and no longer across the street. I waffled over my mail-in ballot until Tuesday afternoon, held my nose, picked one, and walked it to a mailbox so it would count. I sort of consoled myself that my vote wouldn't be included in the night's returns.
I second what Lynne said. I came here from Montana in 1966. Our apartment in Lincoln Park was broken into twice. I was mugged on Hudson Ave on a summer evening, and on another summer evening a man attempted to get me into his car. Also our upstairs neighbor was robbed at gunpoint at our front door.
Like you, I cast a blank ballot for mayor. I stood in the booth for a couple of minutes debating and in the end I could not select either one of them. I'm in the 45th ward, so I voted for alderman. Unfortunately, the incumbent won. The city council now has a larger contingent of progressives. Let's see how progressive Johnson really is.
I wish there was a none of the above choice on the ballot so that we could get an idea of the level of dissent. It would also enlighten the winner on their true level of support.
Thank you for your observations about the Kansas law barring trans women from women’s locker rooms and bathrooms. I would imagine that most men would be up in arms if someone made their wives or daughters use the men’s locker rooms and bathrooms. After all, in addition to privacy issues, there are safety issues involved in requiring a woman or girl to use the men’s bathroom or locker room. Yet, the troglodytes in the legislature in Kansas have no problems requiring women or girls who are transgender to do just that.
I live in Oak Park now, but I would have voted for Vallas, and I would have felt fine about it. I'm a liberal Democrat who has little patience with the progressive excess and magical thinking of the recent awokening. I don't think I've changed much. I think my team has, and it's a bummer.
As mayor, Johnson will have precious little resources to address the "root causes of crime," which are complex and beyond his power to affect much. Some commenters note that crime in the '80s and early '90s was worse. Yes, but it got a lot better, in Chicago and around the country, especially in New York. Why? Scholars debate, but there's a persistent unwillingness to face squarely the most likely reason: bad guys were sent to their room.
I'm supposed to feel guilty about the phrase and sentiment, "tough on crime." But I'm not sure what one is supposed to be tough on if not crime, especially violent crime. I'm against excessive punishment and inhumane confinement. I've always opposed the war on drugs. But I'm very much in favor of a war on gun violence. Is Johnson?
One root cause of crime is lack of opportunity. What is Johnson going to do to encourage economic development in Chicago, to encourage investment in Chicago, to stem population loss and make Chicago a place that attracts migration and business instead of pushing it away? Does anyone have any confidence in Johnson on these fronts? I don't.
It would be nice if our city, metro, and state were not in competition with everywhere else, but it's foolish to pretend that it's not. Our region is in relative decline. This should be seen as an emergency, because everything everyone cares about -- left or right -- hinges on it.
I don't like Vallas's all-in on charters and "school choice," but, as mayor, he would not have been able to dictate that agenda. He would have faced a formidable opponent in the CTU. I'm pro-union and pro-teacher (I'm one), but I think on balance the city and its kids would've been better served by having a conscientious adversary in City Hall rather than its own man. So, even on schools, I think Vallas was the better choice.
I'm with Zorn: give the guy a chance. The surest cure for pessimism is things going well, and I'm ever open to the evidence. I leap it at. We shall see....
I agree that we all need to hope for the best and help where we can. I think that the best means that the mayor's good intentions and solutions are pursued but his solutions are moderated, all with a minimum of rancor. But I think that his supporters would not see that as a good outcome and might still be bad for the city.
I also think that one of the worst outcomes is already guaranteed. The mayor will appoint the majority of the new school board members, including the chair, (11 of 21). His appointments are certain to be CTU members or closely aligned with the CTU. The CTU will also dominate the elected positions.
Zorn is probably correct about the challenge of getting more money from state coffers, but I don't see any barriers to the mayor getting whatever changes he needs in terms of city taxes. But I think there is no hope the mayor morphs towards moderation.
“I wanted to show up at the polls — as I always, do — if only to squeak out a tiny but distinct ‘none of the above’ message. Did that constitute a vote? They gave me an “I Voted!” sticker, so I slapped it on my chest.” --Zorn
Obviously, this may be thought of as common sense: Casting a ballot primarily defines voting as we know it, but in 2023 Eric voted for neither Brandon Johnson nor Paul Vallas for the mayor of Chicago – he voted for “nobody,” which also suggests a deal-breaking protest-vote against the candidates’ positions on issues important to Chicago and all. This is a kind of no confidence vote: Eric has little political confidence in the two candidates for reasons he writes about in his article. Eric voted!
I am an atheist. I get the 'joke' that some people think that some Christians are 'the worst people on the planet' and a disgrace to their core figure. But I find the picture and the caption offensive and in poor taste because it demeans a central religious image and his character. It also does not seem to be primarily political. I doubt that anyone would consider such a post of Muhammad because of the Taliban (or ISIS or Boko Haram), or of Vishnu because of the Hindu terrorists in India, or of Buddha because of the Buddhist terrorists in Myanmar.
Miserable right-wing curmudgeon (to put it politely) Dan Kelly does not "have a point." After nominee after nominee lying about their views on critical issues, we had a nominee in Wisconsin who said clearly that her view was that WI's abortion ban was unconstitutional and wrong and that the extreme gerrymandering in the state was unconstitutional and wrong and won decisively against an opponent who believed neither. What could be more democratic?
Ironic (hypocritical?) to consider that my Evangelical church (like many of those across Texas) do not themselves post the 10 commandments anywhere in their church buildings but want to require them to be posted in all classrooms!!
I must also report the oddity that I have 50 years of affiliation (as student, employee and volunteer) with an exceptional Evangelical Collegiate institution which has no crosses (let alone 10 commandments) anywhere on campus except for my natatorium. BTW, I love Laurie Higgins' kids who swam for me as college students!!
"Laurie Higgins, a strong contender for Illinois’ most batty conservative..."
Won't someone think of our wonderful natural resources and wildlife. Bats should be valued for their contributions to society - not ostracized nor compared to Laurie Higgins in a derogatory manner.
https://blog.nwf.org/2013/10/10-reasons-you-should-love-bats/
Is it ironic that Dan Regan probably doesn't use shampoo?
I think you should have voted. I totally understand your position, but I don't think you can complain about Johnson unless you voted. Voting "present' is a cop out, IMHO
Brandon Johnson has many flaws, but I was pleased to see that the citizens of Chicago did not give in to white paranoia about crime. I came to the University of Chicago in 1971 from the rarefied atmosphere of Eastern Idaho, and lived in the city from the 70s through the 80s. Those were some crimes heavy years; I had plenty of personal experiences of it. Yes, it's worse now than before covid, but nowhere near those years' levels. Don't get me started on Citadel moving to Miami!!! because of crime. We all know, Ken, its because Florida has no state income tax.
Aha! So in the end you completely validated my deep distress about voting for either candidate. I feel so seen! :-)
I was re-mapped out of my ward of 20 years, so my polling place is far away and no longer across the street. I waffled over my mail-in ballot until Tuesday afternoon, held my nose, picked one, and walked it to a mailbox so it would count. I sort of consoled myself that my vote wouldn't be included in the night's returns.
Isn't Angel Reese an LSU starter? Was she kept out for some reason?
Yes, the photo was out of date and I replaced it with a current one.
I second what Lynne said. I came here from Montana in 1966. Our apartment in Lincoln Park was broken into twice. I was mugged on Hudson Ave on a summer evening, and on another summer evening a man attempted to get me into his car. Also our upstairs neighbor was robbed at gunpoint at our front door.
Like you, I cast a blank ballot for mayor. I stood in the booth for a couple of minutes debating and in the end I could not select either one of them. I'm in the 45th ward, so I voted for alderman. Unfortunately, the incumbent won. The city council now has a larger contingent of progressives. Let's see how progressive Johnson really is.
I wish there was a none of the above choice on the ballot so that we could get an idea of the level of dissent. It would also enlighten the winner on their true level of support.
Thank you for your observations about the Kansas law barring trans women from women’s locker rooms and bathrooms. I would imagine that most men would be up in arms if someone made their wives or daughters use the men’s locker rooms and bathrooms. After all, in addition to privacy issues, there are safety issues involved in requiring a woman or girl to use the men’s bathroom or locker room. Yet, the troglodytes in the legislature in Kansas have no problems requiring women or girls who are transgender to do just that.
If you need company in the mayoral race, you got it. First time I my life I didn’t vote.
I live in Oak Park now, but I would have voted for Vallas, and I would have felt fine about it. I'm a liberal Democrat who has little patience with the progressive excess and magical thinking of the recent awokening. I don't think I've changed much. I think my team has, and it's a bummer.
As mayor, Johnson will have precious little resources to address the "root causes of crime," which are complex and beyond his power to affect much. Some commenters note that crime in the '80s and early '90s was worse. Yes, but it got a lot better, in Chicago and around the country, especially in New York. Why? Scholars debate, but there's a persistent unwillingness to face squarely the most likely reason: bad guys were sent to their room.
I'm supposed to feel guilty about the phrase and sentiment, "tough on crime." But I'm not sure what one is supposed to be tough on if not crime, especially violent crime. I'm against excessive punishment and inhumane confinement. I've always opposed the war on drugs. But I'm very much in favor of a war on gun violence. Is Johnson?
One root cause of crime is lack of opportunity. What is Johnson going to do to encourage economic development in Chicago, to encourage investment in Chicago, to stem population loss and make Chicago a place that attracts migration and business instead of pushing it away? Does anyone have any confidence in Johnson on these fronts? I don't.
It would be nice if our city, metro, and state were not in competition with everywhere else, but it's foolish to pretend that it's not. Our region is in relative decline. This should be seen as an emergency, because everything everyone cares about -- left or right -- hinges on it.
I don't like Vallas's all-in on charters and "school choice," but, as mayor, he would not have been able to dictate that agenda. He would have faced a formidable opponent in the CTU. I'm pro-union and pro-teacher (I'm one), but I think on balance the city and its kids would've been better served by having a conscientious adversary in City Hall rather than its own man. So, even on schools, I think Vallas was the better choice.
I'm with Zorn: give the guy a chance. The surest cure for pessimism is things going well, and I'm ever open to the evidence. I leap it at. We shall see....
I agree that we all need to hope for the best and help where we can. I think that the best means that the mayor's good intentions and solutions are pursued but his solutions are moderated, all with a minimum of rancor. But I think that his supporters would not see that as a good outcome and might still be bad for the city.
I also think that one of the worst outcomes is already guaranteed. The mayor will appoint the majority of the new school board members, including the chair, (11 of 21). His appointments are certain to be CTU members or closely aligned with the CTU. The CTU will also dominate the elected positions.
Zorn is probably correct about the challenge of getting more money from state coffers, but I don't see any barriers to the mayor getting whatever changes he needs in terms of city taxes. But I think there is no hope the mayor morphs towards moderation.
“I wanted to show up at the polls — as I always, do — if only to squeak out a tiny but distinct ‘none of the above’ message. Did that constitute a vote? They gave me an “I Voted!” sticker, so I slapped it on my chest.” --Zorn
Obviously, this may be thought of as common sense: Casting a ballot primarily defines voting as we know it, but in 2023 Eric voted for neither Brandon Johnson nor Paul Vallas for the mayor of Chicago – he voted for “nobody,” which also suggests a deal-breaking protest-vote against the candidates’ positions on issues important to Chicago and all. This is a kind of no confidence vote: Eric has little political confidence in the two candidates for reasons he writes about in his article. Eric voted!
I am an atheist. I get the 'joke' that some people think that some Christians are 'the worst people on the planet' and a disgrace to their core figure. But I find the picture and the caption offensive and in poor taste because it demeans a central religious image and his character. It also does not seem to be primarily political. I doubt that anyone would consider such a post of Muhammad because of the Taliban (or ISIS or Boko Haram), or of Vishnu because of the Hindu terrorists in India, or of Buddha because of the Buddhist terrorists in Myanmar.