CHICAGO | Politics and Current Events

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Stockerzzz

You don't think a Chance endoresement has anything to do with his father being the co-chair of the campaign? That's very naive.

In addition to criticizing Rahm when his dad was Rahm's chief of staff, Chance also endorsed Amara Enyia in the primary and not Preckwinkle. Seems pretty clear that Chance is perfectly willing to break from his father politically. I don't understand why you're seeing nepotism here.

Chance is a blowhard. His father has been pulling in over $160,000 from the government since the aughts. Yet Chance cries poverty.

Where is he crying poverty? He chose to live on the South Side to stay connected to his community, but he's very obviously wealthy and successful. Pretty much all rappers walk that line of enjoying their money while staying connected to their community - nobody would buy their music if it wasn't relatable. Arguably Chance is more modest than most and doesn't name drop $100k cars or fashion/liquor brands. He also bought a Streeterville condo last year which was well publicized (and he talks about it in one of his songs).

Now Chance is using dog whistle language to claim that one black woman won't help the black community. Meanwhile, his father is the co-chair of the other campaign. It's sleazy.

This is the only area where I agree with you, his public statements do seem to paint Lightfoot as a sort of Uncle Tom. But I think he earnestly supports Preckwinkle and believes she is the better candidate for the black community. Remember that city workers and teachers are disproportionately black and, due to the residency requirement, they comprise a huge portion of the city's black middle class. What's good for those unions is good for the black middle class.

FYI I am a Lightfoot supporter, I just don't see anything "sleazy" about Chance's endorsement, seems to make perfect sense.

[Steely Dan]

here's another poll pointing to a lightfoot landslide!


March 18-20
sample: 500
MoE - 4.4%

Lightfoot - 53%
Preckwinkle - 17%

Undecided - 29%

source: https://news.wttw.com/elections/vote...-election-poll


that's A LOT of undecideds at this stage of the game, but even if every single last one of them breaks for preckwinkle (yeah right), she still loses, LOL!

Originally Posted by ardecila

FYI I am a Lightfoot supporter, I just don't see anything "sleazy" about Chance's endorsement, seems to make perfect sense.

there's nothing sleazy about his endorsement. chance is free to endorse whichever candidate he so chooses, just as anyone else.

but his language at the recent preckwinkle rally over the weekend, setting up an "us vs. them" narrative with his extremely divisive "side-ism" talk is sleaze-ball 5000.

i expected better of him.


but it won't ultimately matter a whole lot anyway.

lori lightfoot is going to be chicago's next mayor.

the WHOLE fucking city's next mayor.

not the south side mayor.

not the west side mayor.

not the northside mayor.

but rather the CITY OF CHICAGO's mayor!

[Hourstrooper]

Originally Posted by ardecila

In addition to criticizing Rahm when his dad was Rahm's chief of staff, Chance also endorsed Amara Enyia in the primary and not Preckwinkle. Seems pretty clear that Chance is perfectly willing to break from his father politically. I don't understand why you're seeing nepotism here.



Where is he crying poverty? He chose to live on the South Side to stay connected to his community, but he's very obviously wealthy and successful. Pretty much all rappers walk that line of enjoying their money while staying connected to their community - nobody would buy their music if it wasn't relatable. Arguably Chance is more modest than most and doesn't name drop $100k cars or fashion/liquor brands. He also bought a Streeterville condo last year which was well publicized (and he talks about it in one of his songs).



This is the only area where I agree with you, his public statements do seem to paint Lightfoot as a sort of Uncle Tom. But I think he earnestly supports Preckwinkle and believes she is the better candidate for the black community. Remember that city workers and teachers are disproportionately black and, due to the residency requirement, they comprise a huge portion of the city's black middle class. What's good for those unions is good for the black middle class.

FYI I am a Lightfoot supporter, I just don't see anything "sleazy" about Chance's endorsement, seems to make perfect sense.

The only bad thing I see so far from lightfoot is shes anti tif and anti Lincoln yards and the 78.....

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

there's nothing sleazy about his endorsement. chance is free to endorse whichever candidate he so chooses, just as anyone else.

but his language at the recent preckwinkle rally over the weekend, setting up an "us vs. them" narrative with his extremely divisive "side-ism" talk is sleaze-ball 5000.

i expected better of him.

The way Chance phrased his remarks was a little weird, but basically I think he's saying the same thing as Lee Bey here:

https://twitter.com/LEEBEY/status/1108935820596011008

The South Side is a huge urban zone (bigger than Philadelphia) whose needs cannot simply be ignored because the North Side is doing well. If you live on that side of town, the lack of attention by city leaders to South Side problems can be dumbfounding. The fact that Lightfoot finished in a distant 3rd or 4th in the West Side and deep South Side (i.e. the areas where Wilson got the most votes) plus her long history working with cops may suggest to people like Chance that she, too, will continue this lack of attention.

Originally Posted by Hourstrooper

The only bad thing I see so far from lightfoot is shes anti tif and anti Lincoln yards and the 78.....

Don't be so sure. It could just be shrewd posturing on Lightfoot's part. If you actually read her platform, she's proposing some smart reforms that will lower barriers to development - simpler building code, eliminating aldermanic prerogative for projects with affordable housing, etc.

As for Lincoln Yards - it'll be a done deal by the time the next mayor takes office. Even if Lightfoot "opposes" it, it doesn't matter. All it does is maybe get her some votes from pissed-off North Siders.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by ardecila

...
The South Side is a huge urban zone (bigger than Philadelphia) whose needs cannot simply be ignored because the North Side is doing well. If you live on that side of town, the lack of attention by city leaders to South Side problems can be dumbfounding. The fact that Lightfoot finished in a distant 3rd or 4th in the West Side and deep South Side (i.e. the areas where Wilson got the most votes) plus her long history working with cops may suggest to people like Chance that she, too, will continue this lack of attention.
...

I feel like part of the problems with the South Side is their support of corrupt local politicians. Downtown politicians aren't going to focus on any one part of the city, and will mostly take down suggestions of what each power center wants and then dole out of goodies based on what's asked for. The North Side is fairly straight-forward with what it wants. The West Side is less coordinated, but is also so far destroyed that they'll take pretty much anything, plus the gangs control so much of it that the message from the West Side is basically they want investment that doesn't interfere with the drugs trade.

The South Side, though, still has established political systems, many of which conflict and, unfortunately, many of them are about fiefdoms maintaining power in the area without regard to what the actual benefit to the area is. "Downtown" sees that and says, "Whatever, we'll dole out things to the local power-brokers, but they have to figure things out for themselves before anything substantive can be done." And that's what happens. Confused uncoordination leads to haphazard investment that has little to no long-term benefit. For the South Side to really benefit, it would have to come together and present a cohesive plan for investment. I haven't seen that, have you? There are a bunch of little plans, but nothing that operates together toward a common goal. Until that happens, "Downtown" will give each little player a piece to keep them quiet, but won't take it upon themselves to try and coordinate the South Side. And why should they? The North Side has it's shit together, so gets more or less what it asks for. Asking downtown to both come up with the money and try to coordinate the power structures on the South Side as outsiders really is asking too much.

[the urban politician]

It’s never enough.

It will never be enough.

The truth that nobody wants to admit is that you can build Harvard down there and it won’t uplift those communities. The problem isn’t the lack of facilities. The problem is the people.

Most of the entrepreneurs and successful people left these areas years ago. They are on the north side, the burbs, or left the region altogether.

Money spent on new buildings is a trashing of public money. Might as well feed that money to alligators. These areas need new people. Immigration is the only practical answer.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by ardecila

The way Chance phrased his remarks was a little weird

it wasn't just "a little weird".

it was dog whistle bullshit.

ie. "she ain't black enough".

as i said before, i would have expected better from chance.

[the urban politician]

^ It seems deeper, there almost appears to be some sort of rift going on in Chicago's black community into 2 factions:

1. The Govt dependent, machine politics traditional faction supported by unions, ministers, etc that's with Preckwinkle

2. Those in the private sector/professionals who may be more likely to support Lightfoot

[moorhosj]

Seems all the hand-wringing about rent control was a bit premature. The bill to lift the state ban on rent control failed to get out of committee. It couldn't pass the first hurdle in a process of at least 7 hurdles. (committee vote, house vote, senate vote, governor's signature, city council committee vote, full city council vote, mayor's signature).

From Capitol Fax

Guzzardi’s bill died in subcommittee today when Democratic Reps. Curtis Tarver and Rita Mayfield sided with Republicans and voted against it and Rep. Andre Thapedi voted “Present.” The Chicagoland Apartment Association put together a coalition to lobby against the bill and issued a press release celebrating its demise…

[LouisVanDerWright]

Is it actually dead though? Or just kinda dead?


Speaking of the non-existence of the "housing crisis" in Chicago:

I have a $750/mo 2BD/1BA at Cermak and Albany available starting May 1st. Bedrooms and bathrooms are tight, but I just gutted the bathroom with new tile. The whole building has new drywall, electrical, and plumbing since 1996 so it's not even a shitty plaster wall fire hazard either.

Any takers? Kenmore? Anyone who is bitching about rent increases? Seriously, now's your chance to live two blocks from the Pink Line like a 15 minute train ride from the Loop...

[Baronvonellis]

Couldn't you say people buying houses and condo's are getting rent control from the bank though. Plus you get to deduct it from your taxes yet renters cant deduct their rent . You get to pay a fixed rent for 30 years without it going up. In the meantime the value of the property is going up, so there's no reason why the bank couldn't raise the mortgage as the value of the property goes up to reflect that. Since they don't get paid till the mortgage is paid off in 30 years or whatever the time period is. If you bought a house at auction for $200k and in 10 years its worth $500k you got rent control for it. You should be paying a bigger mortgage to the bank.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by Baronvonellis

Couldn't you say people buying houses and condo's are getting rent control from the bank though. Plus you get to deduct it from your taxes yet renters cant deduct their rent . You get to pay a fixed rent for 30 years without it going up. In the meantime the value of the property is going up, so there's no reason why the bank couldn't raise the mortgage as the value of the property goes up to reflect that. Since they don't get paid till the mortgage is paid off in 30 years or whatever the time period is. If you bought a house at auction for $200k and in 10 years its worth $500k you got rent control for it. You should be paying a bigger mortgage to the bank.

Real Estate taxes continue to skyrocket. So does home owners insurance. Many people have ARMs so the mortgage payment can change. Rent control is an arbitrary government enforced price control.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Baronvonellis

Couldn't you say people buying houses and condo's are getting rent control from the bank though. Plus you get to deduct it from your taxes yet renters cant deduct their rent . You get to pay a fixed rent for 30 years without it going up. In the meantime the value of the property is going up, so there's no reason why the bank couldn't raise the mortgage as the value of the property goes up to reflect that. Since they don't get paid till the mortgage is paid off in 30 years or whatever the time period is. If you bought a house at auction for $200k and in 10 years its worth $500k you got rent control for it. You should be paying a bigger mortgage to the bank.

Wow, what?

Nothing at all related to property ownership remains "fixed" for 30 years

Standard residential loans are fixed for 30 years, but all commercial mortgages renew ever 5-7 years at the latest interest rates. So that can go up, and often does.

Property tax is always going up.

Maintenance costs go up over time as your property ages.

Utility costs always rise.

Rents MUST go up over time or else you'll be in the red. Sorry renters, but there's no such thing as a free lunch.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by moorhosj

Seems all the hand-wringing about rent control was a bit premature. The bill to lift the state ban on rent control failed to get out of committee. It couldn't pass the first hurdle in a process of at least 7 hurdles. (committee vote, house vote, senate vote, governor's signature, city council committee vote, full city council vote, mayor's signature).

From Capitol Fax

Yeah, I heard something of this sort.

There are enough sensible people among the elected officials to stave off the Socialists, at least so far. We must remain ever vigilant, though.

Btw, is this seriously how the Rent Control question was worded in the referendum?

“Should the State of Illinois lift the ban on rent control to address rising rents, unjust evictions, and gentrification in our community?”

That's just precious

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Yeah, I heard something of this sort.

There are enough sensible people among the elected officials to stave off the Socialists, at least so far. We must remain ever vigilant, though.

Btw, is this seriously how the Rent Control question was worded in the referendum?

“Should the State of Illinois lift the ban on rent control to address rising rents, unjust evictions, and gentrification in our community?”

That's just precious

That's hilarious considering the cities with rent control like San Francisco and New York have experienced far more gentrification than Chicago.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

That's hilarious considering the cities with rent control like San Francisco and New York have experienced far more gentrification than Chicago.

Of course and one of the reasons for that is...

Drumroll...

Rent control driving up prices for the masses to the benefit of the few lucky ones.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Lololol, heads gonna roll:

https://abc7chicago.com/fbi-reviewin...urces/5219838/

FBI now investigating the State's attorney's office and their handling of the Smollett Hoax. Wonder if Kim Foxx is going to get strung up on obstruction of justice charges?

PS the FBI is still investigating the letter:

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...327-story.html

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ It seems deeper, there almost appears to be some sort of rift going on in Chicago's black community into 2 factions:

1. The Govt dependent, machine politics traditional faction supported by unions, ministers, etc that's with Preckwinkle

2. Those in the private sector/professionals who may be more likely to support Lightfoot

Purely anecdotal but it seems to me like many of the black "private sector/professionals" are fleeing the city unless forced to remain because they are city workers. If you have the option of living in the suburbs or taking your skills to another city and avoiding the dysfunction of the South Side, why wouldn't you do that?

So Group #1 has a numerical advantage on Group #2 and the well-publicized black exodus is only making that advantage bigger.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Lololol, heads gonna roll:

https://abc7chicago.com/fbi-reviewin...urces/5219838/

FBI now investigating the State's attorney's office and their handling of the Smollett Hoax. Wonder if Kim Foxx is going to get strung up on obstruction of justice charges?

PS the FBI is still investigating the letter:

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...327-story.html

Whoa, I'm certainly no expert, but this seems pretty abnormal.

Also, what is gained by dropping the charges. Seems like red meat for racist Trump types.

[Halsted & Villagio]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Lololol, heads gonna roll:

https://abc7chicago.com/fbi-reviewin...urces/5219838/

FBI now investigating the State's attorney's office and their handling of the Smollett Hoax. Wonder if Kim Foxx is going to get strung up on obstruction of justice charges?

PS the FBI is still investigating the letter:

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...327-story.html

I have a little time today so I will bite. Not to be the PC police but the use of words like "strung up" in reference to an African American is... well Louis... you know what goes next so I won't bother to write it. Lets just chalk this one up to us all being human/multi-tasking without fully thinking about what we post sometimes. I say this because I have never seen you make such a mistake in the past so this definitely gets a pass in my book

Regarding this whole Smollett debacle, as an attorney for close to 20 years, I have never seen anything like it in my entire career. I had a cup of coffee as a State's Attorney, Public Guardian and Public Defender -- all by the age of 30 just to get real trial experience under my belt before accepting a position with a law firm. I never saw anything like this - period.

Of course there has never been a case quite like this one with a celebrity involved (at least not in Chicago) but I have been directly involved with somewhat similar cases where Average Joe is involved and they almost always walk away with paper following them -- meaning a CD ("conditional discharge") - permanent criminal record... or probation - permanent criminal record. Never a Nolle (decline to prosecute/dismissal). A "Sup" (Supervision) or some type of carved out deferred program (for example - no criminal record if all of the conditions are met over the course of 1 year) would have been a homerun, and under this amount of evidence would have been the absolute best that a defense attorney could have reasonably hoped for. And a Sup or deferred program would be light (pretty much a slap on the wrist if you will) but at least that would have kept up the appearance of propriety, justice and fairness. But under this amount of evidence... a Nolle? Never happens.

Yes, this one should be thoroughly investigated.


Excuse the typos guys I am trying to get it all in while eating lunch. Also some the criminal laws may have changed since the last time I practiced criminal law but from friends and colleagues still in criminal practice, no, this was a "one-off".... something they NEVER see in the day to day practice of criminal law.