CHICAGO | Politics and Current Events

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Just like Lightfoot, I think that Johnson already realizes that he faces an uphill battle with city council and other things. He will have a harder time than Lightfoot passing things because he's more to the left than she is and there's not enough support in this camp in city council (I don't think) to get most of what he wants that is far left.

Honestly, if the argument is “Trust the Chicago city council not to go along with stupid ideas that don’t affect their personal power”, I wouldn’t hold my breath. Parking meters, Exhibit A.

Most of the stupid stuff is going to get approved in the council, which may or may not get undone in a subsequent election. Even though I didn’t support either Vallas or Johnson, I think we should be realistic here.

Oh well. I’m a firm believer that social ties and greater economic trends matter far more than politics for outcomes in cities.

[Handro]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

Johnson wasn't my first choice in the runoff, and to be honest I thought he'd be toast against Vallas, but I'm glad the populists scaremongering candidate with few actual plans (other than, *checks notes*, bringing cops out of retirement somehow?) candidate lost. Here's hoping he's a more effective leader than Lightfoot (at least he's more charismatic, and clearly has more political savvy). Now the important question is if he's going to try to reclaim "Let's Go Brandon"?

I'm not sure how one paints Vallas as the "populist, scaremongering candidate," he was pretty milquetoast and and small-c conservative. Interesting to me that Chicago has seemingingly moved so far to the left that a very boring, middle of the road candidate can be so convincingly painted as an ultra-right wing neo-fascist.

All I got from Brandon Johnson was political wordsmithing and demagoguery.

[Vlajos]

Two years, let my youngest finish high school, but I think I'm done with this city.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by JMBasquiat

It's because he has no idea what he's talking about and is constantly shifting positions in an effort to keep up with what's cool at that moment. Let's hope he wakes up and realizes he needs to work with others to implement sound policy instead of trying to squeeze out whItE CapITaL like he said he would multiple times.

Well, he also doesn't know what he's talking about in regards to getting anything passed. I viewed his campaign as a "let me say ANYTHING to get elected" type of thing and he left no prisoners. He didn't even know that there's state laws preventing city income taxes and you'd have to pass a state law to even have a shot at making it a reality. Good luck with that. I know that some people talked sense into him regarding commuter taxes. The guy even started lying through his teeth about claiming he never said anything about defunding the police. It was actually off putting to see him do things like this time and time again. He is going to get a lot of shit from the media if he continues that.

If he's true to his word though as a "uniter" he's going to bring together various business leaders to talk about how stupid some other taxes like a financial transaction tax is and raising hotel taxes. I predict he'll make headway on a "mansion tax" though. Maybe he'll make headway on a hotel tax after compromising down to like a 50 cent per night surcharge. That's probably about it and maybe some really small but not very impactful taxes.

Originally Posted by galleyfox

Honestly, if the argument is “Trust the Chicago city council not to go along with stupid ideas that don’t affect their personal power”, I wouldn’t hold my breath. Parking meters, Exhibit A.

Most of the stupid stuff is going to get approved in the council, which may or may not get undone in a subsequent election. Even though I didn’t support either Vallas or Johnson, I think we should be realistic here.

Oh well. I’m a firm believer that social ties and greater economic trends matter far more than politics for outcomes in cities.

Different times. Daley had incredibly more political power than anyone today has to get people to pass dumb shit like the parking meter deal. he had people like Tunney in his back pocket to do whatever he wanted and it worked. I don't think that's an apt comparison vs. 2023. I think the Chicago political machine is definitely weaker today than 2008. You just don't have that kind of "do whatever the hell I say" right now in regards to a mayor anymore. Rahm was the last of it at all, albeit weaker than Daley, but Johnson won't even come close to it IMO (hope not - I hope nobody has that kind of power TBH). Vallas may have had that power if he were elected but it's not happening with Johnson. I would bet real money on that.

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by Handro

I'm not sure how one paints Vallas as the "populist, scaremongering candidate," he was pretty milquetoast and and small-c conservative. Interesting to me that Chicago has seemingingly moved so far to the left that a very boring, middle of the road candidate can be so convincingly painted as an ultra-right wing neo-fascist.

All I got from Brandon Johnson was political wordsmithing and demagoguery.

Look, nobody except online weirdos seriously believes Vallas is MAGA.

But the problem with campaigning on crime is that the South side and the Lakefront liberals voted in their own self interest and obviously make the majority for now.

The realistic plan for crime (since there was never the budget to massively increase the police force) was shifting officers out of the South side to the North side.

Lakefront liberals are rarely affected by crime so it’s a moot point for them compared to the small-c conservative stuff that they hate.

On the other hand, lakefront liberals are the clear source of new wealth and neighborhood investment in the city, so candidates have to kiss the ring sometimes.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Handro

I'm not sure how one paints Vallas as the "populist, scaremongering candidate," he was pretty milquetoast and and small-c conservative. Interesting to me that Chicago has seemingingly moved so far to the left that a very boring, middle of the road candidate can be so convincingly painted as an ultra-right wing neo-fascist.

All I got from Brandon Johnson was political wordsmithing and demagoguery.

Yeah this is mostly how I feel too. Although some of the fearmongering is true - much (but not all) of what is talked about regarding crime is fairly overstated right now in 2023. Hopefully 3 months from now it doesn't go the other way. It was more of a point from mid 2020 thru mid 2022, but the last 8 or 9 or so months has seen a fairly sizable decrease in murders in Chicago. We are about identical to 2018 now in the city, and a lot of the north side areas as far as some of the other violent crime has been retreating. Some of the areas going the opposite way are in other parts of town (like the Chatham area). The most vocal people about crime on social media are those in the parts of town that have been actually decreasing for multiple quarters now but they haven't been realizing due to living their life through social media/app updates as opposed to real life. And sometimes the amount of the crimes even in 2022 were less than years like 2019, 2016, even 2013 depending on what neighborhood.


Anyway, I voted Vallas and it had nothing to do with fearmongering. I do agree with him regarding safety being a right though and I agree with him that it would actually benefit a lot of the highest crime neighborhoods if they could truly get some things back under control. Johnson ran an attack campaign and he painted Vallas as some big MAGA guy. I'm not 100% sure that's true though I do think he had some sympathies to a few things they have. Vallas ran mostly on policy and he poured on the negative stuff way later (percentage wise..) than Johnson. I truly believe that Vallas was just trying to run a clean campaign on policy and not give into negativity. Though he ultimately did in the last small handful of weeks.

What's funny is just how much backtracking Johnson has even done including claiming he never wanted to defund the police. He will learn fast that this is not an easy job and if he truly wants to unite the city it literally means everyone - rich, middle class, and poor - all races, creeds, etc. One of Lightfoot's biggest mistakes was disregarding those downtown and some north side areas. People with much power but it's true that those people are being replaced by more liberal people who also have a little bit of money. I hope Johnson doesn't fall into the same mistakes Lightfoot made there.


I'll also say this - Vallas shot himself in the foot. If he wasn't going to Awake events or on some more MAGA radio shows as a guest (even if he didn't align with what they were saying), the guy would have won this election. All Johnson had to do was keep pointing this out and it apparently scared enough people. Without these things, Vallas would have probably easily won.

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Different times. Daley had incredibly more political power than anyone today has to get people to pass dumb shit like the parking meter deal. he had people like Tunney in his back pocket to do whatever he wanted and it worked. I don't think that's an apt comparison vs. 2023. I think the Chicago political machine is definitely weaker today than 2008. You just don't have that kind of "do whatever the hell I say" right now in regards to a mayor anymore. Rahm was the last of it at all, albeit weaker than Daley, but Johnson won't even come close to it IMO (hope not - I hope nobody has that kind of power TBH). Vallas may have had that power if he were elected but it's not happening with Johnson. I would bet real money on that.

I think the city council on its own without input from the mayor is fully capable of mind-numbing stupidity. What happens when they have to choose between taxing downtown businesses vs their constituents? The choice has to be made, and the aldermen by definition favor their own wards.

[Halsted & Villagio]

Let’s give the guy a chance. He won. Let’s see what he can do. At its core, what I see is a trend towards neighborhoods… historically ‘underserved/overlooked’ neighborhoods in particular. Lightfoot was a step in that direction and could not deliver. Let’s hope Johnson can right past wrongs and bring up those areas lacking in investment and attention for decades… long overlooked areas under Daley, mayors before him and as recently as Rahm. We all loved Rahm for the glitter of what he delivered all the while the decay was happening from the inside… from areas out of view. Those areas came back to bite us all with rising crime and discontent. You cannot overlook whole swaths of communities and not have it hurt you in the long run. New York tackled the Bronx, Harlem and Brooklyn — 60’s, 70’s & 80’s known for gang infestation, decay, high crime, discontent — that city did the heavy lifting in those communities and came roaring back and become (before the Covid surge) a model of what big cities can become as far as having an exceptionally large population with relative low crime.

I was hopeful Vallas would have such an effect but now that falls on Johnson. The trick will be doing this, while keeping business vibrant and keeping the economy churning at peak capacity… and yes, adding the glitter of Rahm. There is no reason to think he cannot do both. People/politicians evolve. Over the past few months, Johnson has come to strike me as a pragmatically shrewd operator who is highly attuned to what the landscape around him requires. He will know rather quickly that if he is not keeping the Chicago economic engine humming and does not add in glitter here and there, he will fall out of favor with large groups of influential people in this city. If he can do both — work on neighborhood issues/while fostering/growing a strong environment for business — they may be naming buildings after the man by the time his work is done in this city.

That would be a rare feat indeed. It’s usually been one or the other — rarely (if ever) both. Time will tell but I hope he can do it.

[bnk]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Two years, let my youngest finish high school, but I think I'm done with this city.

Let's hope corporate HQ's don't feel the same way but I doubt it.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Halsted & Villagio

Let’s give the guy a chance. He won. Let’s see what he can do. At its core, what I see is a trend towards neighborhoods… historically ‘underserved/overlooked’ neighborhoods in particular. Lightfoot was a step in that direction and could not deliver. Let’s hope Johnson can right past wrongs and bring up those areas lacking in investment and attention for decades… long overlooked areas under Daley, mayors before him and as recently as Rahm. We all loved Rahm for the glitter of what he delivered all the while the decay was happening from the inside… from areas out of view. Those areas came back to bite us all with rising crime and discontent. You cannot overlook whole swaths of communities and not have it hurt you in the long run. New York tackled the Bronx, Harlem and Brooklyn — 60’s, 70’s & 80’s known for gang infestation, decay, high crime, discontent — that city did the heavy lifting in those communities and came roaring back and become (before the Covid surge) a model of what big cities can become as far as having an exceptionally large population with relative low crime.

I was hopeful Vallas would have such an effect but now that falls on Johnson. The trick will be doing this, while keeping business vibrant and keeping the economy churning at peak capacity… and yes, adding the glitter of Rahm. There is no reason to think he cannot do both. People/politicians evolve. Over the past few months, Johnson has come to strike me as a pragmatically shrewd operator who is highly attuned to what the landscape around him requires. He will know rather quickly that if he is not keeping the Chicago economic engine humming and does not add in glitter here and there, he will fall out of favor with large groups of influential people in this city. If he can do both — work on neighborhood issues/while fostering/growing a strong environment for business — they may be naming buildings after the man by the time his work is done in this city.

That would be a rare feat indeed. It’s usually been one or the other — rarely (if ever) both. Time will tell but I hope he can do it.

Agree with this. Let's see what he can do. As someone who lived in NYC for enough time, I cannot agree with you any more. They still have issues and while their crime has increased during COVID (like literally almost every city in America) it is still loads below Chicago. Back in the 80s and 90s, Chicago and NYC were not so different. NYC actually did the right types of investments while Chicago went another path. Chicago still great but I'll tell you there wasn't a single neighborhood in 2019 that I was afraid of stepping into in NYC in the 5 boroughs. In Chicago? Not so much. I was also hopeful of Vallas because I think he actually does totally understand that safety is a really high priority. Actually, Johnson knows it too. They just have some different viewpoints about how to achieve safety. The last debate was funny because they asked Vallas how he'll get Michigan Avenue back - he answered with "safety" and one of the moderators kept telling him that he wasn't answering the question. It was insane. But then they asked Johnson the same thing and he ALSO said safety. I think it made one of the moderators realize that they should shut up and let the candidates reason it out instead of look for the answer they wanted.


I don't like how Johnson ran his campaign but he strikes me as a guy who would say a lot of shit to get votes. He backtracked on a bit. Instead of saying "well I'm going to pass it" he just kind of said "nvm" to those things. It will be interesting to see who he actually picks to run various offices of the city. That matters a lot.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by bnk

Let's hope corporate HQ's don't feel the same way but I doubt it.

Look. Moving to new office space for a large office is very, very difficult and takes a lot of data, planning, analysis, etc etc. Especially in a completely different city - and ESPECIALLY in another state. These aren't things that happen overnight or even over a few short months. Although there's rumors swirling, I think that smart businesses are going to wait to see what Johnson does and has in store, as well as how City Council reacts to anything anti-business/anti-upper middle or upper class that he brings to the table (if that even happens at this point with him). Although yes, there are SOME industries which are easy to move such as consultancies as a lot of work can be done remotely and/or from a client site while traveling. Some of the business from financial services for data center activity could be changed to some other surrounding states, depending on what kind of business. Of course, there's also the suburbs so when talking about a city change, they may only go a handful of miles instead of out of state if possible.

Unfortunately, even if things like murder continue to go down as they have been since mid last year, that won't be the narrative. As long as he is in power, the narrative will be one of decline there no matter what the data says. Which will ultimately have an impact to some businesses from a psychological standpoint anyway.

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by marothisu

I don't like how Johnson ran his campaign but he strikes me as a guy who would say a lot of shit to get votes. He backtracked on a bit. Instead of saying "well I'm going to pass it" he just kind of said "nvm" to those things. It will be interesting to see who he actually picks to run various offices of the city. That matters a lot.

We shall see, but I am enormously skeptical when people claim that politicians don’t really believe in the things they have said in the recent past before election time, or that they’ll behave differently in office than they did in a campaign.

It does a disservice to Johnson as a grown man of 47 to claim that he’s suddenly being educated on certain topics instead of having his own convictions that he’ll act on once he’s achieved the position he wants.

My opinion is that he is as hard left as opponents claim, and will go for extreme policies with only minor pushback from the council. Why would he not? The most active voters are in full support.

The budget has to balanced in the near future and sacred cows slaughtered.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by galleyfox

We shall see, but I am enormously skeptical when people claim that politicians don’t really believe in the things they have said in the recent past before election time, or that they’ll behave differently in office than they did in a campaign.

It does a disservice to Johnson as a grown man of 47 to claim that he’s suddenly being educated on certain topics instead of having his own convictions that he’ll act on once he’s achieved the position he wants.

My opinion is that he is as hard left as opponents claim, and will go for extreme policies with only minor pushback from the council. Why would he not? The most active voters are in full support.

The budget has to balanced in the near future and sacred cows slaughtered.

I never said he's going to behave differently, but I do think that he will definitely not go for everything he campaigned on. That's just extremely common in politics. Politicians promise a ton, and try only really a small fraction of it due to a lot of factors. They may want to try everything in reality but there's a lot preventing it whether it's logistical/process or someone talked some sense into them. Whether it was to get votes or when they realize that passing things is way harder than they realized and they end up cutting their losses and focusing on something else for support.

City income tax will be dead in the water (state law prevents it IIRC). Johnson has been massively lying most of the campaign, however - I mean it's quite amazing. He will tell people he never said things that are heavily recorded. I do know he's walked back on various other taxes like the Metra commuter taxes. But who knows, since he lies so much he could just easily keep it up and claim he never walked back on it and go for it. He could also propose something else that he never even once brought up.

Just like anyone who is elected (unless it's a mega racist, facist, etc) I am willing to give them a chance even if I didn't vote for them. Again, I think if Johnson is half the man he claims he is, he will actually bring together the business community and listen to their concerns. It seems like he already did it at least for one of the taxes he walked back on. If not then same old from his campaign - a lot of bullshit. I'm not sure which one we're going to get.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by galleyfox

We shall see, but I am enormously skeptical when people claim that politicians don’t really believe in the things they have said in the recent past before election time, or that they’ll behave differently in office than they did in a campaign.

It does a disservice to Johnson as a grown man of 47 to claim that he’s suddenly being educated on certain topics instead of having his own convictions that he’ll act on once he’s achieved the position he wants.

My opinion is that he is as hard left as opponents claim, and will go for extreme policies with only minor pushback from the council. Why would he not? The most active voters are in full support.

The budget has to balanced in the near future and sacred cows slaughtered.

The charitable interpretation is that Johnson said a bunch of things to get liberals to vote for him in the first round (sort of how politicians say all sort of things during primaries that they don't necessarily fully mean). He was fairly unknown before that, other than being a Preckwinkle ally.

Reading Johnson's response to the Crain's questionnaire (https://www.chicagobusiness.com/poli...-questionnaire) which seemed very pragmatic and level-headed, even if I didn't agree with everything. Vallas (https://www.chicagobusiness.com/poli...-questionnaire) gives off "I'm smarter than everyone else" vibes (like... see his answer on the Lasalle St. TIF).

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

The charitable interpretation is that Johnson said a bunch of things to get liberals to vote for him in the first round (sort of how politicians say all sort of things during primaries that they don't necessarily fully mean). He was fairly unknown before that, other than being a Preckwinkle ally.

Reading Johnson's response to the Crain's questionnaire (https://www.chicagobusiness.com/poli...-questionnaire) which seemed very pragmatic and level-headed, even if I didn't agree with everything. Vallas (https://www.chicagobusiness.com/poli...-questionnaire) gives off "I'm smarter than everyone else" vibes (like... see his answer on the Lasalle St. TIF).

I didn’t like Vallas one bit, and I’m not sad that he lost (although I am surprised). That is not to say that I like Johnson at all either, and we should be clearheaded about what his election means.

The cold hard reality is that a couple $100 million of federal funding is about to end, and the money had to come from somewhere. Like in 2-3 years. On top of Union contracts being negotiated. On top of pension payments.

The schools are not going to be asked to take the fall, and he’s ruled out property taxes. As of two weeks ago, he is clearly supportive of financial transaction taxes, head taxes, and airport taxes. Which I hope the council would block, but I don’t trust that to fully happen.

(A pro-business mayor pandering to voters wouldn’t even breathe about financial transaction taxes. They would say any other BS except the thing that might literally scare away an entire industry. So Johnson os serious about this tax.)

From a realistic Johnson POV, the only other option is a de facto defunding of police described as “seeking efficiencies”. I highly doubt Springfield is coming to the rescue.

That’s what this election boils down to. Which of the two money sinks in the city takes the cut, schools or police?

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by galleyfox

I didn’t like Vallas one bit, and I’m not sad that he lost (although I am surprised). That is not to say that I like Johnson at all either, and we should be clearheaded about what his election means.

The cold hard reality is that a couple $100 million of federal funding is about to end, and the money had to come from somewhere. Like in 2-3 years. On top of Union contracts being negotiated. On top of pension payments.

The schools are not going to be asked to take the fall, and he’s ruled out property taxes. As of two weeks ago, he is clearly supportive of financial transaction taxes, head taxes, and airport taxes. Which I hope the council would block, but I don’t trust that to fully happen.

(A pro-business mayor pandering to voters wouldn’t even breathe about financial transaction taxes. They would say any other BS except the thing that might literally scare away an entire industry. So Johnson os serious about this tax.)

From a realistic Johnson POV, the only other option is a de facto defunding of police described as “seeking efficiencies”. I highly doubt Springfield is coming to the rescue.

That’s what this election boils down to. Which of the two money sinks in the city takes the cut, schools or police?

I can sympathize with not liking either of them all that much, but in the end, I had to get my I voted sticker, right?

A financial transaction tax will require state law changes, no? In the end, he'll probably have to raise property taxes as everyone else has.

[Kenmore]

nice w, city finally heading the right direction

and lol @ all the raging conservatives

[Kenmore]

Originally Posted by blazingfire

Sad Angela Clay won the aldermanic race. Walz seemed like a sensible moderate good for that neighborhood. God forbid Uptown stops being the ghetto of the northside. Isn't she the same lady who was protesting the Weiss development? So they elected a nimby, anti development, police defunder, progressive who thinks concentrating a bunch of "affordable" housing (aka section 8) into Uptown will make it better? okay...

I thought Vallas had this in the bag. You would think Chicago, leading the nation in homicides EVERY YEAR for 12 years straight (despite only being the 3rd largest city), leading the nation in carjackings, being the national punching bag for urban crime in America, plus all the negative stuff in general would elect someone who would prioritize bringing down crime...instead we elect a police defunder who only solution to crimes will take generations to take effect. SMH.



I was thinking Chicago would follow in the steps of NYC. Safest big city in America. Recently elected a moderate hard on crime democrat. Crime is down in every category in New York. Like Marothisu said, Chicago is what right wingers who hate cities think New York is (hate to say it but its true). New York is ridiculously safe. A city of almost 9 million people averages less than 300-400 homicides a year, and it's trending downward. I visited the Bronx and didn't feel unsafe at all. The worst hoods in New York have nothing on Chicago. Walking outside in Englewood, Austin, Garfield Park, etc. at night is playing russian roulette with your life. They're doing something right that we're not.

Best case scenario, Chicago stays the course and nothing changes. Worst case scenario, all of Johnson's tax and police plans go into effect and this city goes into the gutter. There's a reason every business backed Vallas. Also worried about CPD...another soft strike awaiting.

I'm being optimistic tho. The CTA will continue being a crime filled disaster, but hey, the new bus lanes he discussed would be nice. Hopefully the number of corporations and business that depart the city will be few.

clay is great, so happy 4 uptown

it had become way too expensive

really savoring all the i'm leaving chicago posts

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

I can sympathize with not liking either of them all that much, but in the end, I had to get my I voted sticker, right?

A financial transaction tax will require state law changes, no? In the end, he'll probably have to raise property taxes as everyone else has.

A financial transaction tax is banned by state law, I think, but that’s not going to stop true believers from talking about it and trying to implement one. The rhetoric alone will cause a lot of fallout.

Very large property tax increases are most likely in the picture. Probably the new school contract worth an extra billion or two gets approved giving CTU everything they want. It’s hard to see a majority of the council putting up a fight.

Followed by a contentious budget fight a year later when the contract and other shortfalls have to actually to be payed for. That’s when we’ll see a bunch of employment head taxes, airport-related fees, mansion taxes, hotel taxes, ect. get passed as the council tries to avoid raising property taxes at once.

So I fully expect the city politicians to produce a lot of anti-business rhetoric and taxes during these years and rack up even more unpayable debt. And I don’t see much special interest from businesses in the city for some time except for corporate backend offices.

I’m not predicting doom or anything since there’s plenty of reliable young adult interest in Chicago, but I think the scenario above is realistic.

That’s how the Daley administration got the city into such a big mess in the first place. Always easy to approve contracts first and kick the can down the road.

Violence is probably going to moderate over the long run from this recent peak, but I doubt we’ll return to early 2010s lows. Simply because police are indeed important, and hiring and maintaining a fully staffed department is going be an uphill battle with Johnson openly on record as a defunder.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by galleyfox

That’s what this election boils down to. Which of the two money sinks in the city takes the cut, schools or police?

Too bad we didn't have a candidate willing to kick both the CTU and the FOP square in the nuts.

Both "organizations" have amassed far too much power and need to be abolished.