92 days, and counting, until Election Day

To me, the final day of the time period for filing nominating petitions is always more interesting than the first day.

Admittedly, that first day always sees a mad rush of potential candidates or their aides (the would-be politicos wouldn’t want to risk catching a cold) waiting at the Elections Board office when it first opens that Monday morning – all in hopes of getting that first spot on the ballot.

THE DAYS IN between (which this time consisted of all of last week) usually attract the fringe candidates who didn’t get their nominating petitions in order by Monday morning.

So the fact that fringe mayoral candidates Tyrone Carter and Jay Stone filed on Tuesday and Thursday of last week ought to be reason enough to discount their chances (that, and the fact that Stone's petitions didn't even come close to the minimal support required to survive an electoral challenge). Even fringe candidate M. Tricia Lee managed to be ready to file for her spot on the Feb. 22 ballot by first thing Monday morning.

But it is that last day, which this year occurs today, that has the potential for intrigue.

Because there is always a serious candidate who decides to play the game of wanting to have his name appear last on the list of candidates running for a particular office. This year, it is the mayoral bid of Rev./state Sen. James Meeks, D-Chicago, who is trying that gambit.

THE REVEREND COULD make a big splash IF he were to show up just before the Chicago Board of Elections offices were to close, and file his nominating petitions at the last possible second. But what if someone were to get stuck in traffic, and the reverend’s people were to show up just seconds after the office door were locked?

The death of a credible campaign on a fluke? It could happen.

Monday is the final day to file the nominating petitions that let someone run for the right to be the Big Man (or Woman) who walks these halls.



Or what if the reverend’s people show up late in the day and file, only to have someone else manage to slip in at the (literal) last minute to file their own nominating petitions for a ballot slot to run for mayor?

When I look at the list of nine people who as of the weekend had filed their nominating petitions to get on the mayoral ballot, I first notice the absence of the name Patricia Van Pelt-Watkins. She’s the woman who caught my Election Night attention earlier this month by having her radio campaign spots run over and over and over again on WBBM-AM radio, making themselves prominent among all the reports of Mark Kirk’s narrow victory for U.S. Senate, or Pat Quinn’s even closer win for Illinois governor.

I DON’T KNOW definitively what Van Pelt-Watkins is planning to do. Maybe she has given up. Or she may file those petitions and get herself a ballot slot. Could this be a race between the CEO and the pastor to see who can come in last?

And what about that guy who’s living in mayoral hopeful Rahm Emanuel’s house, is refusing to move out, and a couple of weeks ago tossed out hints that he may run his own campaign for mayor?

If he’s serious about that notion, he has to get those petitions in today – or else he’s as full of hot air as any other political dreamer.

I’m sure some people will be doing a body-watch for him to show up with nominating petitions, although I have to admit to not having too much interest in whether or not he runs.

IF HE DOES manage to get on the ballot, it would be just another fringe candidate on the mayoral ballot. We have enough of those (I’m sorry that I can’t take Stone’s mayoral bid more seriously, because not even his alderman father plans to support him), and I don’t think we need many more.

If there is a real story to that guy’s presence (I’m deliberately not naming him because I don’t want to publicize his ego any more than necessary), it would be to find out who put the idea of a mayoral bid into his head to begin with.

Just as I believe one story we reporter-types should be pursuing related to this mayoral campaign is to find out who is paying the bills that are accumulating related to the attempt to get the courts to knock Emanuel off the ballot on the grounds that he has not (according to the letter of the law) been a Chicago resident for a current-enough period to qualify for a political campaign this election cycle.

Thus far, we have heard about how attorney Burt Odelson and his legal colleague James Nally are handling this particular effort (claiming Emanuel gave up his Chicago residency when he went off to Washington to be President Barack Obama’s chief of staff for 20 months).

PROFESSIONALLY, I RESPECT the legal skills and the work of Odelson – who I have watched for just over two decades. He is an expert at election law, and he is good at getting things done for his clients.

But whose client is he in handling this particular case? I can’t envision he’s taking on this case pro bono just for his own curiosity, although I have heard him identified in recent weeks as being an “adviser” to Meeks’ campaign.

Who is paying the legal expenses for Odelson to work his hardest to knock off Emanuel, and what are the partisan leanings of those particular individuals?

In my mind, I can’t figure if it is just some conservative partisan who dreads the idea of Rahm-bo continuing to be politically relevant (the ideologues would want Emanuel to be unemployed and living on food stamps, so they could then label him a welfare cheat)?

OR ARE WE talking about someone who wants to clear the path for another of the mayoral hopefuls? Does the reverend want Emanuel out of the way so that this becomes the all-African-American political battle?

I don’t know the answer to those questions. I must admit to being more curious about learning those facts, rather than listening to the rhetorical nonsense that we’re going to hear in coming weeks from all the candidates as they try to convince us they deserve the chance to be the person who has to take the blame for being unable to resolve the fiscal mess that confronts city government these days.

  -30-

‘Daley for mayor’ intimidating to all but the most foolhardy of prospective pols

Why do I believe that Richard M. Daley is going to get re-elected as mayor come next year’s municipal elections, despite what negative feelings prospective voters might have about him or incumbent politicians in general?

Perhaps it is because the leading challenger at this point is a man whose own political father won’t help him, and who goes about saying it is his “patriotic duty” to run for Mayor of Chicago (sounds to me way too similar to the Blues Brothers “Mission for God” that caused them to create that massive police chase on the cinematic screen).

I DON’T SEE the challengers. The names I hear are either too obscure to be taken seriously, or they are officials who may have significant impact within a specific ward or neighborhood, but are largely meaningless to the rest of the city.

While I realize that campaigns are about prospective candidates becoming known to the public at large, I doubt anybody outside of their respective home wards will really take Sandi Jackson or Tom Tunney that seriously.

And as for Bob Fioretti, I understand he’s trying to get his name known by visiting all 50 wards (and boasting of how he has put in excess of “100 miles per day” on his car because of the effort). Yet I don’t see the evidence of any traction gained by his prospective campaign – although admittedly, it is still early.

Most people, including the so-called “big gun” candidacy of White House chief fo staff Rahm Emanuel, openly say they will only consider a campaign of their own if Daley himself were to step down voluntarily and not seek re-election.

YET IN GIVING the State of the City address earlier this week, Daley gave off so many hints that he still envisions himself being a part of city government beyond May of next year that aldermen are openly saying they took the speech as his declaration of intent to run for re-election – even though I am aware Daley is going to wait until the absolute last minute before he makes anything official.

It actually is a realistic strategy. Daley has been around so long (in December, he will surpass his father, Richard J., in terms of the actual amount of time served in office as Chicago mayor) that he doesn’t have to campaign.

Everybody already knows what they think of the man. There’s nothing he can say to change anyone’s opinion. What works is the intimidation factor that few people want future retribution from the powers that be by openly challenging Daley.

Which is why the campaigns that have come forth are from the long-shots who have nothing to lose.

PEOPLE SUCH AS Jay Stone – the son of long-time Alderman Bernie Stone, who having represented the far North Side for so long (since 1973) is exactly the kind of person who might think his personal status is strong enough to stand up to Hizzoner Jr.

Yet even Bernie won’t back Jay. “No comment, whatsoever” is his official response to reporter-types asking about Jay’s candidacy.

It’s quite a differing reaction from the classic Chicago viewpoint, as expressed by Richard J. Daley himself, who when criticized some four decades ago because one of his sons had an insurance business that received a city contract, said, “if I can’t help my sons, then they can kiss my ass.”

What kind of respectable Chicago politico can’t even get his father’s support? Heck, even Alderman Dick Mell helped to turn his son-in-law from an unemployed law school graduate to Illinois governor – with stops in the state Legislature and Congress along the way.

YET SO FAR, Jay Stone is the only real candidate we have, although I understand there also is a man named Fredrick K. White who is calling himself a Chicago mayoral candidate (and has created a website to promote that very idea).

Somehow, I don’t sense that Daley is concerned about either of these men, which I know is confusing to out-of-towners who want to take on face value that poll from a few weeks ago that says a majority of people questioned want somebody else as Chicago mayor.

Not that they have any real clue as to who that “somebody else” should be. That factor is what makes me think that any talk of replacing Daley is wishful thinking.

It is only because of my age that I can remember an era when anyone other than a Daley was mayor – although for nearly three-quarters of my life to date – either J. or M. has been the city’s chief executive. There are times when those days of Jayne Byrne, Harold Washington or Eugene Sawyer have withered into the history books that it seems like they never happened.

AS FOR MIKE Bilandic, I honestly remember him more as a former Illinois Supreme Court justice than for anything he did during his stint on the Fifth Floor.

I’m sure I’m not alone in thinking this way.

Which is why until a credible candidate comes forth and gives us legitimate reasons why we should vote for them (rather than against Daley), I can picture many city voters showing up at the polling places next year and voting knee-jerk for Daley for mayor – putting their real attention toward picking replacements for Helen Shiller and the many other aldermen who are hinting they may step down from the City Council.

-30-