Does anybody think a 14-candidate forum works – except to create chaos?

I’m usually of the sort when it comes to candidate forums and debates that it’s wrong to think in terms of fringe candidates and paring down the field to only certain political aspirants.

Can we 'decide' amongst mayoral candidates if we don't see them side by side? Or would such a forum be little more than political chaos?

If a candidate manages to get a spot on a ballot and will be an option come Election Day, I say its downright reckless to try to exclude them. People have a right to know exactly who the ding-dongs are whose names are before them when they make choices for political office.

BUT I HAVE to admit; that viewpoint of mine is being tested by the upcoming election cycle for Chicago municipal government – particularly for that of mayor.

I’m talking about the cycle that’s going to ask voters to pick from amongst 14 candidates who managed to make it past the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners’ process for putting together the Feb. 26 ballot.

WFLD-TV (as in Channel 32) is planning a pair of candidate forums they will televise, come Thursday and Friday.

The Thursday program will feature the campaigns of Toni Preckwinkle, Susana Mendoza, Gery Chico, Bill Daley and Willie Wilson. Friday’s forum will be for everybody else – as in the candidates who are not considered as having as strong of support as the Big Five.

OR, AS CANDIDATE Paul Vallas put it, “we get invited to the children’s table.”

It doesn’t surprise me that judgment calls are being made as to which of the 14 candidates ought to be taken seriously and are worthy of news coverage. It would be kind of ridiculous to equate former Alderman Robert Fioretti’s mayoral campaign with that of Preckwinkle.

But it also means feelings are being hurt by the candidates who are finding out they’re not going to be taken as seriously as the Big Five! Both Vallas and Amara Enyia both complained publicly about their exclusion, with Enyia taking the stance that this is the political establishment trying to pre-determine the Election Day outcome. She’d even be correct in saying that the polls showing the Big Five in the lead actually show no one has a ridiculously-large lead and the “children’s table” candidates aren’t that far behind the leaders.

It almost seems like everybody wants to work out of the Fifth Floor office at City Hall for the next four years

Of course, she’s also getting hammered these days by the Chicago Tribune for the moments of ineptitude she has had in her personal finances and in government posts she has held in the suburbs.

IF ANYTHING, IT would be interesting to have a candidate forum of sorts so that we could see Enyia side-by-side with the bigger names so we could see for ourselves just how much she is lacking by comparison. Although I expect the kind of people who back her because she has a rap music star on her side will not care much.

But I’m not optimistic that such a forum could occur.

Mostly because I don’t have a clue how you’d stage such an event. How could you have a credible debate program with 14 people each trying to respond to each other, and come up with smart-aleck retorts to each other’s insults?

Is this the inevitable outcome … 

When you consider that a debate is likely to be an hour-long event – at most – trying to include everybody would most likely result in everybody getting one question. There wouldn’t be enough time to ask anything more and expect everybody to answer.

AND BEFORE YOU say the forum could be lengthened, I’d retort that, “You’ve got to be kidding me!” Trying to stage several hours of political blather (which is what many political debates devolve into) would insure that nobody sits through and sees the whole thing.

… for an April 2 run-off election?

The tedium would cause so many channels to be changed in mid-debate.

It might well be that this freak-show of an election cycle with so many candidates is just the type of thing that makes for bad television. It certainly wouldn’t be possible to do much of a debate – no matter how much political people try to follow the usual conventions to do so.

Unless you’re really that eager to see and hear La Shawn Ford and Jeremiah Joyce exchange retorts, while Daley sighs at the sight of other people trying to seek the political post that certain types of Chicagoans may regard as his birthright.

  -30-

EXTRA: Did Joyce just have most-significant electoral accomplishment?

Jerry Joyce is the mayoral candidate whose most significant personal fact about himself is that he is from a family that has long been associated politically with the Daley family.

JOYCE: Number One (for a day)

Joyce’s father, Jeremiah, in fact was one of those behind-the-scenes guys who served as a significant adviser to Mayors Daley – both the elder and the younger.

THERE ISN’T MUCH else to say about him – other than the fact that he’s going to have his name atop the list of mayoral candidates on the ballot for the Feb. 26 election.

Joyce won the lottery, which gives him the ballot spot in the prime place. There are those who say some people are clueless enough they merely vote for the first name they see – and could get some 1 or 1 percent of the votes for that reason alone.

In a campaign where even after candidates get kicked off the ballot for insufficient support, there are still doing to be at least a dozen or so candidates in the running. Any advantage in gaining votes could mean something.

Except that it might turn out that Joyce is just too obscure politically to be able to take full advantage of this political perk.

LEARNING THIS WEEK of Joyce getting the top ballot spot actually reminded me of a past election cycle – as in the Democratic primary for governor in 1994.

That election cycle saw state Attorney General Roland Burris, Comptroller Dawn Clark Netsch and Cook County Board President Richard Phelan challenge each other for governor – yet the top ballot spot went by lottery to Jim Gierach – a suburban Palos Park attorney who has spent much of his public life campaigning for less-draconian laws related to drugs.

I remember being a reporter-type person speaking with Gierach that day; knowing there was a good chance it would be the last time I’d give his campaign for governor any significant attention. Is that the same for Joyce for mayor this week?

GIERACH: Won 'No. 1' slot in '94

Then again, I also remember the Netsch campaign’s response, which gained the Second ballot spot from the lottery. They contended that voters would ignore the little-known “Gierach” name on top and look to the second slot.

IT’S LIKE THEY really won the ballot lottery. Or at least that’s the political “spin” they put on the issue.

Would that make one-time Chicago Public Schools CEO Paul Vallas the big winner; since he is the one who gained the second ballot slot out of the list of 21 candidates who currently are in the running for mayor?

Putting him ahead of Number three Willie Wilson and Number four Toni Preckwinkle? Or is this all a batch of political hooey intended to try to get us to think something significant is happening – when in reality we’re still just over two months away from Election Day.

And some four months from the likely run-off election April 2 that will actually decide who will be taking the oath of office as Chicago’s new mayor come the city’s Inauguration Day in May.

THERE IS ONE part of the Joyce campaign, however, that continues to intrigue me. For it seems that the alleged Daley family ally is actually the guy who filed the legal challenge to the mayoral nominating petitions of William Daley.

DALEY: Tense times with Joyce?

Could Joyce think that, if only, he could get a Daley name off the ballot, he might actually have a chance of achieving political victory? For many of the challenges that have been filed have been done with the “logic” of kicking off the candidate who most closely resembles one’s own (such as Preckwinkle allies being behind the effort to remove Susana Mendoza from the mayoral running).

“Mayor Joyce?” I don’t know how much of a ring it has to it. Would the type of Chicagoans who think the “Daley” name is synonymous with City Hall be willing to accept it? Will the Christmas holiday greetings between the two political families be particularly tense this season?

Or could all of this merely be evidence of how inane our political procedures are capable of being?

  -30-

Campaign tactics meant to gain whatever edge candidates can get

We’re at that stage of the mayoral election cycle in which candidates are desperately trying to game the process in ways they desperately hope will give them an edge on Election Day.

The four mayoral hopefuls …

Even though many of the things they’re now going are really trivial and superficial and not likely to make one bit of difference in terms of turning out votes.

THIS IS THE election cycle in which there are no incumbents seeking a return as mayor, meaning every political dreamer with delusions of grandeur is putting themselves in the running.

Monday was the first day in which candidates could file nominating petitions, and it should be noted that aides to four people showed up at City Hall to make their claim to a ballot spot.

Jerry Joyce (a long-time Daley family friend, is he really running against William?), Toni Preckwinkle, Paul Vallas and Willie Wilson were those people, and they’re now likely to go about making claims they’re the only candidates who deserve to be taken seriously. After all, they’re dedicated enough to file early – which may give them the chance of having their names listed at the top of the list of candidates on the Feb. 26 ballot.

With the political theory being that some people are clueless and confused enough that when they cast their ballots, they vote for whoever’s name is atop the list.

… with dreams of getting … 

PRECKWINKLE, THE FORMER alderman from Hyde Park turned Cook County Board president, herself claims getting that top spot on the ballot could account for a percent or two of the vote – which in this year’s electoral mess could be enough to prevail.

Kind of scary, if you think about it.

The municipal election cycle’s most prominent post being resolved by the ballots cast by people who didn’t put any thought into WHO they were voting for – but merely cast a vote for a ballot slot!

You may have noticed that many more names have tossed themselves out for mayoral contemplation beyond the four individuals who filed early Monday morning.

… the number one mayoral spot … 

OF COURSE, THERE’S the fact that the deadline for filing is the end of business next Monday. And yes, there will be those people eager to have their names listed last on the ballot.

Because names are put on the ballot in the order that candidates file their petitions, there are bound to be a few candidates who will want to show up just before 5 p.m. so they can be absolutely last. A Dec. 5 lottery will break any ties that develop.

With the line of logic being that having one’s name at the end of a lengthy list of political dreamers is better than being stuck in the middle of the pack. Just think being seventh on a list of 13 or so candidates for mayor?

Geez, you might as well wear a millstone around your neck. Because you’re actually going to have to campaign completely on the issues and the merits of what kind of candidate you would make. And yes, that line is meant to reek heavily of sarcasm.

THERE ALWAYS IS the chance someone will show up late Thursday, only to have someone else manage to slip in just behind them. Or the risk of having someone show up at City Hall at 5:02 p.m., just a moment or so too late to file the nominating petitions you struggled to put together.

… on the Feb. 26 Election Day ballot

Which brings your political aspirations for Election ’19 coming to a crashing halt not because you were defeated at the polling place, but because your campaign dreams became irrelevant to the process.

All of which makes the activity of Monday morning running trough next Monday night an intriguing part of the process for politically geeky observers.

Because a lot of people are engaging in actions now that will seem downright trivial and irrelevant come May when one of these people takes the oath of office promising not to totally embarrass themselves as mayor – and everybody else will have their heads filled with fantasies about how much better qualified they would have been IF ONLY the voters had come to their senses.

  -30-

Chicago mayoral pack to whittle its way down to more manageable pack

The days of having 30 to 40 people claiming they’re candidates for the post of Mayor of the city of Chicago are soon to be through.

Chicago's next mayor will be, … who knows?

Next Monday is the deadline for candidates for the Feb. 26 municipal elections to file their nominating petitions to even get on the ballot, and we’re going to learn how many of those people were politically incompetent enough that they couldn’t get the 12,500 signatures of support needed to qualify.

WE’RE GOING TO see how many of the so-called candidates of earlier this year will not even be a factor in the final discussion over who should replace Rahm Emanuel in the mayor’s office.

If anything, I gained some respect earlier this week when I learned that Troy LaRaviere, head of the Chicago Principals and Administrators Association, was giving up his campaign before it even began.

He was honest enough to admit he couldn’t get a sufficient number of signatures of support, thereby making any effort to run for mayor an exercise in futility.

Of course, he’ll probably be remembered in this election cycle as the guy whose farewell to the campaign season was to take a pot shot at entertainer Kanye West – who apparently reached out early on to the LaRaviere camp with thoughts of publicly supporting him.

LaRAVIERE: First to see jolt of reality

WEST, OF COURSE, is one of several entertainers who are now backing the mayoral dreams of Amara Enyia, an experienced public policy professional who has never actually run for office herself.

LaRaviere let it be known he couldn’t accept West’s support because the man’s too friendly with President Donald Trump (remember that goofy Oval Office meeting between the two of a few weeks ago?).

The trick of anticipating the upcoming week is to figure out how many of the mayoral dreamers will come to their senses before the Nov. 26 deadline. Of course, people with political aspirations usually are delusional enough to think so highly of themselves they can’t see their own flaws.

So we may get a lot of them fighting for a ballot space, just so they can take 1 percent or so of the vote come the end of February.

FIORETTI: Latest with mayoral dreams

TAKE ROBERT FIORETTI – the one-time outspoken alderman who has since run for mayor and Cook County Board president. He let it be known this week he’s getting into the mayoral mix again.

I understand that having a political post is more interesting for a legal-minded person than having a mere law practice. Yet Fioretti comes across these days as somebody who runs for office because he needs a job! Not necessarily because he has ideas beneficial to our society at-large.

So Fioretti is working these days, as are other candidates, in gathering the necessary petition signatures to qualify. By Fioretti’s admission, he’s trying to gain some 30,000 signatures, because he knows the political powers-that-be are capable of having their people come up with ways to disqualify signatures so as to void them out.

Time for a new 'Mayor' Daley, … 

It may even turn out that some of those who do file their petitions next week will be unable to actually appear on the ballot.

PERSONALLY, I’M GOING to find it interesting how many of the candidates who have been talking up the mayor’s race for months on end will be amongst those who qualify. Will Rahm Emanuel turn out to be correct when he said upon his own announcement he would not seek re-election that Chicago’s next mayor wasn’t even in the race yet?

Implying that people like former Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy and former Chicago Public Schools CEO Paul Vallas were kidding themselves, and that the rest of the dozens of mayoral dreamers were truly delusional.

… or is Chicago ready for Mendoza's youth

Will this really become a campaign dominated by the big-time political names of Daley (as in William), Chico (as in Gery) and Preckwinkle (as in Toni)? With the real question becoming whether the kid (as in 46-year-old Susana Mendoza) can do enough to get herself taken seriously. Or whether Willie Wilson attracts any political support outside of a few select political precincts on the South and West sides?

There’s a lot of uncertainty be settled between now and April 2 – the date of the run-off election likely to be needed. I wonder if the only certainty now is the appropriateness of the election so close to April Fool’s Day. We may wind up feeling like the election results are a practical joke on all of us.

  -30-

How quirky can partisan politics be? Consider possible outcome for Toni P.

It was just a year ago that political speculation was wondering about how Toni Preckwinkle, the one-time alderman from Hyde Park and two-term Cook County Board president, was finished.

PRECKWINKLE: Changing from county to city seal?

The voters, these speculators claimed, were going to cash Preckwinkle out on her behind – all because she had the nerve to try to stabilize Cook County government finances with that pop tax of a penny per ounce that offended so many people who they felt compelled to purchase their carbonated beverages.

WHAT WOUND UP happening was that Preckwinkle won the primary to run for a third term with ease – largely because the opponent she had was Robert Fioretti, a former alderman of no particular skill who couldn’t give voters a reason to pick him instead of her.

That means she’s up for re-election come Nov. 6. Yet Preckwinkle won’t be focusing much attention on being in charge of Cook County government much longer.

For it seems that Preckwinkle plans to make a formal announcement – the creation of an exploratory committee. As in she’s going to study whether the voters of Chicago would love her so much that they’d take seriously her bid to become mayor.

Could Fioretti again challenge Preckwinkle?

Yes, I write that with a touch of sarcasm. Because creating such a committee usually is evidence that the candidate, in her own mind, wants to run for the higher office.

“MAYOR TONI PRECKWINKLE” is a concept that I’m sure will grossly offend certain people – the ones who really wanted her to go down to political defeat on account of the pop tax that boosted the overall cost of a bottle of Coke (or whatever other flavor one chose to drink) by about 21 cents.

Instead, she’s got the potential to become the city’s (and arguably, the state’s) most important government official. Because hardly anybody thinks the governor is more important than “da Mare,” no matter who occupies either office.

With Rahm Emanuel making it clear he no longer plans to seek re-election to a third term for himself, it creates an opening. One that none of the dozen or so people who for months have tossed about their names amidst the political speculation have been able to fill.

Could Toni P. make McCarthy dreams fizzle?

Which could well lead to people like Preckwinkle, Rep. Mike Quigley, D-Ill., and soon to be retired Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., getting into the mayoral campaign.

ALL HAVE SAID in recent days they are considering getting into the campaign mix (although soon-to-be former Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan has specifically said she’s NOT thinking of running for mayor).

I guess the idea of a McCarthy/Vallas campaign for City Hall come 2019 just doesn’t sway anyone into being interested.

It will be interesting to see how quickly a new political presence can get themselves into the electoral mix. Particularly since there are some candidates who already are in the process of gathering the nominating petition signatures that would get their names on the ballot for the February election (which could lead to an April run-off if no one takes a clear-cut majority).

One thing that political people always get wary of is trying to do a rush job in piecing together those petition signatures. Because, all too often, the lack of time causes short-cuts to be taken that result in flawed petitions – which can get candidates kicked off the ballot even before Election Day.

SO AS FOR Preckwinkle, she could have the potential to bring an organized candidate to the Election Day mix. She could make the upcoming election cycle intriguing.

GUTIERREZ: Also may add to mix?R

Particularly if it means she has to address the issues that her critics wished they could have used against her in this year’s election cycle. Which they couldn’t because not only did she have a token Democratic opponent, the Republicans couldn’t even put up that much of a challenge.

Toni for Mayor? I’ve already heard the speculation about how Chicago could be one of nine cities in upcoming elections that choose to put African-American women in charge of their municipal government. A first – although one that I’m sure will grossly offend those kind of people who believe in this Age of Trump we’re now in.

Will they be the ones screaming “Pop Tax!!!” the loudest? While also screeching in the future about how much “Crook County” isn’t meeting its financial obligations due to a shortage of funds.

  -30-

Speculation stories – Deep thoughts of news, or just whole load of hooey?

At heart, it’s just a speculation story, as in the Chicago Sun-Times thought they could sell newspapers on Thursday with a story about the load of people who could possibly be considered as contenders for the post of Mayor of Chicago.

Will they really ALL run for mayor?

The newspaper went so far as to publish a front page depicting 38 people they’re saying are potential mayors (or “may nots,” to use the Sun-Times’ bad pun).

I’M INCLINED TO think that Rahm Emanuel is telling a tidbit of truth when he said this week the person who will replace him in the mayor’s office is someone who has yet to declare themselves a candidate.

As in the dozen or so people who have publicly stated a desire to run for mayor aren’t really credible candidates. Which means we should probably give more credence to all of the last-minute arrivals to the mayoral competition front – rather than taking seriously anybody who’s been campaigning for months, but has yet to capture the public’s imagination.

Now I’m not bashing the Sun-Times as somehow publishing nonsense information. I’m sure there are some people eager to pick at the newsgathering organization who will toss out the “fake news” label and try to proclaim this the ultimate evidence.

In reality, it is the work of some of the Sun-Times’ more experienced political reporters dredging up the information they do have to try to figure out who might well become the next mayor of Chicago following the February election and potential April run-off.

Who is Trump's anonymous critic?

PERHAPS EVEN GIVE the public a sense of just who these people are and what they might offer to the city of Chicago now that Emanuel has decided that a third four-year term as mayor just isn’t worth the electoral aggravation it would take to achieve.

Particularly since this particular election cycle in 2019 is going to be such a free-for-all – what with no incumbent and a batch of candidates with limited appeal amongst the masses of Chicago’s population.

Personally, I’m inclined to think one-time Chicago schools CEO Paul Vallas is a part of Chicago’s political past, while former Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy has the stink of Laquan McDonald’s death on him just as much as those people who are determined to believe that Rahm Emanuel bears all the blame.

Gave competing paper some publicity

It’s only by comparison to those two so-called front-runners amongst the people willing to challenge Emanuel that potential candidates such as Amara Enyia or Ja’Mal Green can think they have much of a chance of succeeding.

OF COURSE, THE concept of speculation stories isn’t unique to this happening.

For another story I stumbled across on Thursday was off the CNN.com website – a piece of copy contemplating the anonymous commentary the New York Times published about high-ranking presidential staffers who supposedly are working to undermine the desires of Donald Trump out of a sense that they’re protecting the nation.

CNN decided to do a story that listed names of people who could potentially be the anonymous commentary’s author – the one who has committed an act of “treason!” (as Trump thinks it) or is the “rat” (as I’m sure a mob boss would term it).

I don’t think CNN has a clue, particularly since their list of potential political blabbermouths includes Trump’s daughter, Ivanka, or first lady Melania.

Is the public more interested in this?

I’D THINK THE chances of either Trump femme turning out to be the fink is about as likely as the Sun-Times being correct when they say one-time presidential advisor (during the Barack Obama administration) Valerie Jarrett or aging Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White (he’s 85) will become the new mayor.

It may be fun to contemplate – at least for politically-geeky types who take seriously the nuances of public policy.

Whereas I suspect many others will consider the big celebrity-style story of Thursday to be more interesting – actor Burt Reynolds died at age 82.

Perhaps they envision Reynolds approaching the pearly gates with the late actor Jackie Gleason’s “Buford T. Justice” character ready to resume their “Smokey and the Bandit” films pursuit?

  -30-

Can cop firearm reporting rule work?

The part of me that, many years ago, was a full-time cop and crime reporter appreciates the fact that police officers are going to have instances where they use force on people.

To the point where we issue them firearms. Why else would we do so if we didn’t expect there to be occasions when they’d have to kill someone else “in the line of duty.”

WHICH IS WHY I’m skeptical of a new proposal that would require police officers to report for the record every single instance where they reach for that sidearm and use the threat of shooting someone as a way of intimidating them into submission.

A consent decree offered up by the Illinois attorney general’s office (and enforceable by the federal courts) to help govern the operating policies of the Chicago Police Department includes that very provision, and it is one that the police themselves don’t think much of.

Soon-to-be former Illinois attorney general Lisa Madigan may be adding to her legacy of 16 years in that post, but many of the political people don’t think much of the policy, with possible mayoral candidate Paul Vallas (the one-time Chicago Public Schools CEO) jumping on the bandwagon and saying he thinks it’s a bad idea.

Personally, I don’t comprehend how a reporting requirement would work. Or if there’s any way it could work. It just seems too far out of the realm of what is practical.

CURRENT POLICIES REQUIRE that police officers be capable of accounting for every bullet they fire with their sidearm. If they pull the trigger and try to shoot someone, they have to be capable of justifying why they felt compelled to do so.

Police officers don’t (or aren’t supposed to) go around shooting people just for the sake of trying to intimidate them into submission.

My own memories of talking with street cops back in the day (which in my case was the late 1980s, back when the city’s murder rate for a few consecutive years averaged 900-something per year) was that if an officer reaches for that pistol, it’s because he seriously thinks someone’s life (possibly his or her own) is in danger.

VALLAS: Appealing for cop votes?

In short, it is a “shoot to kill” type of situation. Otherwise, reaching for the pistol and waving it about to try to scare someone (or firing off “warning” shots) is out of line, and just as reckless and inappropriate as killing someone who didn’t pose a threat.

WHAT I DON’T get is just how a reporting requirement of drawing a weapon could possibly work. After all, the decision to reach for the pistol is usually a reactive one – it happens in a matter of seconds.

Political people, including Vallas and Mayor Rahm Emanuel, say they fear causing an officer to have to spend that extra second thinking could be the difference between an officer able to do his job and one who gets the official police rituals performed at his (or her) funeral.

I also wonder if we fully trust officers enough to think that at the end of every shift they work, they’re going to do even more paperwork to acknowledge every incident where they felt compelled to reach down to grab their pistol.

Will we start getting people filing claims that a cop pointed a pistol at their heads? Will we start hearing stories of some cop playing “cowboy” and waving his firearm over his head?

AT A TIME when we have a significant share of our society not really trusting of law enforcement (that’s actually putting it mildly), while others throw their support to police officers usually to reinforce any racial, ethnic or whatever other hang-ups they may have, this could cause more confusion.

MADIGAN: Adding to legacy?

Although I do have to admit I approve of the notion of some sort of restriction on firearm use – even though I’m sure some would argue there already are sufficient limits on our police officers.

There may be people who think there’s nothing wrong with a cop using his/her pistol to intimidate a “punk” by pointing it upside his temple to scare him into submission. The problem is that life always presents situations (such as misfired shots) where something can go drastically wrong.

Disarming the police altogether might be a solution, but it isn’t one that is the least bit practical in our society of today.

  -30-

Is there really a difference between a city neighborhood and a suburb?

That’s the question bopping through my brain these days, what with the questions being brought up about the mayoral aspirations of Paul Vallas.

VALLAS: Chicago enough to be mayor?

The one-time CEO of the Chicago Public Schools who also has worked in education in Philadelphia, New Orleans and Bridgeport, Conn., has had quite a life in many places.

BORN IN CHICAGO, it seems that Vallas is like many a Second City native in that he regards Chicago as home and his life always manages to bring him back to us – even though his work life has managed to take him to several places.

In fact, Vallas had his long-time home in the Chicago area in suburban Crestwood – which was his residence when he ran for lieutenant governor back in 2014.

Which is why it shouldn’t be shocking that some people are already trying to take Vallas’ mayoral aspirations down for the count by trying to make it seem that Paul has no right to think of himself as a Chicagoan.

WMAQ-TV this week reported how Vallas’ mayoral campaign doesn’t seem to have an office in Chicago. Campaign literature does offer up an address in the Chinatown neighborhood, but the television station couldn’t find local people aware of any political presence.

THEY DID FIND evidence that Vallas’ brother, Dean, has business interests at that address, and also in Crestwood. It also seems the Vallas for Mayor campaign, as it exists, does have a bank account – at a financial institution out in Plainfield.

Which, for what it’s worth, is a suburb not even located in Cook County (it’s most definitely Will, where locals consider Joliet to be the BIG city nearby).

So is Vallas unfit to even think of running for mayor of Chicago? Are we going to get something similar to the political strategy back in the 2011 election cycle – when people tried arguing that Rahm Emanuel wasn’t really a Chicagoan.

EMANUEL: Residency issue didn't work

After all, he was raised in the North Shore suburbs near Wilmette and did live in Washington, D.C. back when he was working for presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama and also serving in the House of Representatives – albeit representing a district that covered the Northwest suburbs of Chicago proper.

THAT EFFORT ULTIMATELY failed, in large part because the courts ultimately found that Rahm was registered to vote at the residence where he continues to live – even during much of the time he was working in the District of Columbia.

While Vallas made a point of moving to the Lincoln Park neighborhood several months ago – so as to establish city residency so he could even consider being on the mayoral ballot for the 2019 election cycle.

It may be a lame issue. But then again, when there are roughly a dozen people talking seriously about trying to get their names on the ballot next year to run for mayor, perhaps they hope it will stick.

Particularly if it only manages to sway a few potential voters into erasing Vallas from their mental consideration for their vote. A few is all it will take in an at-large election in which no one will come close to a 50-percent-plus-one majority.

NOW I REALIZE why municipal elections are open only to city residents-proper. Suburbs have their own local governments. People ought to have a stake in the communities whose government business they want to do.

But there is a part of me who wonders if we ought to think of places like Calumet City, Cicero or Evanston as being similar to Hyde Park, Austin or Lake View. In terms of being small communities that comprise the greater entity otherwise known as the Chicago metropolitan area.

The idea that the Vallas campaign is at such an early stage it really hasn’t set up a full-time campaign office or established bank accounts for itself within the city proper for an election cycle that remains some eight months off (and we still have to vote for governor first) comes across as a non-issue.

Besides, if the Vallas campaign really is uncoordinated enough that it can’t put together a proper campaign office and account at one of the city’s bigger banks, then it likely is destined to become one of a fringe nature that we’ll most likely forget all about a year from now.

  -30-

Who needs to win? Finishing second is all these mayoral dreamers want to do

We’re not even through this year’s election cycle for Illinois governor, yet there are those to whom the “big” election is next year’s brawl for Chicago mayor.

EMANUEL: No. 1, but is that good enough?

In that cycle, it seems obvious incumbent Rahm Emanuel will get more votes than anybody else. Which is why the many other officials who either have declared their candidacy or are still contemplating their desire are more concerned with finishing second.

IT’S ALL BASED in the non-partisan nature of our municipal government in Chicago. Whether Democrat or Republican or whatever other political party one wants to identify with, everybody will get lumped into one election come Feb. 26.

Should it turn out Emanuel does not get a 50 percent-plus-one majority, he and the second-place finisher will compete against each other in a run-off to be held exactly one year from Monday.

Which means that none of the people wishing to challenge Emanuel are thinking about beating him. They merely wish to be “first runner-up,” so to speak.

One such candidate, the former Chicago Public Schools CEO Paul Vallas, says openly his desire is to get Emanuel into a run-off, where he figures that all of Chicago will unite behind his candidacy.

McCARTHY: Wants revenge for dismissal

HE WINS, BECAUSE he thinks a majority of Chicagoans will vote for Anybody But Rahm, and he wants to be the guy they’re forced to vote for.

Which is the line of logic that also goes behind the strategy of former Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy, former school principal Troy LaRaviere, self-made millionaire Willie Wilson and possible candidates Ra Joy (he was paired with Chris Kennedy’s recently-unsuccessful governor campaign), Lori Lightfoot (Chicago Police Board president), Bridget Gainer (a Cook County Board commissioner) and Amaya Enyia (a community organizer).

VALLAS: Thinks 2nd is enough to win

None of them can beat Rahm Emanuel in a one-on-one fight. But they really think enough people in Chicago are eager to dump Rahm from office that they’ll begrudgingly vote for whichever of them survives the first portion of the municipal election process.

It probably would serve them right if Emanuel were somehow able to get a majority vote in February – thereby making the need for a run-off unnecessary.

WILSON: Willing to be fringe candidate again

NOT THAT I’M saying I’m eager to see Emanuel re-elected. Or that I have ill will towards any of the individual challengers.

It’s just that we’re not going to have an election cycle in Chicago where anybody is trying to unite the various segments of our city’s electorate. It’s going to be about everybody trying to find their particular segment of supporters – with the ultimate hope being that the REST of Chicago will have to “suck eggs,” so to speak, and put up with them.

I don’t know that a majority of Chicagoans hate the idea of “Mayor Emanuel” all THAT much. Or that we're prepared to love any of them as an alternative.

Could Gainer become the second woman ...

I also don’t know there’s anyone amongst the various Rahm challengers who’d be capable of uniting everybody in Chicago to vote against Rahm.

I COULD SEE where certain people with political dreams (such as McCarthy) will appeal solely to small segments of Chicagoans, many of them who would then feel compelled NOT to vote come an April 2 run-off.

The idea of a Bridget Gainer bid for office might appeal to those who’d like to see another woman beyond the late Jane Byrne rise to the ranks of being the so-called “Man on Five” at City Hall. But I could also see where the people inclined to vote for her might also be the types who could wind up voting for Emanuel.

... since Byrne to be mayor?

I already have heard enough people dredging up Vallas’ mid-1990s performance with the Chicago school system and using it as reasons they could NEVER vote for him. As for the rest, they could wind up being the candidates who struggle to get 1 percent voter support.

Which means we have 365 days and counting until we can put this mayoral quarrel behind us; then shift our attention to the desire to dump Donald Trump from his office come 2020.

  -30- 

Does McCarthy have a political ‘base’ to support his mayoral fantasies?

It’s going to be intriguing to see just who, if anyone, thinks one-time Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy ought to become mayor of the Second City.

McCARTHY: Does anyone want him for mayor?

McCarthy is the guy who lost his police post more than a year ago when Mayor Rahm Emanuel canned him, with the hope that dismissal of a police chief would be sufficient to satisfy the public anger that arose from the shooting death of a 17-year-old by a Chicago police officer.

THE COP WHO pulled the trigger 16 times and caused the death of Laquan McDonald is facing criminal charges, and the mayor wants to think he cleaned up the police department by hiring a new superintendent.

Which, of course, angers McCarthy. He resents the notion that he is in any way to blame for McCarthy’s death.

In fact, there are some people in Chicago who are bothered by the notion that the police are at fault in the teenager’s death. They’d just as soon believe the “kid” had it coming.

But I’m skeptical that there’s going to be an outcry of people wishing to PUNISH Rahm Emanuel for picking on the police and placing blame on them.

BECAUSE IF THERE is a stronger sentiment, it’s that Emanuel himself deserves some sort of political punishment ALONG WITH the police for the death of McDonald.

The kind of people who are going to be inclined to want to vote against Emanuel because of Laquan McDonald certainly aren’t going to side with McCarthy in this particular political fight. They’re going to think he got what he deserved, but it isn’t enough to resolve the overall problem of police misconduct – or as they’d rather perceive it, police running roughshod over the citizenry of Chicago.

Of course, there’s always the chance that enough time has passed between the shooting (2014), the discovery of video (without audio) of the shooting that showed how graphic and violent an act it was (early 2016) and the next municipal election (February of next year).

 

EMANUEL: Will he have a serious challenger?

People do tend to have short memories, and it’s always possible that a good number will have gotten over their anger, or let the details slip into the crevasses of their minds.

THAT CERTAINLY SEEMED to have happened in the most recent elections with Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle who was supposed to become political history because she supported the “pop tax.” Instead, she won by a solid margin and appears poised to become the new Cook County Democratic Party chairwoman.

Yes, it’s true that Preckwinkle faced a less-than-stellar opponent in last week’s Democratic primary. But McCarthy, a career law enforcement officer with no electoral experience, could appear to be an equally-weak challenger to Emanuel.

If there is a real mayoral challenger to Rahm, it could be Paul Vallas – the one-time Chicago Public Schools CEO and career educator/administrator. But he hasn’t even formally declared a candidacy yet.

It is with all of this in mind that I find it amusing to learn that McCarthy is saying he’s the man who can “save” the lives of black people if he becomes mayor.

AS HE SAID on a recent WLS-AM weekend radio broadcast, 80 percent of people who die in incidents deemed murder are black men (or male blacks, in official police lingo that attempts to mimic legal language). Which makes him think only a police officer can solve the problem of urban violence.

Whether that is true remains to be seen.

VALLAS: Will he ever make up mind?

I can’t help but think that McCarthy shares the same problems in gaining the votes of black people that Emanuel would. If anything, more. McCarthy, after all, wore the badge and was supposed to be in charge of the department at the time of the violence.

Of course, we have some 11 months to go before the municipal elections – and 13 months to go, if we wind up needing to have a municipal runoff. I’m sure many of us will be so absorbed with the Rauner/Pritzker “battle of the billionaires” in search of a post to keep themselves busy that they will be completely frazzled by the time the mayoral election becomes a priority.

  -30-