38 Comments - Enviro - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 11:44 am: Agree with your observations: 1. Emanuel knows how not to waste a good crisis. 2. Emanuel has a sense of humor. Here is a recent example: “Well, I suppose Bernie Sanders and my Passover dinner won’t be happening together this year,” Emanuel said Tuesday. - 47th Ward - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 11:47 am: Mostly agree. Yes, it is still a bumpy ride for the mayor and it may get a bit worse before it gets better for him politically. He has city budget problems and CPS is a ticking time bomb of fiscal destruction. He still needs to figure out how and when to support a massive property tax hike for CPS. And no one will forget the Laquan McDonald and CPD scandals, so it’s still pretty grim. But 2019 is still pretty far away. And for those who think it’s no longer dangerous to stick it to the mayor, see what kind of day Todd Maisch is having in Normal today. Rahm is down, but he’s not out. - moddem - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 11:49 am: I disagree. Without the Rahm connection, Hillary would have won Chicago by 2-1 or possibly even 3-1. (That’s been her margin in other big cities with large minority populations). So Rahm was a major negative for her. - Nearly Normal - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 12:01 pm: Rahm is a political animal. He has time to rebuild his reputation before the next election. if he runs again, he will have opposition that will no doubt bring up these issues and more. Time will tell. - Robert the Bruce - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 12:02 pm: A big difference I see is the efforts that flopped were in tying Emanuel to other candidates. At the end of the day, people were voting for or against Clinton and Stratton, rather than voting against Rahm. Alvarez lost because she herself covered up the McDonald shooting. - chi - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 12:07 pm: The spread in the Foxx/Alvarez race was surprisingly large. But 1) Alvarez’s campaign apparatus is not the Mayor’s, 2) The Mayor isn’t running again for a few years, and passions have a way of dying down over that timespan, and 3) Alvarez is much more clearly and directly involved in the McDonald shooting anyway. Unless you’re gonna show that the Mayor was ordering other elected officials to hold off indictments for political reasons (in which case Zach Fardon will be interested and Rahm’s political standing will become a secondary worry for him), a Mayor doesn’t have direct responsibility for an individual case. He does, though, have responsibility for the direction the City is going and the police culture in general, and so he does need to make progress on that front in the next few years. - Arsenal - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 12:07 pm: I disagree. Hanging a “down ballot” office-holder around a POTUS candidate’s neck is always an iffy strategy. It usually doesn’t work. That it didn’t work in this case doesn’t mean Rahm is doing OK. - Commander Norton - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 12:07 pm: I disagree that the Democratic presidential primary was to such a great extent a referendum on Rahm. Clinton is a known quantity in Chicago as elsewhere. I’m guessing most Democratic voters had already made up their minds about her, regardless of her associations and endorsements. Not quite all politics is local… - Ahoy! - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 12:12 pm: I agree more than disagree, mainly around the premise that Emanuel is damaged goods, but I don’t think it’s a good idea to compare and contrast his affect on other campaigns. I believe that is a habit of insiders and political hobbyists, but not necessarily something most voters care that much about in an election for a different office. - Blue dog dem - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 12:13 pm: I voted “disagree with most”. His woes have yet to begin, but remember it’s all been orchestrated with his fellow Booze Brother. My prediction is that somewhere in the not too distant future , CPS and bankruptcy will be featured in the same headlines. His buddy will be the villain, RAHM will have a scapegoat, and the RAHN Man will be enshrined downstate. - From the 'Dale to HP - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 12:15 pm: What is Hinz talking about? No one voted for or against Rahm and Hillary didn’t do all that well in Chicago (compared to Wayne County for starters). No one in the City likes Rahm still… so again, what is Hinz talking about? - doofusguy - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 12:15 pm: agreed - mainly because three years is long enough to repair the damage - - dead man walking - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 12:23 pm: I think he is done. This Mayor-thing has not turned out so good for him. He should recognize his talent has always been behind the scenes, not in front of the curtain! Time to think about the next stage in his career. He sticks around for term and then enters business. - @MisterJayEm - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 12:23 pm: I disagree. I named him as my loser of the election yesterday and I stand by my reasoning: Rahm is under siege. Bernie closed a 30 point gap in Illinois in no small part by running against Rahm Emanuel. Even the mayor’s natural allies in the Illinois Chamber of Commerce got in on the act. Every serious political figure in the city now understands that running against Rahm is a winning move. If they didn’t understand before, they certainly understand after last night. What can Rahm do to turn his fortunes around? Not much. Even if he somehow, miraculously, solved some biggest problems facing the city — the shootings, the schools, etc. — he’s been mayor long enough that those are now perceived of as HIS problems. Few points for that. And there is no Daley-style “world class city” event on the horizon to rehabilitate the image of the city and its mayor. So perhaps now is when the abrasive, alienating and politically-wounded mayor of Chicago finds common cause with the abrasive, alienating and politically-wounded governor of Illinois. Many of us expected it to happen immediately, but perhaps these two narcissists needed to be backed deep into a corner before they could admit that they might be of some use to each other. Or perhaps they will each continue to shout “All’s Well!” from the captain’s galley as the city and state slowly sink beneath the waves. Mr. Hinz says, “Now he has three years left in his term to build back up.” To which I sincerely reply, “How? How in the world can Rahm stop his fall much less turn his fortunes around?” He’s already exhausted the “shocked at gambling in Casablanca then firing someone” routine in both CPD and CPS. Who’s left to fire for the current problems? There’s no stunt Chicago celebration to distract from reality. If Chicago had an Olympics? Sure, maybe then Rahm could bang the City that Works drum for the national media. But what’s he got? The NFL Draft? Who cares? There’s no media event for the mayor to use as a distraction. So all eyes remain on the mayor. And who’s going to reach out to help him? His friends? Who are they? Rahm ground his foot in the face of everyone he stepped on on his way up. In fact, he went out of his way to step on people. No one has forgotten that and no one has forgiven that. Rahm has no friends. Rahm used to have allies. Now? Not so much. Rahm has no one to whom he can turn. Even if it were in your best interests to give Rahm a hand, why would you do it right now? He’s at his lowest. He can’t do much for you. Let him twist in the wind a little and he’ll be much more likely to give you a better deal down the road. (And for the vast majority of political actors — in Chicago, Illinois and nationwide — the sheer enjoyability of watching Rahm twist in the wind has a value all its own.) Nope. I disagree with Mr. Hines. It’s time for Rahm to reap the whirlwind. – MrJM - James - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 12:28 pm: Rahm was fortunate to run before the McDonald coverup was discovered and before the BBB/SUPES and redlight camera kickbacks indictments were announced. I don’t think he would have beaten Chuy if he had run with those 3 scandals around his neck. The Trib had already outed Vitale in 11/14 for gambling with public funds on interest rate swaps, but it wasn’t enough. Rahm is a smart and capable person who has made poor personnel choices, including his first comptroller. As Hinz notes, he’s in recovery mode, but he will never win re-election–he should be grooming his corporate wing democratic successor (Summers? P. Pritzker?). He should have never left Congress where his performance was a net plus. - wordslinger - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 12:36 pm: Mostly disagree. Emanuel has three years to build himself back up to what? He can’t ever run again. What’s his base now? Nobody is going to forget how Emanuel played the voters by keeping the McDonald video and settlement on ice until after the election. The Clinton reference is just silly. Emanuel used to work for Bubba. He also used to work for Obama. Is Obama unpopular in Chicago because of his Emanuel “connection.” Voters in Chicago are a little more sophisticated than Hinz gives them credit for. - siriusly - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 12:48 pm: I voted mostly agree. he’s damaged for sure. But people forget that Rahm has always been unpopular. People don’t like him they didn’t like him when they voted for him in ‘15 and ‘11. he’s not very likeable - and he has overcome that I think he comes back enough to make a race out of it in ‘21 and he tries to win a third term. I think he loses, but he will go down swinging. - siriusly - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 12:49 pm: I meant in ‘19 sorry - illini - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 12:51 pm: When MrJM posts a comment this lengthy - read carefully and take note. - Cheryl44 - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 1:01 pm: I rarely disagree with Word, but let’s be honest–Rahm probably worked for Obama as a favor/ concession to the Hillary campaign. I’ve never thought there was a lot of mutual admiration between the President and that Chief of Staff. Not only is he unelectable, I doubt he’ll last out this term. - Anonymous - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 1:05 pm: Not all politics is local and not all Illinois politics is Chicago. Bernie overcame Hillary’s 30 point lead by winning in “Downstate” Illinois. That’s right, rural Illinois came out heavy for Bernie. There’s no question that Hillary was going to take Chicago no matter what Rahm did or didn’t do. She was a solid lock to win the city…the spread is insignificant. To the post, Rahm is indeed down, but not out. Three years is a long time and lots of stuff can happen in that time. But he’s got his work cut out for him. - Bronco Bahma - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 1:05 pm: Anonymous at 1:05 is me…sorry. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 1:10 pm: Voted “mostly disagree” “Why?” If it’s ok with - @MisterJayEm -, I’ll let those words speak for me. Today, those words are as raw, as they are true. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 1:29 pm: ===How? How in the world can Rahm stop his fall much less turn his fortunes around?=== Time and hard work. The man does not want to leave a legacy of failure and I think his comments to the media yesterday shows he gets it more now than he ever has. I completely agree with Greg. - @MisterJayEm - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 1:34 pm: “I completely agree with Greg.” I hope you’re right, Rich. For the sake of the city that I love, I hope you’re right. – MrJM - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 1:44 pm: Three is is a very long time in politics. An eternity. I think, remembering this is a “mostly” disagree, some stains are so tough to walk away from, and the video situation isn’t going to change. If Rahm is humble, and seen as a partner 2 years from now, I dunno howuch CAN be forgotten. Lots will be decided who Rahm draws in his next election, if he runs again. - Railrat - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 2:51 pm: I agree the mayor was once a ” Judas” from a labor leader now they walk the same path for Future POTUS - Hammer - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 2:54 pm: Mostly disagree. While 3 years is a lifetime I a) never really believed Rahm wanted to be boss (mayor isn’t boss) of the city and was always playing to a national audience. Summers might be the play. b) The city (likely) won’t be in better shape in 3 years. There’s not a strong scare argument to make anymore c) Between Foxx, Toni and her crew there’s a challenger there somewhere that has to have Rahm spooked, if they don’t screw it up over the next couple years they’re in the catbird seat - Rollo Tomasi - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 2:55 pm: Rahm will cave somewhat on the CTU if he can financially. He will throw the police under the bus until the crime rate is at epic proportions. But look for him to start behind the scenes going after aldermen who are now voting against him. City jobs will dry up in certain wards. - Wensicia - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 2:57 pm: I disagree, mostly for reasons wordslinger pointed out. Sanders made a mistake in trying to tie Clinton to Emanuel. There isn’t any connection between her and Chicago’s problems, rather she’s been campaigning heavily with the mothers of African American victims of gun violence. Voters went for those directly responsible for current woes that were up for election. As for Emanuel, I doubt he can repair the perceived damage he’s carrying right now. The schools will still be a mess, it’ll take years to reform the police department and he still faces the Justice Department’s conclusion on race and police relationships in Chicago. And the non-stop shootings in African American communities continue. He’s done unless he can gain from Rauner’s efforts to trash Chicago. - Century Club - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 3:19 pm: I voted ‘disagree’ mostly because of the silliness of the Clinton/Dunkin voting analysis. I do believe that Mayor Emanuel has two things going for him: he’s shown a willingness to dramatically alter his stances when he needs to (like jumping behind a $13 minimum wage), and in Chicago, the political culture and levers of power are so far in the Mayor’s favor. I don’t think he can win re-election - the double whammy of the McDonald video and the tax hike cut too deep. But I do think he can build back to a point where he can govern again. - ChicagoVinny - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 3:53 pm: Voted agree because three years is a long time. - Anonymous - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 3:56 pm: Me thinks should Bernie, and I doubt it, win the D, he may have to come hat in hand asking for forgiveness. The odds of being D’s presidential choice are 200 to 1. - Chicago Taxpayer - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 4:21 pm: Agreed. Bernie got the same percentage of the black vote he got in the Michigan primary. All his attacks on Emanuel didn’t add one vote. - Molly Maguire - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 4:38 pm: Rahm is wildly unpopular and would lose an election today tomorrow and the next day. Don’t see how he rehabs. Judging his popularity by gauging Clinton’s is a stretch. - burbanite - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 5:24 pm: Prior to the current Governor I didn’t care for the Speaker. Now, well…. Only time and the political landscape will tell. - What is this... - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 5:36 pm: …A love Fest? Rahm is done. No PR stunts will make the real residents of Chicago forget who he really is and where he places his priorities. He’s already trying to start Chuy-protection antics by hiring his Latina friends. Muy tarde Emmanuel! - wordslinger - Thursday, Mar 17, 16 @ 6:11 pm: –He will throw the police under the bus until the crime rate is at epic proportions.– Epic, like the “good old days” in the 70s, 80s and 90s when annual murders busted 700 and 800 quite regularly and even went past 900 a few times? I hear the Prohibition Era was epic, too. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.