A couple of Chicago mayoral race polling results from last month have been stuck in my head ever since they were released.
The BSP Research poll, taken March 15-23 for Northwestern University’s Center for the Study of Diversity and Democracy, found the two mayoral runoff candidates were running neck and neck. The poll was almost universally ignored by the city’s news media, yet it might’ve possibly contained an important nugget that could help explain at least part of Brandon Johnson’s win and Paul Vallas’ loss.
The poll found that 82% of Chicagoans supported the idea of increasing the number of police on the force. OK, no surprise there.
Immediately after answering that question, however, 63% said they supported the idea of decreasing police funding and investing in addressing root causes of crime. According to the poll, 68% of Black people, 66% of Latinos and 59% of whites supported that idea.
“If that second result is even close to accurate, it upends everything we’re supposed to believe about this contest,” I wrote at the time.
Vallas heavily outspent Johnson on television ads, warning voters for weeks that Johnson wanted to “defund the police.” According to Vallas, Chicago crime was “out of control” and Johnson would only make things worse.
Almost Vallas’ entire platform centered around both hiring more police officers, which is something Chicago voters of all persuasions clearly said they wanted, and ridiculing Johnson for his past remarks on the topic of police funding. Johnson soft pedaled his past remarks but insisted that crime prevention and solving crimes should be at the top of the priority list.
I’ve often declared that voters “don’t do nuance,” but it’s been clear that pundits and many political reporters are the ones who’ve been far less nuanced about crime than voters over the past year in this state, and particularly in the Chicago metro area.
As we saw in 2022, polls showed that suburban and Downstate voters simply did not view the crime problem as the over-arching issue portrayed by the news media and Republican political operatives.
Aurora Mayor Richard Irvin spent tens of millions of Ken Griffin’s money to use the crime issue in a spectacularly failed effort to capture the Republican gubernatorial nomination and prove his questionable Republican bonafides.
The Chicago Fraternal Order of Police aggressively attacked state Sen. Rob Martwick (D-Chicago) over his support for the SAFE-T Act in an attempt to nominate a candidate with Republican affiliations in a Democratic primary. That also failed miserably.
And then, of course, there were the endless TV ads from Dan Proft’s People Who Play by the Rules PAC last year, designed to depress the Democrats’ Chicago base and hurt Gov. J.B. Pritzker and wound Democrats in the suburbs. Nope.
A GQR poll released the day after Chicago’s mayoral election found similar results.
Likely Chicago voters were asked if they preferred 1) “Doing more to get tough on crime, like having stricter sentences for people convicted of violent crimes, maintaining strong bail laws to keep potentially dangerous people in jail, and giving police more support and resources”; or 2) “Fully fund things that are proven to create safe communities and improve people’s quality of life, like good schools, a living wage, and affordable housing, and do more to prevent crime by increasing treatment for mental health and drug addiction and cracking down on illegal gun sales.”
By a 58-39 margin, respondents chose the prevention angle over the tough-on-crime angle.
At least in this state, the Bill Clinton era sure appears to be over. Ginning up fears about crime and promising to throw more money at the police just aren’t enough by themselves any longer to win races.
In that bygone time, Vallas would’ve likely easily defeated Johnson with the message he used this spring, despite his affiliations with the far right in the recent past (including the ultra-radical Awake Illinois and Dan Proft). Today’s voters here want far more than just “lock ‘em up” rhetoric.
Not all of Clinton’s lessons are now passe, however. Vallas, who will turn 70 in June, constantly surrounded himself with older Democrats like former Secretary of State Jesse White, former Senate President Emil Jones, former U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush and U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin.
But that ignored one of Clinton’s most valuable and enduring political lessons: Don’t offer to be a bridge to the past; promise instead that you will build a bridge to the future. Johnson did that, Vallas did not.
“Voters have a very nuanced perception about public safety and about what gets us to public safety in every community across a city as complex as Chicago,” ACLU of Illinois’ Communications Chief Ed Yohnka said.
During the campaign, Vallas vowed to increase the number of police while Johnson promoted a platform to make CPD more efficient. Asked the most effective solution to crime about a third of voters chose increased mental health/drug treatment compared to 18% who favor hiring more police.
“It was never a binary choice of in the way that it was sometimes portrayed. I think there was kind of an easy one’s tough on crime, one’s not,” Yohnka said. “At the end of the day people kind of piece through the easy labels and actually look at what kind of policies are going to get us to enhanced public safety.” […]
“It turns out that you can spend a lot of money sorta trying to paint this picture of black and white but people still see grey. And they see that I would argue at least largely because these are the people in the communities they’re living in. They know what the issues are in their communities, and they know that they’re aren’t necessarily solved by just more policing, that there are other underlining needs that just have to be met.”
* Meanwhile, a little context about yet another nationally notorious Chicago weekend…
- Arsenal - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 9:27 am:
I’ve been thinking a lot about “voters don’t do nuance” and crime, too. But ultimately, I think the voters’ view is “Police should stop crime and not hurt innocent people.” Which frankly, isn’t THAT nuanced.
- Trap - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 9:28 am:
How’s that nuance treating ya? Great weekend in the city
- ChicagoVinny - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 9:29 am:
I’ve always viewed some of this stuff as a false choice. Increasing investment in mental health clinics and non-police mental health crisis teams will free up cops from having to do non-policing work. They can focus on actual policing. From the small pilot program we’ve seen it leads to better outcomes for all involved. We need other levers to pull than just “more cops”, because that hasn’t worked.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 9:33 am:
===How’s that nuance treating ya? Great weekend in the city===
Are you… cheering… for people being shot or worse? Are you now hoping your, whatever it is, point would’ve immediately stopped things?
It’s an odd flex cheering and waiting people hurt to feel vindicated in some political thought.
Just sayin.
- @misterjayem - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 9:40 am:
“How’s that nuance treating ya? Great weekend in the city.”
Didn’t read beyond the headline, huh?
– MrJM
- Techie - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 9:41 am:
“They know what the issues are in their communities, and they know that they’re aren’t necessarily solved by just more policing, that there are other underlining needs that just have to be met.”
I think this is a big part of it. Most people are struggling economically moreso than they have in years, so the lack of resources in many communities is probably clearer than ever.
People know that the lack of resources and opportunities means there will be crime, and you can’t police your way out of that. You have to fix that, and then the decrease in crime will follow.
One of my pet sayings is that you don’t see millionaires shooting each other on the streets. Once people have resources and something going for themselves, they are much less inclined to commit violent crime.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 9:46 am:
To the post,
Great read, even better reflection of your own thoughts, Rich.
Two things stand out, for me;
First…
===Immediately after answering that question, however, 63% said they supported the idea of decreasing police funding and investing in addressing root causes of crime. According to the poll, 68% of Black people, 66% of Latinos and 59% of whites supported that idea.===
… Second…
===Not all of Clinton’s lessons are now passe, however. Vallas, who will turn 70 in June, constantly surrounded himself with older Democrats like former Secretary of State Jesse White, former Senate President Emil Jones, former U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush and U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin.
But that ignored one of Clinton’s most valuable and enduring political lessons: Don’t offer to be a bridge to the past; promise instead that you will build a bridge to the future. Johnson did that, Vallas did not.===
It was the waning “over 50” voters that didn’t turn out for the runoff, the increased younger voters that did show up for the runoff, and the majority minority wards that carried the day for Johnson… a younger tilt.., that just can’t buy “more police is better” for them or Chicago without getting to the social root issues in their communities.
It’s a bit like not understanding women will vote against abortion restrictions, but thinking “Republican Women” will get it. Crime in high crime areas or areas that face greater challenges seem to understand that others thinking they “know” are not the ones they feel will bring the support needed.
The “There’s Only One Map of Chicago” played into that nuance too.
Applying the “the map” reality, along with the choices and their takes to crime and policing, the nuance proved the rules that make the “one map” true.
Great read, Rich.
- TheInvisibleMan - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 9:46 am:
“Don’t offer to be a bridge to the past; promise instead that you will build a bridge to the future.”
A very succinct description of the differences which currently exist within the Democratic Party.
As the age demographics continue to change in their long understood ways, attempting to use nostalgia for ‘the good old days’ just isn’t going to have as large of a target audience as it did in previous years.
Current generations coming into their midlife have a remembrance of the past consisting of the Global Financial Crisis, and the housing crash. It is foolish to try to win them over by trying to remind them of, and a yearning to return to, the past.
- Chicago - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 9:47 am:
It seems to me that this election similar to last fall was more about abortion. Vallas calling himself more of a Republican and pro life was a huge problem in Chicago…certainly worth more than Johnson’s margin of victory in votes. They nuanced alright…They voted on an issue that the Mayor of Chicago would have virtually no impact on (maybe a zoning issue but Vallas said he would govern as pro choice). We shall see how this works out…certainly hoping and praying for the best but also not betting on it.
- Norseman - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 9:50 am:
Whether they do nuance or not (I’m leaning in Arsenal’s direction), groups need to think twice, three times, before coming up with unhelpful catch phrases like “defund the police”.
- Amalia - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 10:00 am:
I’m totally with Chicago. anti abortion does not sell well. Don’t think there has been an analysis of gender in voting for the Mayoral and there should be. we have age and place analyzed so far but I’m far more interested in gender. I’m betting that there is a gap and in favor of Johnson.
Also agree that defund the police is still a stupid phrase even if the pull the string on Vallas response of more police, more police for every problem was idiotic. enough with the one thing or another, both/and both/and. we can do two things and more at once on any issue.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 10:04 am:
===was more about abortion===
I didn’t claim that Johnson won *because* of the violence issue. I pointed out that Johnson won *despite* that particular issue. We can argue all day about what actually won it for him. That’s *not* the crux of this column.
- Left of what - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 10:07 am:
A big thing that also helped Johnson is who turned out to vote. if you look at where he did really well, ie the north side which was also an area with higher turnout, that’s an area of younger more educated people, a demo that skews more progressive. Since 2018 that group is also more engaged and likely to vote. So issues aside, in low turnout elections progressive candidates can more easily outperform based on the electorate.
- Tinman - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 10:08 am:
Let’s all hope we can make the city feel safe and welcoming for everyone. That said we are coming into the time of the year that we always see a lot of disorder with the weather warmed up and teens with more time on their hands looking to get out. The problem is more complex with social media allowing people to quickly gather in large groups which can sometimes led to some becoming emboldened to act out . If the downtown doesn’t feel safe it will affect everything . From business to tourism. Let’s hope everyone works together to figure out how to address this issue.
- low level - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 10:15 am:
== there has never really been a plan. ==
Fair enough. Like Tinman above, I am looking forward to seeing the Mayor elect’s plan for how to deal w this issue.
- Arsenal - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 10:15 am:
==How’s that nuance treating ya? Great weekend in the city==
Why do all of you weirdos keep acting like Johnson is already Mayor? This is still MLL’s policies at work.
- Left of what - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 10:16 am:
On the issue of crime, it is interesting that right and right leaning, in the case if Vallas, keep bringing this up. It didn’t work in the midterms and didn’t work in the mayors race. I’m not sure what the disconnect is, that the consultants see the polls and 80 percent say crime is an issue and take that as a que to run on crime. There is a difference between saying you care about an issue and that issue being a determining factor in vote choice. Which as Rich pointed out, seems to be what happened here.
- Arsenal - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 10:17 am:
==Also agree that defund the police is still a stupid phrase==
Totally agree. If Johnson had never said it, Vallas would’ve basically had nothing on him.
- Amalia - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 10:19 am:
and by the numbers, Johnson’s win is growing. 5 days after the election he was at 52.05% now he is at 52.13% with tomorrow the counting deadline. more proof of nuance winning.
- Rudy’s teeth - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 10:23 am:
Here’s a novel idea. Support parents so that they can guide their children into choosing a path that will not lead to criminal behavior.
It’s called home training.
- levivotedforjudy - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 10:42 am:
For some reason, the concept of “either/or” was baked in. We need to address long-term structural issues in reducing crime and this weekend showed, we have to address having more police. Why neither candidate made it clear that to do this it didn’t all have to come out of the police budget. There’ tons of workforce funding available and pots of unused federal money that could be used for safety issues related to public transit. Maybe that is too much for a 30 sec. ad. Hopefully this weekend will cause Johnson to tweak his strategy.
- Midwesterner - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 10:50 am:
You utterly nailed it. Hopefully, the referenced survey results portend hope for balanced approaches to any number of problems as opposed to all the “one way and that one way alone”/”you agree with me 80% of the time so you’re my enemy” attitude spewed on Fox and MSNBC.
- Blue Dog - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 10:51 am:
I’m in agreement that a two pronged approach to crime prevention should be considered.
For a bit this weekend I thought possibly that the Democratic National Convention started early.
- Big Dipper - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 10:55 am:
==Why do all of you weirdos keep acting like Johnson is already Mayor? This is still MLL’s policies at work.==
Exactly. If Vallas had won, somehow the teens would have stayed home quaking at what he might do next month?
- Arsenal - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 11:07 am:
==For a bit this weekend I thought possibly that the Democratic National Convention started early.==
Our self-proclaimed “moderate”, everyone.
- Arsenal - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 11:08 am:
==Exactly. If Vallas had won, somehow the teens would have stayed home quaking at what he might do next month?==
It probably would’ve been “have your fun now kids, bc Vallas is coming soon.”
As if he’s gonna, I don’t know, throw spreadsheets at them or something.
- Dr. M - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 11:12 am:
I spent Thursday-Sat in downtown Chicago for a conference. I stayed at a hotel on Michigan avenue, dined at excellent restaurants each night, and reveled in the diverse, happy crowd of locals and tourists enjoying the city in the sunshine. I felt such optimism about Chicago’s future!
When I walked back to my hotel at 9pm on Saturday I heard sirens but could not locate the source of the commotion. The next morning, I saw news coverage of the melee and was so relieved my female companion and I had not been caught in the middle. My friend had suggested we walk back toward our respective hotels from the conference venue after dinner to have a nightcap at a bar in the loop. I felt uneasy about this because I’d been told by my Chicagoan friend the night before that it’s unwise to walk around the loop at night alone. So, I encouraged my friend to take the shuttle back to her hotel instead of walking together, since we’d have diverged when she headed to her hotel, which was nearer to Millennium park than mine.
Admittedly and perhaps naively, I felt perfectly safe and secure in the loop all weekend because there were so many people around enjoying the perfect weather. But I wasn’t cavalier about my movements as a woman traveling alone, especially after sunset. On Friday, when my Chicagoan friend and I finished up at the Cherry Room he insisted on walking me the two blocks back to my hotel. He reinforced that he was taking an uber and that he never rides the train at night. (He’s also a Black man, so take that FWIW.) When I got back to my hotel at 10pm I perceived a change from when I’d left for dinner at 5. There was a new air of agitation that hadn’t existed earlier. Groups of people were arguing with each other and the hotel staff. I was not inclined to stay out later in the loop.
I’m not deterred from spending time in downtown Chicago and I’m not in a moral panic about crime and unruly teenagers. But I also wasn’t in the midst of the mob, luckily. If I’d been walking a few blocks north and heard gunshots or been assaulted, I’d have been terrified. If I’d read about this in the news the weeks before my trip, I’d have also been hesitant. Admittedly, I was nervous about this trip because I follow Chicago crime news and know the loop isn’t immune. I’d even packed a stun gun with me for the trip! Once I was downtown surrounded by people enjoying the city, I determined I didn’t need to carry the stun gun, so I left it at my hotel. I felt sheepish for thinking I needed it! I thought to myself that Chicago is safer than the pointy wires crowd would have me believe, that huge cities always have crime, and that I was totally fine as a 125-pound woman walking around alone, at least during the daytime. This is still largely true, but who wants to risk being the victim of a violent assault or shooting in what should be the most secure part of a major city? Such lawlessness deters tourism while ruining the city for locals who deserve to enjoy it. This is not normal and we should not accept it as such.
- Big Dipper - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 11:14 am:
==As if he’s gonna, I don’t know, throw spreadsheets at them or something.==
All the retired cops he was going to bring back could chase them in circles around The Bean.
- 4th Generation Chicagoan - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 11:18 am:
I’ll defer my opinion until next summer - to wait and see if Johnson’s plans make any difference and if he is able to implement them. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding. Let’s see what the crime statistics say a year from now.
- Steve - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 11:24 am:
-nuance-
A majority of voters want the Johnson/ Foxx approach to crime/ law enforcement in Chicago. Vallas put out of a message and lost. Johnson didn’t run away from the crime issue. He says he doesn’t want to bring the police in on every conflict. Johnson implies that solving poverty will prevent crime. He won.
- Betty Draper’s cigarette. - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 11:32 am:
=== How’s that nuance treating ya? Great weekend in the city.===
Not sure I follow. Nuance caused the kids to have a tantrum?
- Stephanie Kollmann - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 12:33 pm:
It’s good that you left the stun gun in your hotel room,. Dr. M, as possessing it during most of your activities would have been a felony offense.
- Bothanspied - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 12:35 pm:
An easy way to verify the poll results would be to repeat the poll. I doubt opinions have changed after the election.
Now whether there is correlation and causation, I hope this gives us a clue.
- Stephanie Kollmann - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 12:41 pm:
My comment is a little terse for reasons unrelated to the thoughtful post of Dr. M. I mean no offense.
I do mean to suggest that who downtown is actually for and who actually commits crimes there is a question that is a lot more complicated than most people assume.
- Amalia - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 12:48 pm:
thanks for the report, Dr. M. there is much work to do. and despite the need for more opportunities and understanding, facial recognition should be employed on the video circulated apparently by some of the mob that beat a woman at 129 Wabash. A white woman with long brown hair was surrounded and attacked. the video is terrifying. arrest and prosecute or adjudicate. actions have consequences even if we want to do things that prevent actions and lead to better lives.
- Rudy’s teeth - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 1:57 pm:
On Saturday evening we enjoyed dinner and live music at a restaurant near Wacker Drive/State Street. We were unaware of the chaos just blocks away. Took a cab home and learned on the news about the unruly crowds.
Imagine coming into the city for an evening, vandals destroying your vehicle, and ending up in the hospital with injuries suffered in a beating. A Saturday night in Chicago.
The mayor-elect must realize that opening community centers and parks in neighborhoods is not the antidote to this criminal behavior.
Parents must be held responsible for their teens who choose to commit crime.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 2:45 pm:
===Parents must be held responsible===
How? Specifically, legally and constitutionally, how?
Unless the parent sent a kid downtown to create mayhem, what, specifically, do you charge them with?
So tired of hearing this general comment made for twenty years without anyone coming forward with an actual, constitutional idea.
Parents do not own their children.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 3:05 pm:
I look at “the parents” trope not as someone who is serious about finding answers, but I do look at “the parents” as Jeanne Ives intended… to signal “like mindedness” where it’s unspoken to “the few who ‘get it’…”
It’s never intended in its use to be at all helpful.
- Rudy’s teeth - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 3:07 pm:
—parents must be held responsible—
Parents should provide structure and stability in children’s lives.
It’s called home training. I first heard that term when one of my students said “So-and-so” has no home training.
Guidance provided in the home environment prepares children for success in life. When structure and stability are present in a child’s life, one might avoid some of the behaviors that occurred on Saturday night.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 3:23 pm:
===It’s called home training===
And you mandate that… how?
- Arsenal - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 3:23 pm:
==The mayor-elect must realize that opening community centers and parks in neighborhoods is not the antidote to this criminal behavior.==
It’s not the sole antidote (and Johnson did not campaign on claiming it was), but it could be part of the mix. It’s surely worth trying, unless your actual goal is “swell the prisons”.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 3:30 pm:
===It’s called home training. I first heard that term when one of my students said “So-and-so” has no home training.===
The trope continues with “smiles and nods” about “the parents… and the Jeanne Ives types see this as their call.
“We’ll, one reason they have no home training us because there is no father at home”
I mean, it’s like 2-3 pages of dialog walking around this idea “Don’t you understand what I’m saying without saying it?” kind of walking it around a barn.
Then there’s “well, that’s only as it was described to me” because a) it’s not a thing b) the thing is what I’m not saying not this real thought.
It’s tiring
- Wonky Kong - Monday, Apr 17, 23 @ 5:09 pm:
More cops, crackdowns, etc are the answers pols provide when they don’t have an actual solution to the underlying problem, or they don’t want to do the hard, long work, of going after a problem and spending the money, staying committed over the long term with slow small progress.
Kids don’t commit crimes because there aren’t enough cops or it’s warm out. Plenty of cities and towns have less crime with less police patrols, regardless of weather.
Voters are smart enough to know that “more cops” just treats the symptoms, not the disease.
That said, you win Chicago with the better ground game. Johnson had that.
- ArchPundit - Tuesday, Apr 18, 23 @ 1:23 pm:
======It’s called home training. I first heard that term when one of my students said “So-and-so” has no home training.===
Let’s see what that would look like to actually help low income parents:
1) Quality Health care including mental health care
2) Quality Childcare
3) Flexible work allowing parents to attend school events
4) Safe and reliable public transportation
5) Food security
6) Workforce Training to allow improved job prospects (can be College & Technical or specific workforce training)
If you don’t have the above, ‘home training’ isn’t going to happen for many families. Seems like Brandon understands this even as I’m not sure the city has the resources.