Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Rahm Emanuel winning 55% with 86% counted.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
jaxx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 09:24 PM
Original message
Rahm Emanuel winning 55% with 86% counted.
Edited on Tue Feb-22-11 09:59 PM by jaxx
http://elections.chicagotribune.com/results/



edit...I was in a hurry and spelled his name wrong....so thanks nice DUer for pointing that out. The new Mayor of Chicago should have his name spelled correctly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 09:28 PM
Response to Original message
1. For somebody who so alienated the Democratic base, this is pretty amazing
But Chico and Braun Mosely are not exactly heavyweight opponents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HuckleB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Money. Money. Money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jaxx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Looks like Chicago wants him and voted to get him.
I don't think he alienated much of the base. ;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 09:41 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. It's not like any good comes of Rahm winning.
There's no good reason for the way he treats people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jaxx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. The City of Chicago differs with you on that.
I'm glad he won.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Yes, I'm aware of that.
But then again I'm for social justice. the elimination of poverty and worker's rights. That's why I could NEVER back anybody like Rahm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
prolesunited Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #11
19. So who should have Chicago chosen?
Out of the candidates who ran, not the imaginary champion of the poor and downtrodden in your head.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WI_DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #11
44. So by your calculation anybody who would vote for Rahm isn't for social justice
the elimination of poverty and worker's rights? Interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-24-11 01:37 AM
Response to Reply #44
53. Well, if they are, I have a hard time understanding how they could think
Edited on Thu Feb-24-11 01:39 AM by Ken Burch
a right-wing corporate toady could be the person to vote for to achieve any of those things.

It would be different if Rahm actually fought the other side instead of focusing exclusively on bashing those to his left on THIS side. Progressives and activists have never, EVER deserved Rahm's treatment of them, and no good at all came from his keeping them out in the cold during the first two years of the Admin.

If you can explain how anyone could possibly think that anything progressive or even blandly positive could come from electing this guy, I'd really appreciate it. You can't really be progressive and think that "connections" trump everything else, including principle.

Clearly, Rahm couldn't possibly be on the side, for example, of the state workers in Wisconsin. He probably thinks THEY'RE "fucking r______d".

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #3
22. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 09:12 AM
Response to Reply #3
40. Yup. Winning a 55% majority in a five-way race seems
pretty clear. Chicago wanted Rahm. The voters have spoken.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LoZoccolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. He didn't alienate anybody.
He reacted to a particular threat made to his face in strong terms. People alienated themselves by interpreting it however they felt or believing the Fire Dog Lake spin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #5
23. He is as bad as Karl Rove. nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhaTHellsgoingonhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #1
13. Rahm's campaign featured Obama and Clinton ads
Historic low voter turnout.

Whatever people think about Rahm, they still like Obama and Clinton.

Don't fool yourself, aside from NYC, I can't think of another U.S. city that is significant enough to have the current and past Democratic presidents endorse its mayoral candidate.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #13
18. Obama has abandoned the base also so how is that supposed to help, how is Clinton supposed to help
when we are talking about the base ?

so the base just didn't vote ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhaTHellsgoingonhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 07:36 AM
Response to Reply #18
26. Because Chicagoans don't read DU
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #18
29. Only in DU Land has Obama abandoned "the base"
In the real world not so much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillwaiting Donating Member (591 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 08:15 AM
Response to Reply #29
31. DU Land is one place where people pay attention to what's going on.
The number of people who really care enough to pay attention to the actions of Obama and his Administration are very, very small.

A LARGE majority of people, even those who vote, do NOT pay attention.

MOST people get their views on Obama from corporate media outlets.

So, polls that show overwhelming support for Obama, to my mind, simply show that Obama's SPEECHES resonate with the majority and they think that's the direction his Administration is taking. Surely Obama's speeches can be pretty inspiring. Unfortunately, he does very little to push his supposed beliefs and ideas forward, while on a few occasions outright ACTIVELY working against values and beliefs he supposedly supports and campaigned on while behind closed doors and in private.

Worse, those who vote and identify as Democrats and don't even pay attention to his speeches probably comprise more than 50% of those who voted for him. SO many constituents of this country (I refuse to label these individuals citizens b/c they have abdicated their responsibilities) have simply bought the farcical theatrical production that's being put on for us in the corporate media. Granted, if someone were not watching like a hawk, it might be easy to believe.

How the average American views the "real world" is a pathetic joke, and their beliefs most probably have no bearing on what's really happening in Washington. It takes time and effort to figure that out. We have a highly propagandized population. The wealthy elite have made sure of it. I hope we have begun to peel away the veil they've created so life might actually begin improving for Americans again. It's a class war and it's time more Americans realized it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 08:30 AM
Response to Reply #31
35. Yes, we here at DU are so much more enlightened than
those stupid sheep. :eyes: Get real. There are MANY uninformed people on this website. And there are MANY informed people who have never even heard of DU.

"Unfortunately, he does very little to push his supposed beliefs and ideas forward, while on a few occasions outright ACTIVELY working against values and beliefs he supposedly supports and campaigned on while behind closed doors and in private."

And thus my point is proven. If you really believe this, then you are quite clearly not "paying attention to what's going on." Here's some facts:
  • Signed executive orders to close the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, ban torture and end the CIA’s secret overseas prisons and define treatment of Detainees.
  • Reversed restrictions on stem cell research.
  • Signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. Reducing discrimination based on gender, age, religion, or race.
  • Signed an executive order reversing the ban that prohibits funding to international family planning groups that provide abortions. Gag rule revoked (Mexico City policy).
  • Signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
  • Creates the White House Council on Women and Girls "to provide a coordinated federal response to the challenges confronted by women and girls and to ensure that all Cabinet and Cabinet-level agencies consider how their policies and programs impact women and families."
  • Signed a Presidental Memorandum extending federal benefits to same-sex partners of federal workers and announced support for the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act of 2009.
  • Reverses U.S. position on LGBT Issues at the UN: At the "Durban Review Conference," U.S. supports language condemning “all forms of discrimination and all other human rights violations based on sexual orientation.”
  • Signed the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) Reauthorization Act of 2009 expanding health coverage for 250,000 children.
  • Rescinded a Bush administration directive that effectively made it impossible for states to raise their eligibility limits under the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) above 250 percent of the poverty level.
  • Named Wilma Liebman as the next chairwoman of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). As an NLRB member over the past eight years, Liebman challenged the Bush administration’s war on workers.
  • Nominated Mark Pearce, a member of the New York State United Teachers union, and Craig Becker, current associate general counsel for the AFL-CIO and the Service Employees International Union, to the to the National Labor Relations Board.
  • Signed executive order requiring federal contractors to offer jobs to current workers when contracts change.
  • Reversed a Bush order requiring federal contractors to post notice that workers can limit financial support of unions serving as their exclusive bargaining representatives.
  • Signed executive order preventing federal contractors from being reimbursed for expenses meant to influence workers deciding whether to form a union and engage in collective bargaining.
  • Created a foreclosure prevention fund for homeowners.
  • Expanded eligibility for the refinancing portion of the Making Home Affordable plan to help Americans struggling with distressed mortgages refinance at lower interest rates, even if they owe up to 25 percent more than their homes are now worth.
  • Established a credit card "bill of rights".
  • Expanded loan programs for small businesses.
  • Extended and index the 2007 Alternative Minimum Tax patch.
  • Expanded eligibility for State Children's Health Insurance Fund (SCHIP).
  • Expanded funding to train primary care providers and public health practitioners.
  • Created a new White House task force on the problems of middle-class Americans, and installed Vice President Joe Biden as its chairman.
  • Appoints Vice President Joe Biden to Oversee Stimulus Plan Payouts.
  • Granted a reprieve to Liberian immigrants facing imminent expulsion.
  • Directed military leaders to end war in Iraq.
  • Allowing Caskets to be photographed when the return from Iraq with family approval.
  • Released nine previously secret internal Justice Department memos and opinions defining the legal limits of government power in combating terrorism.
  • On Arab TV Network, Obama Urges Dialogue.
  • Gave a speech in Cairo engaging the Muslim and Arab world.
  • Bars independent contractors from conducting interrogations of terror suspects.
  • Granted Americans unrestricted rights to visit family and send money to Cuba.
  • Ordered the release of nearly a quarter of a million pages of records from the Reagan White House that were kept from the public during a lengthy review by President George W. Bush.
  • Restored funding for the Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (Byrne/JAG) program.
  • Released presidential records.
  • Required new hires to sign a form affirming their hiring was not due to political affiliation or contributions.
  • Pushed for enactment of Matthew Shepard Act, which expands hate crime law to include sexual orientation and other factors.
  • Invites gay families to the Easter Egg Roll as part of the Obama administration's outreach to diverse communities.
  • Created a White House Office on Urban Policy.
  • Increased funding for the NEA.
  • Appointed an assistant to the president for science and technology policy.
  • Funded a major expansion of AmeriCorps.
  • Banned lobbyist gifts to executive employees.
  • Investment in all types of alternative energy.
  • Enacted tax credit for consumers for plug-in hybrid cars.
  • Support for high-speed rail.
  • Provided grants to encourage energy-efficient building codes.
  • Extended unemployment insurance benefits and temporarily suspend taxes on these benefits.
  • Created the White House Council on Automotive Communities and Workers to help auto industry workers transition to new manufacturing opportunities, including jobs in alternative energy.
  • Stop raids on medical marijuana dispensers.
  • Nominated Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court of the United States, the first Hispanic to ever serve on the Supreme Court.
  • Nominated Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court of the United States.
  • Appointed more than 60 openly LGBT persons to positions in the executive branch.
  • Issues Presidential Proclamation for Pride, proclaiming June as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month.
  • Signed a mercury reduction pact with 140 other nations.
  • Signed the Weapons System Acquisition Reform Act to curb wasteful spending by the Pentagon. Intended to price contracts and budgets lower; may potentially save billions of dollars in defense.
  • Signed the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009, which serves to protect two million acres of land and creates a new system of land conservation for the Bureau of Land Management.
  • Phase out government payments to crop producers making more than $500,000 a year and eliminates subsidies for cotton storage to help trim the U.S. budget deficit.
  • Cut funding for a proposed U.S. nuclear storage facility at Yucca Mountain.
  • Restored Endangered Species Act Provision requiring U.S. agencies consult with independent federal experts to determine if their actions might harm threatened and endangered species.
  • Orders The Chesapeake Bay Protection and Restoration "to protect and restore the health, heritage, natural resources, and social and economic value of the Nation's largest estuarine ecosystem and the natural sustainability of its watershed."
  • Signed the 2009 Omnibus Public Land Management Act designating two million additional acres of public wilderness areas the highest level of government protection from logging and other forms of commercial use and development.
  • Signed the Christopher and Dana Reeve Paralysis Act which will expedite the search for cures and treatments for millions of Americans living with paralysis caused by spinal cord injury, stroke, MS, Parkinson's and many other diseases and disorders.
  • Established The Joint Virtual Lifetime Electronic Record, a new system for updating medical records of servicemen and women both during and after their military careers.
  • Established the White House Office of Health Reform
  • Created new and stronger safety standards to safeguard the country's food supply.
  • Signed into law the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act
  • Overturned a 22-year-old travel and immigration ban against people with HIV.
  • Extended the Ryan White HIV/AIDS program.
  • Directed US Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice to sign the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities Proclamation. The UN treaty calls on all countries to guarantee equal benefits, protection, and justice for individuals with disabilities around the world.
  • Largest increase in veterans funding ever - more than the VA had actually asked for.
  • Signed the Daniel Pearl Freedom of the Press Act into law.
  • Signed the Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2010 into law.
  • Signed the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act into law.
  • Signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act into law.
  • Signed the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment (HIRE) Act into law.
  • Reversed the USA's negative global image in one fell swoop.
  • Signed the Fair Sentencing Act, which reduces the disparity in the amounts of powder cocaine and crack cocaine required for the imposition of mandatory minimum sentences and eliminates the mandatory minimum sentence for simple possession of crack cocaine.
  • Signed into law the Small Business Jobs Bill that will help promote job creation and spur private-sector growth.
  • Signed into law the most comprehensive financial regulatory overhaul since the Great Depression.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillwaiting Donating Member (591 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 08:45 AM
Response to Reply #35
38. Oh my goodness! A listing of achievements that the WH PR Department would LOVE!
You rolled your eyes at me! How will I get over it!

Listen, if you are not willing to admit that an OVERWHELMING majority of Americans just aren't paying attention, and that most Americans are very tribal when it comes to defending "their" political party then there's not much to say between us. These two facts are imperative at maintaining the status quo in our country.

Have you seen the number of Americans that even pay attention to the corporate news? It's a very small percentage of Americans. Most Americans just don't care to know what's going on. Yes, I believe that. Which makes their opinion very unimportant when trying to decipher facts.

And, whether you like it or not, it's MUCH easier to propagandize a nation when very few pay attention.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 09:07 AM
Response to Reply #38
39. Ok so tell me: what is the percentage of the "enlightened" portion
of "the base" that has stopped supporting Obama?

The fact is you have no idea who pays attention and who doesn't. What you are doing is making a blanket statement about all the people who disagree with you (and only the people who disagree with you). Are any of the people with whom you agree also uninformed, or is it only those with a different opinion?

Have you seen the number of Americans that even pay attention to the corporate news? It's a very small percentage of Americans.

And here's some actual data:


Question: Just in general, how much do you enjoy keeping up with the news – a lot, some, not much, or not at all?
Source: Pew Research Center
Date: Sep. 12, 2010
Results:
              a lot 45%
               some 36
           not much 12
         not at all 6
don't know/ refused 1

Field Date - Jun 8-28, 2010

Universe: Country: Continental United States
Method: telephone
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillwaiting Donating Member (591 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #39
41. You are ridiculous to post that poll!
So because people SAY that they enjoy keeping up with the news that settles it and you find THAT information RELIABLE??

Try looking at the average corporate news ratings! It's a tiny percentage of Americans that even bother to try and stay informed, and they certainly will not be informed adequately from corporate sources. There was a recent poll that showed 52% of Americans didn't even know anything was happening in Egypt at the height of the revolution.

People will ALWAYS say things to make themselves look better. That's PSYCH 101.

I still can't believe that you posted that poll as reliable proof for how informed the average American is on political issues.

I'll simply say that a tiny percentage of Americans bother to filter through news and opinion from a variety of sources in order to inform their opinions and leave it at that. Yes, it's my opinion. It's based on an accumulation of paying attention to various polls over the years that have led me to believe that Americans just can't be bothered with politics.

FYI: Your little poll makes NO mention about politics either. Politics is a subset of news that most Americans despise, and again, that makes it extremely easy to pull the rug over their eyes.

I have hope that things are BEGINNING to change. We'll see.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WI_DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #35
46. Exactly--some on DU think they are the only elements of the Democratic base
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WI_DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #18
45. the Democratic base is much more than DU
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #13
20. Historic low turnout? Where did you get that idea?
Turnout is 41 percent. http://chicagoelections.com/
Four years ago it was 33.1 percent. http://elections.chicagotribune.com/mayor/

Emanuel received fewer votes than has been the case in recent elections because, despite lower turnout, Daley captured a higher percentage of the vote. But his total number of votes is pretty close to what Daley got in 2007 even though Daley was an incumbent and had minimal opposition as compared to Emanuel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhaTHellsgoingonhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #20
28. Turnout was expected to be over 50%...
...but wound up slightly over 40%. Historically, low. By Chicago standards, low.

Comparisons were made to 1989, when voter turnout was 68% when Daley first ran.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 08:41 AM
Response to Reply #28
36. not historically low compared with past two elections
Turnout yesterday was nearly eight percentage points higher than the turnout of the two previous mayoral races (2007 and 2003).

http://www.chicagoelections.com/election3.asp?change_language=en
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhaTHellsgoingonhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #36
42. It's what I said it was. Low by Chicago standards.
Edited on Wed Feb-23-11 10:29 AM by WhaTHellsgoingonhere
I'm sure you read those exact words in one of those articles, but decided to omit that.

EDIT: The last 2 elections had an extremely popular, incumbent mayor in Richard Daley. 1989, when Daley was first elected, is also relevant. It's been 60 years since there hasn't been an incumbent on the ticket.

Why does this matter so much to you?

Splitting hairs over voter turnout and expressing dismay that Obama and Clinton would influence Chicago voters? Jesus, the shit people what to squabble about. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #42
48. it matters because pretending that there was something unusual about the turnout is misleading
Edited on Wed Feb-23-11 11:38 AM by onenote
And you wouldn't want DU to be used to mislead would you?

You have cited the turnout for one Mayor race held 22 years ago where there was high turnout. I've cited the two most recent mayoral races, which had significantly lower turnout than this year. At this point, the evidence seems to suggest that the 1989 election was unusually high, not that this year was unusually low.

Just the facts. That's all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhaTHellsgoingonhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #48
49. You didn't mention that those previous elections...
...included popular incumbent Richard Daley. Turnout is expected to be lower when Daley is running against "nobody."

You're comparing apples to oranges.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #49
51. actually you are the one comparing apples to oranges
Chicago didn't begin having nonpartisan February municipal elections until 1999. And at least we are in agreement that turnout for the previous two elections was lower than turnout for this year's election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoCubsGo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #20
33. Does that count the early voting?
Or just those who voted yesterday. I understand the early voting was pretty heavy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #20
47. Here: ABC: Emanuel's winning vote total may be lowest ever
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #47
50. misleading story
Obviously not your fault, since you didn't write it. But the fact is that attempts by some to spin Emanuel's victory as anything other than a decisive win are pretty misleading. Chicago only began having nonpartisan February municipal elections in 1999. Before that, the February elections were party-based primaries followed by a general election in April.

While Emanuel's winning total is the lowest of any of the four such elections held, its only aroud 2300 votes less than the number Daley got in 2007. And when you consider that Daley's competition in 2007 was much much weaker than what Emanuel faced in 2011 (and indeed, Daley's opposition in both 2003 and 1999 didn't measure up to Emanuel's opposition in terms of resources or name recognition), Emanuel's performance is actually pretty impressive.

http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/1443.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 08:42 AM
Response to Reply #1
37. Strong candidates often scare away candidates
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WI_DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #1
43. Braun Mosely is a former US Senator who is well-known in Chicago
Edited on Wed Feb-23-11 10:34 AM by WI_DEM
and an African-American in a city that has a large African-American population. She isn't exactly a light-weight. Also, DU isn't exactly the Democratic base.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 09:32 PM
Response to Original message
4. how could he win without the base ?
that's just not possible
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Best chuckle of the day
Thank you.


:bow:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 09:42 PM
Response to Original message
8. Sorry Chicago
He's your problem now
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 09:55 PM
Response to Original message
12. "Rham" Emanuel?
is that Rahm's previously unknown GOOD twin?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jaxx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Thanks so much for pointing that out.
I fixed it. ;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 10:05 PM
Response to Original message
15. Congrats Mayor Emmanuel
I'm out in the burbs and am happy to see Rahm win. I think he'll be good for the city and was the most qualified of the candidates. To those who don't like him...you won't have to worry about him as being Mayor of Chicago is one of the best gigs in the country and he'll be an important factor in party politics come November, 2012...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 11:20 PM
Response to Original message
16. he only won because of the corruption and power of the 2 party system
that's why we need instant voter runoff . this would never have happened if we had that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
prolesunited Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Did you look at the percentages?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LoZoccolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 12:37 AM
Response to Reply #16
25. I have a few questions for you.
1. How many candidates were running?
2. To which parties did the candidates belong?
3. What would have happened if Rahm Emanuel would have gotten less than a majority of votes?
4. On what date, if any, was the municipal primary election held?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
apocalypsehow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 11:44 PM
Response to Original message
21. Congratulations, Mr. Mayor! All the best, and hope to see you back on the national stage eventually.
:party: :toast: :dem:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 12:31 AM
Response to Original message
24. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
TBF Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 07:38 AM
Response to Original message
27. Congratulations to Mr. Rahm - anything that keeps him out of Washington is fine with me.
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 07:51 AM
Response to Original message
30. I'm glad he won...
'cause watching the exploding heads is fun.

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Le Taz Hot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 08:15 AM
Response to Original message
32. Was there any doubt?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
displacedvermoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #32
52. I love your name!!!
And no, there never was any doubt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-23-11 08:24 AM
Response to Original message
34. Love this-Chris Hayes on TRMS "exert expletive here" video
http://www.clicker.com/tv/the-rachel-maddow-show/rahm-emanuel-wins-in-chicago-1363217/

Watch...investment banker rahmbo will go after the unions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC