Skip to main content

View Diary: RAHM EMANUEL WINS No Run Off (77 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  and you have no good issues (0+ / 0-)

    representing finance and other constituencies most dems would not like, so you attack her personality.

    •  competence is an issue (9+ / 0-)

      Whatever Rahm's faults and background, I think most Chicagoans want competence before anything else.

      I guess everyone's got their own blog now.

      by zonk on Tue Feb 22, 2011 at 07:32:55 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  She just had bad pr (0+ / 0-)

        because she does not represent rich people.  Has nothin to do with competence.

        •  Disagree completely (7+ / 0-)

          Bad PR didn't make her cozy up to Abacha, incompetence and a pretty blatant self-interest in helping her significant other lobbyist did.

          Bad PR didn't make her vote for NAFTA, her own decision making did.

          Bad PR didn't cause her to line up behind every single "tort reform" effort to hit the Senate floor -- in some cases, as one of only a handful of Dems to back such efforts -- her own decision making did.

          Bad PR didn't force her into a series of campaign gaffes that ranged from the petulant to the outrageous, she did that herself.

          I guess everyone's got their own blog now.

          by zonk on Tue Feb 22, 2011 at 07:48:02 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Rahm is the one that pushed shafta (0+ / 0-)

            how come it does not work more against him than her.  Shafta would not have happened at all if he had not pushed Clinton to pass it.

            Rahm pushed the war, and has close relations with likudniks in Israel.  

            She never said fuck the uaw either, and that the fact that you overlook all these facts is what good pr and suckingup to rich people buys.

            •  Well, for the record (9+ / 0-)

              I voted for del Valle - but if there had been a run-off between CMB and Rahm, I'd have voted for Rahm and not thought twice about it.

              Frankly, progressive support of CMB pretty much proves Rahm's point -- sometimes progressives are fucking retarded... CMB's entire political career has been built on tossing shiny baubles at progressives.

              Compare their voting records - if there's any separation between CMB's senate record and Rahm's Houe record, I think you'll find Rahm to the left of CMB more often than not.

              If I'm going to be forced to choose between a backroom dealer that got a bill passed with a lot of good in it and a backroom dealer that used her position in the Senate to help a lobbyist boyfriend fronting for a human rights violating dictator -- it becomes an easy choice.

              I guess everyone's got their own blog now.

              by zonk on Tue Feb 22, 2011 at 08:06:32 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  Lets not forget backroom deals (0+ / 0-)

            with insurance companies so we get mandates instead of public option and calling us progressive friggin nuts!

            He is the far more contemptible candidate from a progressive perspective.

            I would vote for a rat first.

          •  Those speak to her record on mostly (0+ / 0-)

            domestic issues, but she was better positioned in this mayoral race for Chicago-only emphasis, which went unrealized (or maybe undelivered) owing to her staff, or to her decision on emphasis points BY her staff, or as anarchyintheusa correctly suggested, bad public relations.  

            There are ad firms up and down most large urban areas that could have given Braun a Chicago-now profile and placed her in stronger contention.  

            I don't think she ever had the numbers to win.  

            Had Emanuel been ruled off the ballot (always an unlikely chance, but possible), the run-off might have been between Chico and Braun.  There's almost no question that Braun's plummeting numbers went in large measure to Emanuel.

            Her campaign was poorly run, but it also attracted the support of a lot of people who were not drawn to Emanuel, despite her losing significant support to his candidacy, in that she did strike the chord of people who do not make very much money.  I'm ripping off anarchyintheusa's point again, because the distinction needs to be made.

            Given an insightful, Chicago-savy staff, and Rahm's fat wallet, minus the crack gaffe, a re-tooled Chicago-now Braun for Mayor campaign would have drawn a larger final percentage and maybe denied Emanuel the outright victory.

            •  That is wishful thinking (6+ / 0-)

              which only in Utopia could possibly have netted her any better a result.

              The more those who didn't remember her got to know her, the faster her numbers plummeted.  

              There is a reason she has been dead politically for something like 15 years.

              "There are always 10% screaming about something"--Hollydem's Dad.

              by pvlb on Tue Feb 22, 2011 at 08:04:50 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Politicians often rise from past fires. (0+ / 0-)

                I say a stronger, more savvy staff could have propelled Braun into the 20s or so, cut into Emanuel's percentages in many wards, and possibly forced a run-off, very likely between Emanuel (in the 40s here) and Chico (high 20s).

                It isn't a wish.  I was rooting for Del Valle.  

                •  Would the stronger staff... (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  ...have helped her debate performances? Because, honestly, neither she nor del Valle were at all impressive on that score. And for a mayor, that kind of thing is telling--This is a leadership position where you want someone with a clear vision who can advocate for it strongly. Rahm and Chico both seemed capable of that, while del Valle and Braun floundered.

                  That said, del Valle seems like a nice guy, and I quite hope he runs for some other office some time.

                  •  Del Valle did not gain from the (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:

                    debates but did not lose his footing either.  I agree that Moseley Braun appeared unprepared in her public performances.  

                    Yes, a stronger staff can make a huge difference in both the message and its delivery.  Braun is not without her supporters, and was better positioned earlier in the contest.  

                    Hillary Clinton's campaign staff suffered from a lack of focus, significant discombobulation, and day-to-day clumsiness, beginning with the initial impulse to skip Iowa.  By the time they decided that would be too politically expensive, Obama and Edwards had already out-hustled her there and she placed third.  

                    Given her funding and profile, Hillary Clinton should have done far better in Iowa than she did.  I attribute at least some of the Obama victory there to his staff.  They were not the whole show, but they kept the picture in focus.  

                    I regret Braun's decline.  When she was elected to the U.S. Senate many people in many small Illinois towns rejoiced.  A woman.  An Afro-American.  As others have posted here, her Senate career was rocky and she was gone after one term.  

                    Had she more skillfully aligned support around a Chicago-now theme for her core supporters, the percentages in those wards tonight would have been different -- not the result, but the percentages -- and I think a run off would have been far more likely.  

                    •  It just seems to me... (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      pvlb, Railfan

                      ...that what you're looking for is an almost entirely different candidate. Yes, Braun achieved some remarkable things. Yes, she could have been a significant inspiration, and probably was to a few. But her missteps, her failure to build strong popular support and any real institutional support, her stances sometimes at odds with her brand, her issues with ethics... All these add up to not only a wasted opportunity, but a candidate voters have every reason not to have a lot of faith in.

                      This was an argument that came up, albeit in reverse, for Obama during his election: Obama had no "leadership" experience, the argument went, but how could someone running such an enormous, tight, smooth campaign not have some serious leadership skills?

                      Braun, on the other hand, couldn't even put together a decent mayoral campaign. How is she going to lead a major city?

                      •  If you and I were hired to (0+ / 0-)

                        assemble a campaign staff for candidate Moseley Braun, we would, let's say, be as thorough as we could.  We'd want a campaign apparatus that both reached into the nooks and crannies of the city's wards, one that deliberately and visibly was multi-ethnic, one that strove for common purpose despite the city's conflictual factions, one with a very significant public relations arm, a legal consultant, a vigorous web presence, plenty of foot soldiers, an ad firm capable of projecting the message, policy analysts to forge and finalize that message, speech writers who believe in public service and the potential role of minority candidates to fulfill that role, a historian to frame the right-now with the what's-come-before, catch phrases to condense the message into consumable media bytes and bumper stickers, a debate coach (make that TWO debate coaches), and not least, a fund raising board with some serious profile cred and connections to out-of-state sources.  

                        If you and I are hired by Candidate Braun to put a team like that together, we could have done better with her campaign than just under 9 percent.

        •  Codswallop (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Bush Bites, Railfan, kerflooey

          Do some research on her career.  She has made her own 'bad pr'.

          "There are always 10% screaming about something"--Hollydem's Dad.

          by pvlb on Tue Feb 22, 2011 at 07:50:48 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  well, I observed a lot of incompetence (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          pvlb, zbbrox, Railfan, kerflooey, littlebird33

          in her campaign - or just sheer laziness; hard to tell which. I know that she simply didn't show up to a number of pre-scheduled appearances - including to an appearance in Lakeview to a largely GLBT crowd that had been led to believe she would come. Instead she called in by phone at the last moment - not terribly inspired campaigning.

          The crack comment was particularly damaging - made her look arrogant and petty. Hard to blame it on PR - she's the one that said it.

          I'm not a huge Rahm fan for all the reasons posted by other commenters. I would have been fine with Chico or Del Valle; but I think Rahm will do better in this job than they would have. But Carol? She would have been a complete disaster.

          My mom wrote a great book on the church & gay marriage - buy it here!

          by hpchicago on Tue Feb 22, 2011 at 08:20:54 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site