Revised 2/23/18, 6:12 p.m.
The Chicago Chapter of the National Organization of Women has announced endorsements in several races for the upcoming primary. The list of endorsements on the linked website, at least as of this morning, differs somewhat from the list recently published on the Facebook page for Chicago NOW PAC. I have revised the list below to conform to the Facebook listing:
Countywide Vacancies
Brewer Vacancy - Oran F. Whiting
Clay Vacancy - Jonathan Clark Green
Rooney Vacancy - Jack Hagerty
McGinnis Vacancy - Peter Michael Gonzalez
Dunford Vacancy - Tom McGuire
Dooling Vacancy - Tom Sianis
Subcircuit Vacancies
2nd, Laws Vacancy - Adrienne DavisOne additional countywide candidate has been added to this list; one 2nd Subcircuit candidate has been eliminated. New endorsements have been noted in races in the 4th, 6th and 8th Subcircuits.
2nd, Turner, Jr. Vacancy - Travis Richardson
2nd, Willis Vacancy - Debra Seaton
4th, Davy Vacancy - Caroline Jamieson Golden
4th, Riley Vacancy - Martin Reggi
6th, Chevere Vacancy - Kent Delgado
6th, Cooke Vacancy - Edward J. Underhill
6th, Lopez Cepero Vacancy: Stephanie Miller
8th, Fabri Vacancy - Robin Shoffner
8th, Liu Vacancy - Michael A. Forti
8th, Pethers Vacancy - Michael Mackoff
10th, O’Neill Burke Vacancy - Stephanie Saltouros
10th, Suriano Vacancy - Colleen Reardon Daly
11th, Kennedy Vacancy - Joanne Rosado
Posts
5 comments:
I wish I could edit comments in order to use the publishable parts, but Blogger does not appear to permit this.
So.
To the several persons (or one person leaving several comments) about a particular candidate being dropped by Chicago NOW from its recently emailed endorsement list -- all I can tell you is that I took this list from Chicago NOW's website this morning. If someone at Chicago NOW has an update, email me.
To the several persons (or one person risking carpal tunnel) who observed that Chicago NOW failed to endorse a single woman running countywide, the list does speak for itself.
I look forward to comments I can print in toto.
To Anon- some of the guys running are openly gay and in committed relationships (So are a number of the straight guys, for that matter). Is your comment all inclusive?
Glad to see Blogger let in that brilliant, insightful and well thought out comment from Anon.9:49. As for myself, I won't be voting for a single Luxembourger this cycle. Compared to their numbers they had more than enough representation in public office when the late, great Phil Rock was around.
Do any of these organizations ever look at bar evaluations or do they just endorse based on donations and pandering?
Anon 2/26 at 2:51 p.m. -- I am getting so tired, so weary, of the Internet. But let's pretend this is a serious question and not just a gratuitous smear. This would be my attempt at a serious answer:
None of these groups necessarily look at a prospective endorsee's bar ratings. Maybe a candidate has them already--by now most do--but they are not yet publicly released. Groups may be announcing their endorsements now, but that doesn't mean that their processes weren't ongoing before most candidates, at least most new candidates, had any ratings to share.
More importantly, bar groups are looking at different things than these various special interest groups. Bar groups are (hopefully) looking at a candidate's overall fairness, temperament, and legal acumen, and not just at whether this candidate is sympathetic to/in lockstep with (there's a range, don't you think?) the goals or needs of the bar group in question.
The special interest groups have no such overarching concerns. Again, hopefully, there's a range -- some tolerance -- but it is up to each group to decide for itself whether it approves a candidate because he or she can be fair in deciding questions concerning the group's goals and causes or whether it insists that the candidate must be in ideological sync with everything the group considers important.
And some candidates may pander, telling this group one thing and that group another, calculating that there is little overlap between the groups and, therefore, little risk of exposure. Others agonize to project fairness and a willingness to listen and evaluate fairly without making any pledges of fealty to this group's goals, or that one's. Ultimately, approval may hinge on whether a key decision-maker on the endorsement/political-action committee knows the candidate or someone close to the candidate. That's human nature for you.
Do donations help? They can't possibly hurt -- just as a candidate's past volunteer work/donations/ticket purchases will be considered when the candidate presents to a political party for slating.
Obtaining a wide range of endorsements may mean that a candidate is perceived as fair by a host of different interest groups -- but it may mean that the candidate has no fixed and definite principles. That's for voters to decide in the case of each candidate.
Post a Comment