Tuesday, February 27, 2024

Girl, I Guess offers endorsements in Cook County judicial races

Updated 3/4/24 mostly to reflect additional endorsement in 18th Subcircuit

I reluctantly concede that, quite frequently, endorsements are kind of... well... boring.

Not to the candidates themselves, certainly. A candidate fortunate enough to garner an endorsement from almost any organization, no matter how obscure, cherishes the honor. Celebrates it. Shouts it from the rooftops, even.

But the endorsements themselves are often rather dry.

This might be an opportune moment to remind readers that FWIW does not endorse Cook County judicial candidates. I do report endorsements made... but only if I can get all of the endorsements made by the politico, union, or community group doing the endorsement. This steams some candidates, of course: They go to all the trouble to get an endorsement from Cong. Filtch or Ald. Grab and then I refuse to report it.

But if a person or group does not want to tell the world who it endorses -- everyone it endorses -- I get suspicious.

And with reason, I think. I recall one time where I finally got hold of a union's complete endorsement list... and several candidates were surprised (and disappointed) to learn that said union had endorsed every candidate in some races.

Which brings us back to the Girl, I Guess Progressive Voter Guide.

Author Stephanie Skora (joined, for this election cycle at least, by Raeghn Draper) have put together an evolving Google Doc (linked above) that is not boring and not dry. The authors describe Girl, I Guess as "Jewish, Black, queer, trans, nerdy and dedicated to helping members of our community navigate a confusing ballot and identify the most progressive candidates." They caution readers not to simply rely on them, but to "consult with progressive / radical organizers in your community, especially queer, trans, Black, and Brown folks!"

The authors are likewise not shy about explaining their endorsements -- and they have opinions on just about every office on the ballot, from POTUS on down. The authors have dozens of criteria by which they evaluate candidates for most offices but, for judicial offices, Girl, I Guess lists this "simple scale" by which it rates judges:
  1. Is this judge a cop?
  2. Is this judge sketchy, suspicious, or have they done bad/controversial things in the past?
  3. Is this judge a dumbass?
  4. Do Bar Associations think that this judge is qualified?
The guide also acknowledges "our amazing friends at Injustice Watch" (and they cite frequently, in their commentary, to the Check Your Judges Guide recently published by Injustice Watch).

I encourage readers to examine the Girl, I Guess guide for themselves (updating... and you may have to go back to it every now and again because it is published as a Google Doc and is subject to updating)... but, meanwhile, allow me to discharge my obligation to report those Cook County judicial candidate endorsements in contested races made by Girl, I Guess:

Supreme Court Vacancy
Joy Virginia Cunningham
Appellate Court Vacancies
Cynthia Y. Cobbs (Cunningham vacancy)
Celia Louise Gamrath (Delort vacancy)
Circuit Court Vacancies
Pablo F. deCastro (Flannery, Jr. vacancy)
Neil Cohen (Mitchell vacancy)
Edward Joseph Underhill (Murphy vacancy)
Debjani "Deb" Desai (Propes vacancy)
Subcircuit Vacancies
Lucy Vazquez-Gonzalez (3rd Subcircuit - Brosnahan vacancy)
Owens J. Shelby (7th Subcircuit - Solganick vacancy)
No Endorsement (10th Subcircuit - Wojkowski vacancy)
Audrey Victoria Cosgrove (11th Subcircuit - Daleo vacancy)
Griselda Vega Samuel (14th Subcircuit - O'Hara vacancy)
Sunil Bhave (18th Subcircuit - Converted from Edidin vacancy)
Bridget Colleen Duignan (19th Subcircuit - Converted from Senechalle, Jr. vacancy)
Nadine Jean Wichern (20th Subcircuit - Converted from Budzinski vacancy)
For those keeping score at home, in countywide judicial races, the Girl, I Guess Progressive Voter Guide strays not one inch from the Cook County Democratic Party slate.

Some FWIW readers may have been intrigued by the deliberate "no endorsement" in the 10th Subcircuit race. There are other contested subcircuit races in which Girl, I Guess has not made any endorsement -- the authors simply don't mention those races -- but, for this race, the authors provide extensive commentary. An excerpt:
Sigh. Dear reader, I am annoyed. Miffed. Vexed and displeased. Never in thirteen editions of this Guide have I been lobbied so incessantly for an endorsement in a race of any kind. For those unfamiliar with the finer points of the Girl, I Guess methodology, I have a longstanding rule against talking to judicial candidates before a Guide comes out, because they’re unable to comment on specific policy positions, and because the four criteria for a judicial endorsement are pretty clear. But, every now and then, someone just doesn’t get the memo, and instead proceeds to send me sixteen separate emails dating back to August of 2023 despite me [not] responding to a single email. So, once again, sigh.

This is an oddly dramatic race between a Guy Who Won’t Stop Emailing Me (Liam Kelly), and JB Pritzker’s Soap Opera Twin JC Pritzker (James Murphy) with plenty of questions and insider drama to go around.

*  *  *

This race leaves a bad taste in my mouth for so many reasons. On the one hand, James Murphy and I clearly have a number of ideological disagreements, he’s clearly police-aligned and therefore violating Criterion #1 for my endorsement. On the other hand, Liam Kelly, despite being more progressive, has run his campaign in such a way that I’m left near-convinced that he’s cheating, violating Criteria #2 and #3 for being both suspicious and a dumbass. Girl, I Guess takes an extremely hard line against many things, and two of those are cops and electoral skullduggery. Because of this, I’m unfortunately unable to make an endorsement in the 10th Subcircuit race, and encourage voters to read this coverage and decide for themselves....
Girl, I Guess: Not boring. Not dry. Readers are (again) encouraged to consult the source material for themselves.

6 comments:

Liam Kelly said...

Jack,

I grew up hearing that politics ain't bean bag. But between getting spoofed by multiple fake social media accounts and now dealing with somebody sending around emails pretending to be me pretending to not be me, I am very ready for this election cycle to end in 22 days. I was especially fond of the fake twitter account of me wearing a tophat and smoking a cigar. I thought that was pretty clever.

As for the criticisms about my willingness to openly discuss my progressive values, I make no apologies for that.

Liam Kelly

Anonymous said...

Liam Kelly is the Paul Vallas of 2024 — his campaign accounts keep getting “hacked.”

Anonymous said...

Jack, this race in the 10th Subcircuit is emblematic of the concerns you have raised about the diminishing number of judicial candidates, in number, as well as time may show quality. Politicians pass out endorsements turning a judgeship into merely another patronage job they allocate no matter the underlying merits of the candidate, or perhaps in spite of them. These practices are diminishing respect for the judiciary from the legal profession as well as the public. Liam Kelly is not a serious person. You provide persons running a unique and valuable opportunity to explain why they are worthy of a vote in their own words, so I think voters should hear from Liam Kelly in his own words and on video. The choice then becomes quite clear.

https://twitter.com/CPD1617Scanner/status/1751465598150758502

Anonymous said...

Dear Anonymous Commentor,

Please share. What makes you so uncomfortable about this video? Is it his 'Black Lives Matter' t-shirt? Is it his support for abortion rights and gender affirming policies and services?

Anonymous said...

Disagree.

He seems pretty serious to me.

https://vimeo.com/914210984

Anonymous said...

Is this what you mean when you say that he is serious?

https://twitter.com/judgewatchers/status/1763963620277227980