Lori Lightfoot: Chicago mayor will lose reelection bid, CNN projects, as crime concerns grow | CNN Politics
By: Eric Bradner (CNN)
Tuesday's municipal election marked the first time in more than 30 years that Chicago has ditched its mayor.
And for good reason
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot lost her bid for a second term Tuesday, failing to make a top-two runoff in the latest demonstration of growing concerns about crime in one of the nation's largest cities.
Paul Vallas, a long-time public schools chief who ran on a tough-on-crime message, and Brandon Johnson, a Cook County commissioner backed by progressives and the Chicago Teachers Union, will advance to the April runoff, CNN projects.
Tuesday's municipal election marked the first time in more than 30 years that Chicago has ditched its mayor. Lightfoot could not overcome years of fights with the police and teachers' unions, a spike in violent crime during her administration and Chicago's slow recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic.
Lightfoot conceded Tuesday evening, telling supporters that she is now "rooting and praying for the next mayor of Chicago."
Former Chicago Public Schools CEO Paul Vallas speaks with supporters after forcing a mayoral runoff election during his election night gathering at City Hall Events on Tuesday, Feb. 28, 2023, in Chicago's West Loop. Armando L. Sanchez/Chicago Tribune/TNS/Getty Images
Vallas built his campaign around a pro-police, tough-on-crime message - one he highlighted in celebratory remarks after Lightfoot had called Vallas and Johnson to concede.
"We will have a safe Chicago. We will make Chicago the safest city in America," Vallas said.
The big question over the next five weeks is whether Vallas' more conservative message will attract enough support to win in a city where nearly 83% of votes in the 2020 presidential race went to the Democratic ticket.
Johnson, in his speech Tuesday night, showed the first signs that he will seek to consolidate liberals who supported other candidates in the nine-person field. He cited each candidate by name.
"If you voted for one of those other candidates, I want you to know that I'm running to be the mayor of you, too," Johnson said.
Cook County Commissioner and Chicago mayoral candidate, Brandon Johnson speaks with supporters after forcing a mayoral runoff election during his election night gathering on Tuesday, Feb. 28, 2023, in Chicago. Terrence Antonio James/Chicago Tribune/TNS/Getty Images
Because no candidate is on course to top 50% in Tuesday's election, the top two of the nine candidates on the ballot are moving on to the April 4 runoff.
Lightfoot, the first Black woman and first out gay person to serve as mayor in a city often pilloried by conservatives in national debates over violence and gun control, rose to prominence as a pugnacious reformer promising a break from the corruption and clubby governance that had long marked Chicago politics.
But years of contentious brawls over policing, teacher pay and Covid-19 public safety policies, as well as mounting complaints about long waits in Chicago's public transit system, left Lightfoot vulnerable, raising the stunning prospect of the Second City ousting its incumbent mayor in the first round of voting.
Video Ad Feedback 'I got elected to shake things up': Lightfoot on time as mayor (2021) 03:31 - Source: CNN
Lightfoot found herself with few allies in her bid for a second term, and a host of powerful interests aligned against her. The Chicago Fraternal Order of Police endorsed Vallas. The Chicago Teachers Union backed Johnson. Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker, with whom Lightfoot has clashed, stayed out of the race entirely.
More than 507,000 ballots had been cast by the time polls closed Tuesday, Chicago elections officials said. More mail-in votes will be added to that total as they arrive.
Concerns about crime and public safety have rattled Chicago. Violence in the city spiked in 2020 and 2021. And though shootings and murders have decreased since then, other crimes - including theft, car-jacking, robberies and burglaries - have increased since last year, according to the Chicago Police Department's 2022 year-end report.
The dynamic has been similar to what played out in other big-city mayoral elections in recent years. In New York City, Mayor Eric Adams won with a pro-police, tough-on-crime message in 2021. But in Los Angeles, voters elected Rep. Karen Bass last year over billionaire developer Rick Caruso, who had pumped $100 million into a campaign in which he had focused on a pitch for law and order.
Chicago's municipal elections are non-partisan, but none of the candidates on the ballot Tuesday called themselves Republicans. Still, Lightfoot sought to portray Vallas that way. He'd attacked her record on crime early in the campaign and was backed by the conservative police union.
Johnson, meanwhile, ate away at Lightfoot's support among progressives. He once advocated reducing police funding, but has backtracked from that message more recently, arguing that he meant he wants to increase funding for other priorities such as mental health treatment.
"Lori Lightfoot hasn't made Chicago safer, but I will," he said in an ad. "It's time to get smart, not just tough."
CORRECTION: This story has been updated to reflect that an elected Chicago mayor hasn't lost in more than 30 years.
This story has been updated with additional information.
Tags
Who is online
549 visitors
Bye bye Betelgeuse. No Daley tenure for you............
What do you mean by Betelgeuse? Is that a slam on her looks?
You're pretty perceptive...........
Tell us you absolutely don't have a clue without telling us
What a shocker that you insulted her looks, shocker!
You like her looks?
What do her 'looks' have to do with anything?
Typical.
Same as it has to do when the subject is MTG or Boebert or any range of conservative women you rail on.
Don't call out their hypocrisy. It makes them cry.
No, it has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Typical.
Her looks have absolutely nothing to do with her ability or inability to do her job yet right out of the gate you insult her looks, the very first comment you made was an insult about her looks.
Yep, and the people have spoken, she sucks bigly.
I'm mixed on her tenure as mayor, definitely not the Daley machines (poppa and son). She did run her re-election campaign somewhat like the Richards, laid low, not many commercials or radio spots until maybe a week or two before then a few jabs here and there against the opponents. That only works in Daley-world.
Jane Byrne the last Mayor to not win re-election. And she got in because of the 1979 snow storm and "decisions" made during that storm by Bilandic. Ever since then it seemed as long as Mayor kept main streets plowed and public transpo running they would get re-elected. And with our last few winters being pretty mild for this area, Lightfoot couldn't use that as a crutch and the ridiculous crime rates, especially of late with the car-jackings / killings of ride-share people, too much to overcome.
Saw on another article where she is blaming her loss on her race and gender. Just another sore loser trying to justify her losing by pulling the race and gender card to avoid admitting the totally abysmal job she did as mayor. Glad to see she lost.
16% as an incumbent. It seems impossible to do so poorly.
Begs the question what on Earth was the 16% thinking?
Rumor has it the prisons were forcing inmates to vote for her.
The hope is somebody is elected that cares for the people of Chicago instead of politics. Trash like here should be taken out frequently.
This morning she's already pushing that she lost because of race and gender. Her words are she lost because she's a black woman in America.
It couldn't be due to the fact she has exhibited the epitome of "The Peter Principle". /s
What's 'the Peter Principle'?
Basically, a person rises to the height of their own incompetence. I'm surprised you weren't familiar with the term. It's been around for a long time.
I'm not surprised [deleted]
Is that exactly what she said?
Yes. Look it up for a change
No, it wasn't what she said, EXACTLY, I read the 'article' regardless of your typical insult. She answered 'of course, I'm a black woman in America' when asked if she was treated unfairly.
Again, where did she say she was treated unfairly, in her own EXACT words, that it was due to racism and sexism? She didn't.
What a lame and failed argument. When someone is asked if they were treated unfairly and they reply 'of course, I'm a black woman in America' and you can come back and deny that's due to racism and sexism? Then just what the fuck could it mean?
Well, you've had over 13 hours now and have failed to come back to explain in your own words what her statement meant. Guess you're all hat and no cattle.
Unlike some, I have a life outside of NT. I don't wait around 13 hours for nonsense interpretations of what YOU and YOUR little buddies think of what she meant.
Deflection mode fail.... You were asked for your interpretation of what her statement meant. Not mine, not anybody else's but you interpretation.
Yes, that is all you and your little buddies have, lame and failed arguments on what you perceive somewhat meant.
No, you failed, as usual.
Is that all you have? Insults?
I don't answer to you or your little buddies
But it wasn't exactly what she said.
Deflection mode fail, I know that's about all you have when you're not defending the indefensible.
You still haven't explained what her statement means to you then. All you do is bitch and walk away. As I said, all hat and no cattle.
I don't answer to you.
Get a life.
I'm not asking you to answer to me, I'm asking you to explain what you thought her statement meant. So far you have argued that our interpretation is wrong but you won't explain why or tell us what your interpretation is.
I don't answer to you.
Just have to have the last word, don't you?
Continue
Once again, I was not asking you to answer to me. I was asking you to explain your comment. But I guess you think a "nuh uh" is a comprehensive answer.
You're a real one-trick pony too. You comment on how I have to have the last word as you came in to reply to me..
Tell you what... fuck off. Don't bother to reply to me cuz I will no longer reply to you. You are not worth my time.
You expect anything comprehendible from some of these on the left?
At least this site is getting easier to read. However the seeds have a lot more white space in them now but it's really no loss. Discussion is always welcome but the constant refusal to acknowledge a different view point it very tiresome when offered with zero evidence to back up their point of view.
Add to that some MODs habit of deleting comments that have that different view point.
Yeah, one forgets she was elected as a white man.
I just put that article up.
Have they figured out her "gender?"
I think they just classify her as "Pat" (think SNL)
At least she conceded when she lost her re-election unlike a lot of republican sore losers.
And blamed her loss on racism and sexism like democrap sore losers usually do.
Then you and snuffy can quote her saying those exact words.
She has her very own words quoted in this article posted by Jeremy
She didn't say those exact words in your 'article' or his
See, you couldn't quote her saying those exact words.
SHOCKER!
How would you characterize this..........
"I'm a black woman in America. Of course," she replied when asked by a reporter if she had been treated unfairly,"
What is a shocker is the fact you can't seem to pull those attitudes from that statement.........shocker but not a surprise.
Again, you've failed to point out her saying those exact words.
SHOCKER!
Guess I did. I stand corrected.
Never said she used those exact words but the sentiment is there. You are stretching with trying to deny she, like many democrats use racism and sexism as an excuse for getting bounced.
Some folks really can't see the forest through the trees.
Stacey Abrams did the same thing twice.
There ya go. Yahoo news with her words in quotes.
But, but, but she didn't say those exact words. Some folks have to learn to read between the lines......................
That makes it too hard to ignore what you don't like
Again, she never stated what some claim she did, no matter how many times y'all POINTLESSLY point out what she actually said 'in quotes'
Where again does she state exactly WHAT YOU CLAIMED SHE STATED, EXACTLY??????
Though YOU said those were her exact words, so now you're backpedaling because I proved you wrong, as usual.
Not backpedaling. I don't think you know what that word means. Actually it is painfully obvious. Read my comment again. I admitted I didn't find the exact words and said I stand corrected. Are you just trolling due to possibly being right for the first time in years?
How quickly you forget the Democrats that did it (and still do) after the 2016 election.
Been standard MO for many liberal Dems since way before 2016.
Selective memory.
Yep, definitely.
You're on ignore
It's just hard to figure why anyone would want her reelected.
The city's budget deficit exploded under her tenure. She failed to stem the violent crime. She let protests run out of control. She seemed helpless to do anything about Covid or labor issues. Where does anyone look at her term and say, "By golly, we need more of that!"
For some odd reason, some people just identify with losers!
It certainly seems like a terrible run.
But I don't live in or near Chicago, so I kinda wonder what else is going on that may be making her job more difficult than normal.