HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Rahm's DLC, neoliberal, c...

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 01:28 PM

Rahm's DLC, neoliberal, corrupt policies tank him in the polls

Rahm is as close to a pure DLC corporate Democrat as you can get. He is to those who have the reins of Democratic Party what Dick Cheney was to the GOP in the Bush years: the ugly heart of coal that no amount of PR and propaganda can pretty up.

Democrats like Rahm are why the GOP is still alive instead of long dead and buried. He reinforces the stereotype that all politicians are alike and will do pretty much the same thing on the big issues because in his case, it's essentially true.

We need more choice than one party that gives away our country to corporations while shredding the social safety net and another that gives us a sleeping pill and then shreds quietly.

Overall, according to the survey of 600 voting-age Illinois residents, 50 percent say they at least lean toward disapproval of his performance as mayor, versus only 19 percent who somewhat or strongly approve, or lean toward approval. That's a margin of 31 percentage points.

***

Specifically, just 2 percent of Chicagoans surveyed said they strongly approve of the mayor's job performance, with 12 percent somewhat approving and 5 percent leaning that way. At the opposite end, 13 percent strongly disapprove, 9 percent somewhat disapprove and 13 percent lean toward disapproval.

In Chicago, that gives Mr. Emanuel a net minus 16 rating, down from the plus 4 he had in September, when 37 percent approved and 33 percent disapproved.

Notably, the share of those disapproving of Mr. Emanuel's job performance hasn't moved much, going from 33 percent to 35 percent. The big shift has occurred in the “mixed feelings” category — up from 21 percent to 30 percent — and the “not sure” category, which went from 12 percent in September to 16 percent from Feb. 12 to 15, when the survey was conducted.


http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20130221/BLOGS02/130229963/emanuels-poll-rating-turns-negative


73 replies, 4896 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 73 replies Author Time Post
Reply Rahm's DLC, neoliberal, corrupt policies tank him in the polls (Original post)
yurbud Feb 2013 OP
Angry Dragon Feb 2013 #1
dsc Feb 2013 #2
Angry Dragon Feb 2013 #4
dsc Feb 2013 #8
tritsofme Feb 2013 #10
dlwickham Feb 2013 #29
tritsofme Feb 2013 #43
mucifer Feb 2013 #38
dlwickham Feb 2013 #60
mucifer Feb 2013 #64
liberalhistorian Feb 2013 #44
dsc Feb 2013 #47
TheKentuckian Feb 2013 #5
Angry Dragon Feb 2013 #6
tritsofme Feb 2013 #12
Ed Suspicious Feb 2013 #28
AnotherMcIntosh Feb 2013 #34
liberalhistorian Feb 2013 #45
AnotherMcIntosh Feb 2013 #48
tritsofme Feb 2013 #3
quinnox Feb 2013 #7
yurbud Feb 2013 #63
Hell Hath No Fury Feb 2013 #9
frazzled Feb 2013 #11
mucifer Feb 2013 #40
LiberalAndProud Feb 2013 #59
frazzled Feb 2013 #71
alcibiades_mystery Feb 2013 #13
sabrina 1 Feb 2013 #15
yurbud Feb 2013 #73
BWCC Feb 2013 #14
datasuspect Feb 2013 #23
wolfie001 Feb 2013 #32
wolfie001 Feb 2013 #33
AnotherMcIntosh Feb 2013 #35
alcibiades_mystery Feb 2013 #42
dballance Feb 2013 #65
marsis Feb 2013 #16
Swede Atlanta Feb 2013 #17
datasuspect Feb 2013 #25
wolfie001 Feb 2013 #31
PufPuf23 Feb 2013 #18
Phlem Feb 2013 #19
NorthCarolina Feb 2013 #22
ancianita Feb 2013 #20
ancianita Feb 2013 #21
Bainbridge Bear Feb 2013 #24
MotherPetrie Feb 2013 #27
Aerows Feb 2013 #41
MotherPetrie Feb 2013 #49
Aerows Feb 2013 #50
MotherPetrie Feb 2013 #52
Aerows Feb 2013 #53
MotherPetrie Feb 2013 #54
Aerows Feb 2013 #55
MotherPetrie Feb 2013 #57
Aerows Feb 2013 #58
WinkyDink Feb 2013 #67
forestpath Feb 2013 #46
Drunken Irishman Feb 2013 #26
dlwickham Feb 2013 #30
greatauntoftriplets Feb 2013 #62
Arctic Dave Feb 2013 #36
Ken Burch Feb 2013 #37
Aerows Feb 2013 #39
WhaTHellsgoingonhere Feb 2013 #51
xchrom Feb 2013 #56
Teamster Jeff Feb 2013 #61
WinkyDink Feb 2013 #66
datasuspect Feb 2013 #68
yurbud Feb 2013 #72
HiPointDem Feb 2013 #69
Jasana Feb 2013 #70

Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 01:32 PM

1. Blame a lot of it on the courts that said he was eligible to run for office

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #1)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 01:34 PM

2. they didn't install him

people could have voted against him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #2)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 01:36 PM

4. I understand that, however you had the Obama name and he ran as a democrat

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #4)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 01:53 PM

8. so

that isn't the court's fault, it is the electorate's fault. They still could have voted against him but decided not to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #4)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 02:09 PM

10. You do understand that there was no serious Republican candidate in the race.

All major candidates were Democrats. Just to make sure you weren't implying the only other option was a Republican. In a 6 way race he got 55%.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tritsofme (Reply #10)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:40 PM

29. and who's fault is that

certainly not his

people need to stop bitching about people getting elected that they don't like and do something rather than just bitching

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dlwickham (Reply #29)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 04:33 PM

43. Um, not sure why you are replying this to me.

I was attacking the fallacy that voters had to choose Rahm or a Republican. Rahm won overwhelmingly in a race full of Democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tritsofme (Reply #10)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 04:08 PM

38. I live in Chicago. I voted for a better democrat. She had no money tho.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mucifer (Reply #38)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:42 PM

60. who is the one who decides who is a "better democrat"

is there a check list or something?

must have missed that when I registered to vote

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dlwickham (Reply #60)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 07:50 PM

64. It's subjective. It was my opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #2)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 04:34 PM

44. Wow, for once we agree!

I guess miracles do occur, lol.

I agree that it wasn't the courts that elected him, that people could have voted against him, but I do disagree with the court decision. I don't believe there was any legal basis for it, and, had it been anyone else, I'm not sure the court would have ruled the way it did. He has been an absolute disaster as mayor, so hopefully, he'll lose his reelection bid. Problem is, Chicago is so corrupt, and too many Chicago Dems are corrupt, that I'm not holding my breath.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberalhistorian (Reply #44)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 04:39 PM

47. I don't pretend to know about Chicago law

so I have no idea if this was a case of one rule for everyone and a different one for Rahm which I would have a problem with. But I have problems with people trying to protect voters from themselves. So I guess we do pretty much agree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #1)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 01:38 PM

5. The lion's share goes to Democratic voters

Being allowed to run doesn't mean anyone has to vote for his wicked ass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #5)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 01:50 PM

6. So their choice was to not vote or vote republican??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #6)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 02:22 PM

12. That was not the choice. There was no Republican candidate.

See my #10.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #5)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:39 PM

28. Regular people vote for the devil they know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #1)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:50 PM

34. Absolutely right.

 

The Illinois Supreme Court disregarded the facts while ruling that Rahm sufficiently met the residency requirements.

Do you know what they call an honest judge in Chicago?

Answer: a tourist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #34)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 04:37 PM

45. Mike Royko had a great column once

discussing the influence and impact of Chicago's unique brand of what was termed "clout". He made up a bunch of only semi-joking examples to illustrate his point. One of my favorites was "my clout recommended me for a judgship. Maybe I'll apply to law school."

Damn, I miss him, what fun he would have had with Rahm!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberalhistorian (Reply #45)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:06 PM

48. Yea, I also miss him.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 01:34 PM

3. 600 Illinois residents with only a smaller subset in Chicago?

This poll is even less relevant than I thought.

I'm sure Rahm is shaking in his boots.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 01:53 PM

7. Rahm is about as inspiring as Rush Limbaugh is

 

as a politician.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to quinnox (Reply #7)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 07:02 PM

63. Rahm is about as inspiring as a DMV clerk, but then I've met some helpful DMV clerks

over the years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 01:59 PM

9. Fanatastic!

Couldn't happen to a nicer shitbag.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 02:19 PM

11. Chicago Tonight panel discussed this poll last night

And pretty much pooh-poohed it as meaningless.

First of all, it was an Internet poll, and of people across Illinois,. The big dip came in the people who live outside of Chicago. Why they would be polled at all is a mystery to me. And it makes the already small sample even tinier for Chicago itself. As the article itself states, his ratings haven't changed much in Chicago, except in the mixed category. This, the panel agreed, is probably due most to publicity about gun violence in the city (which frankly has not changed over the past 40 years much), and because of the strike the teacher's union made.

For those of you who don't know what Chicago Tonight is, it kind of proves that you don't live here, and your opinions on the matters of our city are pretty immaterial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #11)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 04:09 PM

40. Don't blame me. I voted for Patricia Van Pelt Watkins!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #11)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:33 PM

59. You are correct.

It's not my city; not my mayor. He does have a national presence, so many will have an (immaterial) opinion. Do you like him as mayor? If he stays off the national stage and you're happy with his performance, I'm good with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalAndProud (Reply #59)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 11:41 AM

71. Do I like him as mayor? Yes and no

This is such a tough city to judge politically, especially after more than twenty years of Daley. A thing I like: he's brought more attention to the poorer neighborhoods and their issues; he actually goes down there. He's luring businesses to move in here, which means jobs. I like the improvements being made to the CTA and infrastructure. Things I don't like so much: I mistrust the business ties. The thing with the schools I'm sort of neutral on: this school district is such a mess, for so many reasons, it feels like an entrenched mess that has lots of heroes and bad actors at once.

He's kind of like Obama: he inherited a big crisis here, with huge budget deficits on every level and a host of unfinished business that was left on the table. It's a job I don't know who would want. It's going to take some time to dig out of the hole and to see what direction he's really going in.

But I love this city in many ways. Its crazy politics? Not so much.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 02:23 PM

13. Those celebrating this poll are going to be surprised

when Rahm wins the next election in a walk.

Not saying that's right or wrong, but this is a bit silly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #13)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 02:39 PM

15. No, we won't be surprised. We are getting used to the least qualified

politicians with a 'D' after their name being supported with money by the Party Leadership so the fact that he is so unpopular does not guarantee a loss for him. And that is what hopefully the new coalition of Democratic Organizations which is huge, will be able to do something about. By no longer donating to the party but to individual candidates chosen by the people, eventually the people's choice, not the Big Corps, will finally win elections.

But it will take time as the system is so corrupted by money it won't happen overnight. But at least we see a beginning of an awareness and some action to try to start the necessary changes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #13)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 07:31 PM

73. winning isn't the same as doing what's right, and in our two party system it just means

people like you slightly better than the one other choice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 02:31 PM

14. Hopefully these trends will not be ignored..

 

Last edited Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:50 PM - Edit history (1)

The Democratic party needs an overhaul. The current party power structure is made up of Rockefeller Republicans. Wealthy, liberal elites in the cities who frankly have little in common with most of the rest of America.

Democratic party should be the party of working class people, small business owners, entrepreneurs, and those working hard to move up. It should not be the party of Wall Street liberals, Silicon Valley Potentates, and the establishment.

If it is not careful, a Reagan like figure will gobble up the working class Democrats and they'll be in big trouble..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BWCC (Reply #14)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:11 PM

23. it's the "Democratic" party

 

when you say "Democrat" party, people might mistake you for a stupid ass motherfucker who doesn't know how to use correct words like a grown up.

FYI

welcome to DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to datasuspect (Reply #23)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:46 PM

32. "Democrat Party" is a slur

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wolfie001 (Reply #32)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:47 PM

33. Should have added: use "Democratic Party". This isn't Redstate

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wolfie001 (Reply #32)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:52 PM

35. Yes. It's a "tell."

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to datasuspect (Reply #23)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 04:25 PM

42. ROFL



So awesome!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to datasuspect (Reply #23)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 10:21 PM

65. Nicely Put

Thank you for helping to educate newer DU members.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 02:53 PM

16. I've said it before, dare I.....

 


Chicago democrats are the best Republicans we have in Illinois. They're corrupt, disingenuous, hate labor, pay no attention to voters wishes, and have ruined this state, taking us straight to the top of the most corrupt USA states lists.

Downstate is and has been in Chicago's clutches, not much we can do about it. Can't vote Teabag, can't vote Chicago Democrat, third party has become the only choice down here.

Please send help!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 02:54 PM

17. He is a horrible man..........

 

Unfortunately Obama surrounded himself with many of his cronies from Chicago rather than selecting the right people. Emanuel is an opportunist and not especially bright.

I hope that Chicago will oust this imposter at the next election and elect someone who will actually try to do something for the city.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Swede Atlanta (Reply #17)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:13 PM

25. rahm has all the brilliance of a "crazy busy" middle manager yuppie type

 

someone full of chaos and faux professionalism, but a steaming pile of dumbass with a veneer of nastiness.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to datasuspect (Reply #25)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:43 PM

31. Also.....

....don't forget his anti-Union hatred. He's pretty open about it. 1%er all the way.........

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 02:58 PM

18. The DNC and POTUS Obama should get a clue.

Rahm's appointment was a huge mistake in 2009.

Using Zeke Rahm, his bro, as an advisor on health care was also a disaster.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:00 PM

19. He was a sack of shit during Obama's term

and is complete fucking pile now.

And I do remember some shit stains here defending him after throwing liberals under the bus. My how things are revealed over time, but the ones who see it immediately are ridiculed.



-p

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Phlem (Reply #19)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:06 PM

22. That pretty much sums things up

as I see it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:00 PM

20. Music to my ears! Down with that North Shore carpetbagging chiseler.

The biggest challenge will be to have a well known Dem run against him. I'd be lying if I said I knew who could beat him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #20)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:02 PM

21. I wonder how much it costs for PPP to do a more credible poll.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:13 PM

24. As Obama's first appointment,

 

as Chief Of Staff no less, El Rahmbo was the beginning of my distrust for Obama. Subsequent appointments and reversals pf campaign rhetoric have only strengthened that. I am a Social Security recipient who will be eligible to receive Medicare in September and, yes, these heartless, rich fuckers make me very nervous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bainbridge Bear (Reply #24)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:28 PM

27. ICAM!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #27)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 04:20 PM

41. Please for heaven's sake

and it's not just you, this is directed at the forum, please stop using rather obscure acronyms for a simple 3 or 4 word response. It kind of sucks that I have to look it up to find out what you had to say .

No offense intended - just a pet peeve. And for everyone else like me who had no idea what this was, it's I couldn't agree more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #41)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:10 PM

49. For real? ICAM is one of the oldest and most common internet acronyms there is

 

Been seeing it and using it since I first went online in 1995. Never, ever would have occurred to me in a million years that anyone posting here wouldn't know what such a common abbreviation meant.

Since I wasn't born knowing what it means either, I must have either had to ask somebody or look up what it meant the first time I saw it used, too. That is how you learn things! I mean gawd forbid you should take a few seconds to look up something online to learn something new.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #49)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:13 PM

50. Okay

I didn't know what it meant, and I've been online 6 years longer than you have if you went online in 1995 (I was online using DOS with a 1200 baud modem - it was a major upgrade for me to go 2400 baud ).

I figured I would broach the subject. You are free to disagree, and it was just a suggestion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #50)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:17 PM

52. I still can't believe this is for real. Do a search on ICAM on this board and you'll see

 

numerous examples of its use.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #52)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:20 PM

53. Maybe I'm extra dense

I've never seen it. That doesn't mean that you aren't absolutely right that it is common - I've just never seen it, and I promise you, I've been on the internet for a very long time.

Oh well, I learned something new today. I can't be disagreeable about that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #53)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:21 PM

54. I'm wondering how long it took you to figure out ROTFLMAO <g>

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #54)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:24 PM

55. I picked that one up right away

in the GEnie chat rooms <g>. Yes, I've been on the internet THAT long.

Hell, I even know SMH, FWIW and IMHO. I have just never seen ICAM. Oh well, like I said, I learned something new <g>.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #55)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:26 PM

57. And I had to look up SMH the first time I saw it

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #57)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:30 PM

58. LOL

Oh well, there's another fine one j/k.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #52)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 10:24 PM

67. I've never seen it before. IYKWIMAITYD.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bainbridge Bear (Reply #24)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 04:39 PM

46. +1

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:20 PM

26. Bogus poll...

He isn't the mayor of Illinois - he's the mayor of Chicago. Find a city-wide poll for better results.

And the poll doesn't even make sense.

19% approve of the job (either strongly or leaning) and 35% disapprove (either strongly or lean) - so, what about the other 46%?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Reply #26)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:42 PM

30. quit making sense

you'll ruin the OP's OMGism

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Reply #26)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:52 PM

62. I agree.

I have no idea why they polled residents from downstate, where they typically vote Republican.

And for those who might accuse me of defending Emanuel, I have no dog in this race. I live in the Chicago area, but my town has a different mayor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 03:57 PM

36. How much do I hate Rahm, I will give to his opponent, no matter the party.

 

Fuck him until the end of time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 04:01 PM

37. Any chance of getting a DEMOCRAT to challenge Rahm next time?

He should be stripped of the party label and forced to run as what he actually is...a Corporate Party candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 04:09 PM

39. I can't stand him

I'd be willing to watch a Republican win just to jettison him from that seat and to end his political aspirations. Hell, he might as well BE a Republican, since he is a (D) in name only.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:16 PM

51. lol Doesn't anyone remember that Obama created this fucking monster?

At least he got his ass handed to him when he took on the CPS teachers!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:25 PM

56. Rahman is a great - even definitive moderate Republican.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 05:48 PM

61. The last time Chicago had a Republican mayor was 1931

GOP has 0.00% chance of winning anything in Chicago. So, what you end up with is Corpo Dem with all the money running against regular Dem with no money.

Rahm came gift wrapped from the White House. He is a POS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 10:22 PM

66. He's still hot. :-)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #66)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 04:45 AM

68. hot like a slimy dwarfish raccoon?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #66)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 07:29 PM

72. from the residual heat of his last cigarette or brimstone?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 04:49 AM

69. good.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sun Feb 24, 2013, 05:14 AM

70. Just K&R

making sure this gets read... hopefully

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread