WHOA!

Holy Frijoles!

 

Seriously was not expecting that.

 

I believe this will now be appealed to the IL SC. Very interesting.

 

If this were to be upheld, who would get most of his votes? Chico?

I feel like residency requirements are kind of antiquated and stupid.

I feel like residency requirements are kind of antiquated and stupid.

 

so if he's not a resident of Chicago, how has he been able to vote during the past X # of years?

so if he's not a resident of Chicago, how has he been able to vote during the past X # of years?

 

I haven't really been able to read up on this, I have no idea.

He responds.

I feel like residency requirements are kind of antiquated and stupid.

I dont. If you want to be mayor of a town, be a part of the town.

I feel like residency requirements are kind of antiquated and stupid.

 

Whys that? Should someone from Texas be able to run for Chicago mayor? Should a Canadian be allowed to run for U.S. Congress. I think you want a run & represent a town, you should be there and a part of the town.

so if he's not a resident of Chicago, how has he been able to vote during the past X # of years?

They argue it's the same way representatives to congress return home to vote. The difference is that reps go to congress to serve the people they represent. Emanuel, in my opinion, abandoned his residence to take a job elsewhere.

So, does he get kicked out of the upcoming debate?

I haven't really been able to read up on this, I have no idea.

 

 

s*** that's easy. My grandmohter who died in 1981 still votes in CHEE CAW GO. LOL.

I actually agree with the residency requirements... but I disagree that Rahm hasn't met them. Seems to me he has.

 

Holy Frijoles!

 

Seriously was not expecting that.

 

I believe this will now be appealed to the IL SC. Very interesting.

 

I can't believe it happened in the state of IL. I await all of the stories about the judges political affiliations.

I actually agree with the residency requirements... but I disagree that Rahm hasn't met them. Seems to me he has.

The sticking point, in my opinion, is the national service clause. I think it applies to those who serve int he military or are ELECTED to higher office (Senator, Rep, President). But personally, i do not believe it applies to those who take jobs that happen to be for the government.

If someone was a really great mayor in somewhere else and then wants to take that management to another city, I don't see a problem with that. If I grew up in illinois and moved to a college for four years and then moved back I certainly never stopped considering myself a chicagoan. Unless they are not going to live there while they are mayor, I see no problem with it.

If someone was a really great mayor in somewhere else and then wants to take that management to another city, I don't see a problem with that. If I grew up in illinois and moved to a college for four years and then moved back I certainly never stopped considering myself a chicagoan. Unless they are not going to live there while they are mayor, I see no problem with it.

I understand what you are saying, but being a mayor is just so highly localized in what it takes to be successful, that I would not want an outsider running. If they are from the area or have lived there for a significant time, maybe. But otherwise, I think that a lack of understanding of the city and circumstances would handcuff any mayoral candidate.

 

The sticking point, in my opinion, is the national service clause. I think it applies to those who serve int he military or are ELECTED to higher office (Senator, Rep, President). But personally, i do not believe it applies to those who take jobs that happen to be for the government.

 

The opinion is a good read, for those interested.

 

As to this point, the exception doesn't and hasn't applied to candidates for office, only voters.

 

They also went to pretty great lengths to review what "resides in" means (statutorily), and ruled that it actually means "to live in," not just keep some sort of tie to the location.

 

I think it's a good ruling. We'll see what the SC says.

I understand what you are saying, but being a mayor is just so highly localized in what it takes to be successful, that I would not want an outsider running. If they are from the area or have lived there for a significant time, maybe. But otherwise, I think that a lack of understanding of the city and circumstances would handcuff any mayoral candidate.

 

But if they aren't knowledgeable about the city it will come out like it's come out in lots of elections where the person just shows up to get elected (e.g. alan keyes), I don't see a reason why they specifically should not even be allowed to run.

The opinion is a good read, for those interested.

 

As to this point, the exception doesn't and hasn't applied to candidates for office, only voters.

 

They also went to pretty great lengths to review what "resides in" means (statutorily), and ruled that it actually means "to live in," not just keep some sort of tie to the location.

 

I think it's a good ruling. We'll see what the SC says.

According to Rahm's definition, my parents "resided" in my townhouse for a year until I bought it off of them. They never once slept a night in it, but they owned it.

Edited January 24, 201115 yr by Athomeboy_2000

According to Rahm's definition, my parents "resided" in my townhouse for a year until I bought it off of them. They never once slept a night in it, but they owned it.

 

Right. If you took Rahm's argument, you could establish residence with the purchase of property. A rich person could buy a house in any district he might possibly want to run in, rent it out, keep some personal items in the home, and then occasionally tell people that he always plans to return one day to establish intent.

Edited January 24, 201115 yr by Jenksismybitch

I mean, the thing that I find crazy about this is you guys are acting like rahm is getting in on a technicality but I feel like he is being kept out on a technicality. Regardless of whether i'd vote for him, which I wouldn't, this is a guy who was born and raised in chicago, represented a chicago us house district thru the 2000's and left to go work for the president of the united states. The vast majority of his life he's been in Chicago. Do we really think he doesn't know the issues about this town? You guys are acting like he lived in montana, bought a house here and then decided he should run for mayor.

I mean, the thing that I find crazy about this is you guys are acting like rahm is getting in on a technicality but I feel like he is being kept out on a technicality. Regardless of whether i'd vote for him, which I wouldn't, this is a guy who was born and raised in chicago, represented a chicago us house district thru the 2000's and left to go work for the president of the united states. The vast majority of his life he's been in Chicago. Do we really think he doesn't know the issues about this town? You guys are acting like he lived in montana, bought a house here and then decided he should run for mayor.

No I agree with you in this case - like I said, I have no problem with Rahm being on the ballot. But I also understand why the rule is there, and agree with it. But perhaps it could be written better, like, candidate must have had X years of continuous residence in the city at some point in their life.

 

The timing of Daly's decision is what screws this up. Most folks that are going to run for an office usually live there when they decide to run.

 

I also would like the Mosely Braun contingency to change their stance and back Watkins as from what I have read is as qualified as any.

 

This could be a good thing or a bad thing.

 

Odd thing, Rahm does not have a job right now.

The timing of Daly's decision is what screws this up. Most folks that are going to run for an office usually live there when they decide to run.

 

I also would like the Mosely Braun contingency to change their stance and back Watkins as from what I have read is as qualified as any.

This could be a good thing or a bad thing.

 

Odd thing, Rahm does not have a job right now.

 

Explain that please!

Explain that please!

Yeah, I think Braun is more well-qualified... but she's also a dolt, and I'd much rather see Watkins run seriously, so I'd love to see more support for Watkins and for Braun to just go away.