Yesterday on a perfect early summer morning, James Cappleman officially declared his intention to run for alderman of the 46th Ward, just steps from the spot where an SUV sprayed gunfire toward area residents on Thursday. Gay Chicago Magazine was there and sent us a teaser to the story, which will run in the print edition that comes out on Tuesday. "Cappleman told a crowd of about 60 neighbors, friends and supporters, he's worked to improve the ward, but is frustrated by what he called a lack of transparency and public input in ward decisions." Read the article here.
Update: Read the full article here in Gay Chicago (scroll down to find the article).
Hear, Hear!
ReplyDeleteThe games afoot.
ReplyDeleteThere are others poised to hop hoppity hop into da race.
Right now based on experience, name recognition and organization I'd have to put Cappleman first in any betting for being da new aldercreature. Of course there will likely be a runoff.
That could change of course as others enter da race and time slowly proceeds towards February.
Perhaps the Gerald Farinas juggernaut will be like the BP spill. Huge under the surface and we don't realize how large it is until later as estimates of vote totals continually change upward.
My question would be -- why would anyone else run against Cappleman if he is running against Shiller?
ReplyDeleteDid he not have the support of "the comunity" last time?
With the Salvation Army Tom Seay center closing, there should be less voter support for Shiller. But the anti-Shiller vote would remain the same, if not slightly increase. Why would they turn away from Cappleman?
And i agree with IrishPirate on Gearld Farinas not being a strong candidate (i am suspecting he won't make it on the ballot)
i'd also agree there with IrishPirate that there might be a runoff, assuming that the anti-Shiller candidates don't turn on each other (as what happened n the 50th ward in 2007, resulting in a lost opportunity. the 2003 anti-Shiller candidates were united pre-election; Cindi Anderson kept her support through the runoff, but Katharine Nathan, who lost by 100 votes, was slower to support Sandra Reed ).
Short answer: Because there are many people who feel they could do a good job as alderman. It's not about being "The Anti-Shiller" as much as people wanting to be alderman.
ReplyDeleteNo one knows if Helen will run or not.
I spoke to Cappleman. I really like what he has to say about our ward. He has my vote and as well as alot of residents in our condo.
ReplyDelete@WISEGUY: Ditto here. Every person in my building (of voting age) said they'll be casting their ballot for Cappleman.
ReplyDeleteHells yes. I met Cappleman at the meeting regarding the Montrose/Agatite BS BS development non-open-meeting at that condo building on Clarendon. The guy has passion. The guy can DO SOMETHING for our neighborhood. I say that, because, as of late, would you look at Uptown and see anything that has changed? Or anything towards which the "Ward government" has put an effort to better or make more positive? No. NO NO NO. Cappleman will not stand for ONE SHOOTING GOING WITHOUT A STATEMENT in this neighborhood. THUGS NEED TO START SH*TTING THEIR PANTS BECAUSE IF CAPPLEMAN GETS ELECTED, THE GANG BANGERS ARE GOING TO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS TO ANSWER, AND SOME SQUAD CARS TO RIDE IN BACK OF!!!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteBy not making crime an issue in the 46th ward, current leadership is ignoring the issue for the rest of the city.
ReplyDeleteThis ward and the city need someone who can address the root cause of crime. Concentration of poverty and a poor educational system are two.
Does anyone have ward and city-wide statistics for shots fired and other attempted gun violence?
http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/06/toddler-among-14-shot-overnight-throughout-city.html
Estee,
ReplyDeleteThe reason current leadership has remained so long is that regular, law abiding residents are made to sh*t their pants out of fear of being booted from their community by a pro-gentrification alderman.
Community members (those who call 911 on loiterers) and the police need to recognize the difference between people legitimately hanging out and gang members, something that's difficult when gangs mingle with other community members so well.
Every time someone is falsely labled a gang member or trouble maker, an anti-Shiller vote is lost. Worse, that person may begin to believe the label and become part of the problem.
I voted for Cappleman in the last election, but will be voting for Michael Carroll this time around.
ReplyDeleteCase in point: Before the last election, I was greeted by a well dressed, organized and polite volunteer from the Cappleman campaign at Jewel, offering to talk to me about the campaign and if I would be willing to distribute flyers for him to my neighbors. I get back to my place after shopping at Jewel, and am approached by a guy announcing he works for Alderman Shiller, literally, a toothless, smelling of booze almost vagrant, asking me if I needed help with my groceries, and then asking me if I could let him into the locked gate of my condo building so he could leave flyers. It was such a fitting example of the two ...
ReplyDeleteCrime should be the central issue of the campaign not government transparency.
ReplyDeleteShiller is going to rue the day that she was overheard saying 'crime is not my issue'.
ReplyDeleteHopefully it will come down to a Caroll versus Cappleman run-off. That would make for some interesting, thought provoking, and ultimately beneficial debates.
ReplyDeleteCarroll definitely seems like a viable candidate, although I never heard of him until late last year. My fear for him is that he doesn't stand a chance on the "liberal lakefront" since he is a cop.
ReplyDeleteNowotny - I still don't think he is anything more that a Shiller cog trying to split the vote.
So, I'm not going to waste my vote, I am voting for James.
Folks, James is the most honest, sincere candidate running for political office. He wants to MAKE a difference, this is not about political cronies. He has to get donations because the other politicos he needs to support him check campaign funds and support the most viable/financially stable candidate. The other candidates are in this for other reasons and thus why you have never heard from them (except Nowatny who has done little for the 46th). James is for change, change that you can trust. He is very simple and I would not categorize him as a politician; but he should be.
ReplyDeleteI hope "change that I can trust" is different than "change you can believe in"!
ReplyDeleteI would encourage everyone who makes any comment about anyone running for public office to state afterwards whether or not they gave to that person's campaign. Talk is cheap but if I really want Helen out, I must give to a challenger's campaign. There's no way around it.
ReplyDeleteUntil the election, I'll end each of my campaign-related posts with the words "I gave to the candidate of my choice."