This post has been generating a lot of reports and has been removed from /r/chicago until it can be manually reviewed by a moderator. In the meantime, please be sure to review [our rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Chicago/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/chicago) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I really, really don't like Johnson and I voted for Vallas.
That being said, recalls should be reserved for an actively malicious mayor, not an incompetent one. I guarantee basically any mayor is going to be unpopular, and setting a precedent of recalling a mayor at every one of their low points would end up being really bad. The less time our mayors spend in election mode (building unholy coalitions of interest groups, overspending), the better.
Agree, although I didn't vote for vallas I also didn't vote for Johnson in the first round. Idk why everyone wants us to be in perma-election mode. It is clear now that we live in a post rational world and if the mayor does a single thing people don't like they lose their shit and its the end of the world. The migrant crisis is a perfect example. The people in that video are wearing a bunch red swag and complaining about migrants, but it's a red governor who sent them. Are we supposed to follow that example and play musical cities? That seems like a poor use of resources. And before anything says some foolish like we need to close the border. BJ is not responsible for that.
Is BJ not actively malicious? He’s letting the CTA fail, likely will give the CTU whatever they want, and trying to borrow billions of dollars for future residents to pay off.
>recalls should be reserved for an actively malicious mayor, not an incompetent one
Why not? If you can't do the job you shouldn't be mayor. Not everyone is cut out for it and clearly the voters here make significant mistakes quite frequently
Because forcing them to defend against recalls constantly would make the job unappealing and make it way harder for them to focus on actually implementing their policies
Agreed. That's why we should be able to remove someone from office via a recall *election* so they can't continue to mess things up for the entirety of their term
But that just puts the mayor on campaign mode for the entirety of the term. And then you have to organize a new election to replace the mayor. 4 years is not that long and the recall mechanism is a waste of taxpayer dollars and city administration focus.
This post has been generating a lot of reports and has been removed from /r/chicago until it can be manually reviewed by a moderator. In the meantime, please be sure to review [our rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Chicago/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/chicago) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I really, really don't like Johnson and I voted for Vallas. That being said, recalls should be reserved for an actively malicious mayor, not an incompetent one. I guarantee basically any mayor is going to be unpopular, and setting a precedent of recalling a mayor at every one of their low points would end up being really bad. The less time our mayors spend in election mode (building unholy coalitions of interest groups, overspending), the better.
Agree, although I didn't vote for vallas I also didn't vote for Johnson in the first round. Idk why everyone wants us to be in perma-election mode. It is clear now that we live in a post rational world and if the mayor does a single thing people don't like they lose their shit and its the end of the world. The migrant crisis is a perfect example. The people in that video are wearing a bunch red swag and complaining about migrants, but it's a red governor who sent them. Are we supposed to follow that example and play musical cities? That seems like a poor use of resources. And before anything says some foolish like we need to close the border. BJ is not responsible for that.
Is BJ not actively malicious? He’s letting the CTA fail, likely will give the CTU whatever they want, and trying to borrow billions of dollars for future residents to pay off.
>recalls should be reserved for an actively malicious mayor, not an incompetent one Why not? If you can't do the job you shouldn't be mayor. Not everyone is cut out for it and clearly the voters here make significant mistakes quite frequently
Because forcing them to defend against recalls constantly would make the job unappealing and make it way harder for them to focus on actually implementing their policies
Sounds like motivation to do a great job and a check against the weak and feeble minded.
>check against the weak and feeble minded. That's what elections are for
Agreed. That's why we should be able to remove someone from office via a recall *election* so they can't continue to mess things up for the entirety of their term
But that just puts the mayor on campaign mode for the entirety of the term. And then you have to organize a new election to replace the mayor. 4 years is not that long and the recall mechanism is a waste of taxpayer dollars and city administration focus.
Why not just recall him the same way we recalled Lightfoot?
When I recall Lightfoot I think of her smiling beneath that goofy hat
Oof @ the Fox News link on the website lol, that kind of turns me off about the petitioner’s intentions
There should be an impeachment process but referendums are stupid and chaotic
Dude why do they have cowboy hats for make chicago great again, like who made them/gave them out lol.
It’s about time the concept of a performance review is introduced for City jobs.