My Ballot Slate for the November 2020 Election at this Point in Time

I have finished my review of candidates on my November 3, 2020 ballot in East Lakeview, Chicago, IL. I got the sample ballot at Ballotpedia. Below I will present the slate of candidates who, at this point, I plan to vote for. I won't get into judges much, except to point out which ones are endorsed by the Fraternal Order of Police, which means an automatic non-vote for me.

So that people will know if this slate will apply to you, my numbers from my Verification of Registration are as follows:

Precinct 28

Ward 44

US Congressional District 05

State Senator District 06

State Representative District 12

Judicial District 08

Count Board 10

Board of Review 02

My political views that support this slate are as follows: Progressive with some tendencies toward socialism. I probably have a slight conservative bend when it comes to procedure, which falls along the lines that I support things like filibuster and cloture. I support such procedures because my view is "if my side makes things easy to pass what I want, then it becomes that much easier for the other, more regressive side to unpass it or pass their own legislation that could be worse when they get back into power."

On the other hand, I also appreciate that many of our governments have fallen behind the times and that we're in a moment of vast generational change, but that's why more young people need to get into the ballot box to vote, so we can get our governments to represent us and the push through reform that will properly demonstrate justice.

I'm big on looking at society structurally, interrogating that structure, and reforming it for the betterment of people, overall, in a just manner since a lot of people have been screwed over by this country, states, and municipalities over the last few centuries. At the same time, I am against basing such changes on pie in the sky theories that aren't tested.

In addition, I feel VERY burned by the current mayor of Chicago, Lori Lightfoot, who presented very detailed white papers on how she planned to improve the city. Instead of putting through the plans in her white papers, she has instead focused on numerous ways to shore up the budget and to increase her national profile rather than actually working to reform the structure of Chicago, which many progressive aldermen have been pushing her to do.

And since the end of May/beginning of June, Lightfoot has been showing horrible faith when it comes to police brutality, her treatment of BIPOC, her failure to look at reform being proposed by protesters and progressive movements in the city, and her general failure to address these problems before they became problems (like encouraging commerce and industry in badly attended to neighbhorhoods in this city).

I'll admit, I had been warned by many volunteer campaigners for Amara Enyia during the last mayoral campaign along with numerous articles about Lightfoot's lack of empathy in past as an appointed official tasked with investigating the police and suggesting reforms. Lightfoot still might be the overall best candidate from that mayoral race, but that just goes to show the bad pick of candidates we had in the race.

In large part, though, Lightfoot has burned me on the stoic leader/politician who will look at the larger picture and be willing to get tough when she needs to be. Lightfoot has too much of a long view, too lacking in empathy, and too much of 'more of the same thing' of neoliberal Democrats that we have in our country. This burning has definitely colored my view of what will earn my vote when I have a good range of candidates to choose from. I want empathy, I want passion, I want action even though I still want someone who maintains that structural view of things.

So after reviewing a candidates ideological presentation, I'll basically put their name and the position that they're running for into a search engine (for this slate's research, either Google or Bing) then clicked on 3 to 5 pages worth of links. Based on this search, after looking at ideology, I look for the following:

1. Do they have their own campaign page?
   
   
2. How much information about their thoughts, themselves, and history have they put out there?
   
   
3. How much press have they received (how many webpages can I find)?
   
   
4. If I can find it, how much money have they fundraised compared to other candidates?
   
   
5. What is the media saying about this candidate (obviously, I will take the bias of the media into account when reading it)
   
   
6. What endorsements has the candidate received?
   
   
7. Who has the candidate associated with?
   
   
8. What has the candidate accomplished?
   
   
9. What civic organizations has the candidate participated in?
   
   

That's all that I can think of at this point for the questions that I put forward. After their ideology, my questions and analysis mainly focus on:

• How much effort is the candidate putting into their race (which also leads to the question of whether they're a dummie candidate to suck votes away from other candidates. . .that's at least a thing in Chicago)? Is the candidate taking the race seriously?
  
  
• Has the candidate associated with "good" people and "good" organizations?
  
  
• Does the candidate have experience? What does that experience say about them?
  
  
• Has this candidate attracted enough attention for people to take them seriously? If I voted for them, even if I really like their ideology and plans, would my vote be a wasted vote? Even if they're not being taken seriously, could a vote for them be a worthwhile protest vote? Would it give them a sign that someone supports them and encourages them to run for something in the future? Would such a protest vote express something to people who pay attention to results that someone wants to support a certain way of approaching things, an ideology, a viewpoint?
  
  

Based on the above criteria, my slate is as follows:

• US President: Joe Biden - less voting for Biden than against Trump. Trump was dangerous enough for one term. I believe that having him in the office for a second term could honestly destroy the United States. Biden, on the other hand, I believe would be a satisfactory transitory President to build up resentment in the youth and get them to push harder for actual change in the country. But while Biden (or possibly his VP) is in office, we should not become complacent. We need to push harder, learn more, connect more to other people, donate to candidates and PACs, pressure Biden and Congress, and do everything that's possible to push the politicians in more Progressive and Democratic Socialist directions while also valuing humanity and the climate
  
  
• Ballot Measure on Graduated Income Tax in Illinois: Unqualified YES. The rich can afford it. All things being equal, most of the people in the state will either not have any increase in taxes or might even have their taxes go down. This state has a lot of bills that need to be paid (and I'm especially driven to get those bills paid so that Hedge Funds and Billionaires don't win on their gamble that Illinois would fail with Credit Default Swaps, at the cold hearted cost of many human everyday people). Captol Fax pulled together an interesting swath of quotes and data that I feel supports my viewpoint, too: Chamber releases conclusions from “fair tax” study. Please take the time to read thorugh this article/essay/blog entry
  
  
• Cook County State's Attorney: Kim Foxx - The only criticism that feels like it holds any thing close to sticking is Jussie Smollet stuff, but that's just a plain weird case. Otherwise, I feel like Foxx is a prosecutor that falls in line with a lot of Progressive prosecutors/Attorney Generals out there looking to actually have justice with actual empathy, not pound down on Law & Order. She was elected during controversy in hopes of bring justice and trying to provide some counterforce to the abuses of the police & Mayor Emmanuel during the Laquan MacDonald case. I can't say that she's done a stellar job nor do I agree with her 100% of the time, but Foxx definitely seems more qualified than the other candidates I've seen running against her for realizing a justice that I can live with. Even a speech she made today regarding a police encounter in the Englewood neighborhood yesterday and weirdness that happened this morning on Michigan Ave and The Gold Coast encapsulated a lot, if not all, of how I'm feeling about the situation (I feel like these events are more connected than she wants them to seem), and frankly, I feel expresses the reality of the current situation in Chicago better than any other elected or appointed official in the city or Cook County
  
  
• US House of Representatives for District 5: Mike Quigley - Honestly, I don't really like Quigley's centrist views and overly-procedural approach to legislation, but he's the best candidate. The Republican is Republican. The Green candidate either doesn't try too hard and/or doesn't show much, if any support, on the Internet.
  
  
• US Senate: Dick Durbin - For the most part, from what I've heard about Durbin, I like his legislation. Like Quigley, either the other candidates have horrible ideology, they haven't shown the effort to be taken seriously, or haven't garnered the support from the public to see my vote going their way as anything worthwhile.
  
  
• Illinois State Senate District 6: Sara Feigenholtz unopposed and Illinois House of Representatives District 12: Margaret Croke unopposed. No one else to vote on, but I don't have a hesitation voting for either of these candidates. I didn't spend much time on Feigenholtz, but she was appointed to the Senate a couple months ago from the House seat that Croke will very likely win. I may not necessarily agree with many people who live in my neighborhood and area, but Feigenholtz seems to have served the House District well. I didn't vote for Croke in the primary, but I can get behind her ideology and seems pretty good at coalition building. I think they can both do a bit to help improve things and fight against ideologies that I find deplorable.
  
  
• Cook County Clerk of the Circuit Court: Iris Martinez - Martinez was near the end of my choices during the Primary, the only other candidates worse than her seeming to be more embedded in the Illinois Democratic party machine than her. Nonetheless, for this election, Martinez shows more effort than her Republican opponent. Martinez's party affiliation vs a Republican helps a lot, but the fact that Martinez has a campaign webpage and the Republican candidate doesn't shows that at least Martinez wants to put the effort into winning the position.
  
  
• Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Chicago (Choose up to 3): Cameron Davis (Democrat), Eira Corral Sepulveda (Democrat), Troy Hernandez (Green). The three other candidates generally seemed to campaign on their party platform with a couple extra arguments that are identifiable to them. Most of their personal arguments had something compelling to them, but my rationale for the three candidates on my slate are:
  
  
  • Davis shows a lot of qualifications, experience, and passion for water science and the Great Lakes.
    
    
  • Hernandez shows some useful qualifications even if they're more adjacent to the MWRA. Hernandez displays a lot of desire to attack corruption and clean things. He also has displayed a lot of tenacity and willingness to push, push, and push even harder to get good reform through. Team player might not make for a good description for Hernandez, but being the squeaky wheel when it comes to the political, not technical, part of this position could do a lot improve the MWRA. Also, the Green platform of pushing for more green technology/planting rather than gray technology could do a lot to improve the environment and effectiveness of the sewage water/flood mitigation system around here. I also appreciate Hernandez wanting to stand up for marginalized communities.
    
    
  • Sepulveda is more a political/coalition and public relations qualifications pick. At least one of the other candidates took this tact, too, but Sepulveda has a proven track record of working systems, making coalitions, and executing good outreach in her career. I wish she had more of the Green party firebrandness to her, but when those squeaky wheels need to get oiled and assistance from other organizations/departments are in needed, looks like Sepulveda will be able to bring people together. In addition, her youth, energy, and push for more marginalized communities could provide some further diversity to the department.
  
  
  
• Judges I can't support because they have the endorsement of the Fraternal Organization of Police: Laura Ayala-Gonzalez (Ford Vacancy) & Lorraine Murphy (Roti Vacancy)
  
  
  
• Judges I expect to not support for other reasons unless further information arises:
  • Tiesha Smith (Bellows Vacancy) - Didn't participate in any questionnaires
    
    
  • Maura McMahon Zeller (C Sheehan Vacancy) - Possible party of witholding of evidence when defending police, evidence discovery issues
    
    
  Information regarding judges during primaries at Vote for Judges.org, Injustice Watch, and FOP Primary Election Endorsements from Fraternal Order of Policy Chicago Lodge 7 website

So that's my slate and criteria for the slate. I feel happy about completing my research at this point. Unfortunately, there's a whole lot of judge approve or disapprove votes on the ballot that I can't find any information on at this point. I plan to get back to researching them in the middle of October. I might do some cursory research on the ballot then to make sure my opinions don't change about my slate. If they do, I'll provide some edits.

Please, though, if you disagree with my selections and reasons for them, please comment or communicate with me in any other fashion available to us. I'd like to make my final vote with as much knowledge as possible, especially if I have a very incorrect view of a candidate. Thank you.