Gery Chico's campaign released a fun web video poking fun at Rahm's campaign trackers and trying to pivot that into a larger story of transparency. Apparently, it is fine to have staffers film your every move on the trail. It is not fine to lie about it.  

Check out the video:

An interesting battle, that may have some legs with the press, is the (currently hypothetical) question of whether Rahm's kids will attend public school. It's a well-worn campaign tactic that touches two key nerves:

1) Does the candidate believe in the quality of the city's public schools?  There is no better who of faith in the school system than to choose them for your own children.

2) The unique privilege of the city's upper class to choose instead to send their children to private schools. Francis Parker, for example, would cost up to $30K per child per year. For Rahm's 3 children, the cost would be about $75K/year. Clearly, not many voters could afford that option.

Further, while Rahm spent his early childhood in Chicago, he moved north to attend (public) New Trier High School, which itself annually ranks in the top 10 Illinois districts in spending per pupil.

All that said, most mayors have opted to send their children to private school. Here's a quick rundown:

Where do Rahm's kids attend school now?
Sun Times reporter Michael Sneed reports that, in DC, two currently attend the prestigious Maret School, and one attends a private Jewish school.

Where did Mayor Daley's attend school?
Two of his children were largely out of school by the time he began in office, but younger children Elizabeth and Patrick attended Catholic grammar and high schools in the city. Both Richard M. Daley and his father Richard J. Daley are alums of Chicago's Catholic De La Salle High School.

What about other large-city mayors?
-Mike Bloomberg (New York City): Bloomberg's children were nearly out of school by the time he became mayor, but youngest daugther Georgina attended private Spence School for high school.
-Antonio Villaraigosa (Los Angeles): Natalia and Antonio Jr. both attended Catholic schools.
-Adrian Fenty (Washington, DC): Started in private school, but moved to public school in 2009.
-And, of course, the Obama children attend private Sidwell Friends, as did Chelsea Clinton.

So, the lesson is that while mayors generally talk a lot about improving their public schools, their children rarely attend them.

A fun story out today, completely unrelated to the mayoral race, that Rahm Emanuel's high school alma mater has selected their inaugural Hall of Fame class and left off one Rahm Israel Emanuel (class of 1977). Instead, among those selected were Donald Rumsfeld (class of 1950) and Rainn Wilson (class of 1984).

New Trier High School, a public high school of about 4,000 students in the North Shore upper-class town of Winnetka, has an alumni list that would rival a top-tier university.  It even has its own Wikipedia entry. 

Consider this: a theoretical student council president's race could have pitted Rahm against current IL senator Mark Kirk, with ads directed by award-winning director Mark Romanek ('77) and a critical school newspaper endorsement written by WSJ editorial board member Stephen Moore ('78). In the end, the candidate that handed out treats at lunch courtesy of renowned chef Charlie Trotter ('77) probably would have swung the election.

None of those will be inducted in the HOF this time around.

Yeah, it's a competitive group. It's also a target for controversy. Mayoral candidate James Meeks made headlines in 2008 for busing a group of Chicago students up to New Trier to highlight spending inequality.  One wonders if this type of class comparison will sneak into the race.

As I've written previously, State Sen. James Meeks is an intriguing candidate for his unique ability to create an unorthodox coalition. He is a pastor at the sizable Salem Baptist Church, he is an African-American, and he is fairly conservative.

In keeping with that, Meeks was the only candidate to oppose the civil unions legislation for gays and lesbians that passed in the State House and Senate over the last 24 hours. In fact, as a state senator, Meeks was the only to candidate to cast a vote at all on this issue.

While he did not speak on the floor, he said this after the vote (via Dave McKinney at the Sun Times): "I believe this was a bill about marriage, and I believe this is a sea change in the state of Illinois. I believe a bill this big and with this much magnitude probably should have been placed on a ballot for a referendum. I believe in the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman. That was the impetus for my vote.”

Latest email from the campaign entitled "Rahm Under Attack" below, presumably playing to the more nationally-focused among their email database:

We expected that some of our opponents may run negative ads against us, but the first ad didn't come from another candidate in the race:  it came from the national Republican Party.

They're calling Rahm 'Obama's Embarrassment' and raising money to attack him.

We need to fight back. Help take a stand today by donating $25, $50, or $100 today!

The Party of George W. Bush doesn't have any ideas to move the City of Chicago forward. They are just out to attack Rahm's character and attempt to attack President Obama in the process.

Can you help us continue to talk about the issues facing our city instead of petty politics by donating $25, $50, or $100 right now?

We'll continue doing our part by focusing on the issues at hand: safe streets, strong schools, and stable city finances, but we're counting on you to help us defend ourselves against these Republican attacks.

Thank you,

Scott Fairchild
Campaign Manager, Chicago for Rahm

P.S. Need more evidence? The GOP said, "If Rahm Emanuel is not elected Mayor of Chicago, it will be the ultimate humiliation to both he and the White House that has supported him. Defeating Emanuel means embarrassing Obama." Please contribute any amount you can to help us fight back.

Ben Smith at Politico has located the referenced GOP fundraising message.  However, I cannot find the referenced "negative ad."

Rahm released his second ad yesterday, entitled "Tenacity." It should be a leading candidate for 2010's "overstated accomplishment in a campaign TV or Web ad" award.

In the spot, the owner and employees of the company praise Rahm's actions to keep the company in Chicago. It's almost a carbon-copy of an Alexi Giannoulias ad recounting his highly-public efforts to save Hartmarx and approximately 1,000 jobs. The Giannoulias campaign used the story early in the race to define Alexi as a caring, pro-jobs State Treasurer; it clearly worked well enough to be re-run in late October.

If only the magnitude of Rahm's story matched up.

With Chicago Paper Tube and Can, Rahm apparently only helped keep about 30 jobs in Chicago. Further, it's unclear exactly what he did and no contemporaneous news reports exist; the company president states in the ad that Rahm "made the city and the state and developers see the logic of keeping employees in Chicago."  Does "logic" mean the city or state was compelled to provide financial incentives to keep these 30 jobs here? If so, that's hardly a sustainable model for every job in the city.
 

Take a look for yourself at the two ads and note their similarities:

Rahm's campaign manager Scott Fairchild (who, interestingly, has a LinkedIn profile) emailed supporters tonight regarding the lingering residency issue.

This makes one wonder what they are seeing in polling and hearing in voter conversations about this issue. While a majority may not be concerned about the issue per se, there may be a larger group of voters beginning to internalize a perception that Rahm is not a true Chicagoan. Of course, Rahm spent his pre-high school years in Chicago, represented Chicago's IL-5 district for 6 years, and votes in Chicago.

The email text below:

Dear Friend,

You've probably seen the reports this week that say that a lawyer is planning to file a challenge claiming that Rahm is not a Chicago resident in an attempt to knock him off the ballot. That's after more than 90,000 of you signed petitions saying that he should be a candidate for Mayor. 
 
You know the facts: Rahm was born in Chicago's Albany Park, he raised his family here, he owns a home here, his car is registered here and he votes here. There's no question that he's a Chicago resident. 
 
Make no mistake: political games are being played to limit your choices for Mayor.
 
And what for? To continue the same old backroom politics that have gone on in Chicago for too long.
 
The editorial boards of the Chicago Sun-Times and the Chicago Tribune, as well as three former Presidents of the Chicago Bar Association, have weighed in to say that Rahm is a resident and should be allowed to run.
 
The Chicago Tribune wrote, "We've heard the arguments and feel confident Emanuel is firmly and legally rooted to Chicago."
 
And the Sun-Times stated, "But the bottom line is clear: Emanuel is a real Chicagoan. It would be a travesty if the courts said anything but."
 
Please share with your friends and family members so that they have the facts to respond to the distortions that will continue to air against Rahm.
 
I'm counting on you to make sure the facts reach farther than the fiction - and ensure that Chicago's next mayor is chosen by the voters alone.
 
Can you forward this email to five family members and friends?

Thank you,
 
Scott Fairchild, Campaign Manager

Chicago for Rahm

Below is the preliminary list of mayoral candidates who have filed petitions with the Chicago elections board:

The major candidates:
Gery Chico
Danny Davis
Miguel Del Valle
Rahm Emanuel
James Meeks
Carol Moseley Braun

The novelty candidates:
Rob Halpin (who rents Rahm's Ravenswood home)
Roland Burris (the former senator, as part of a draft Burris movement...)

The longshots:
Wilfredo De Jesus
Tyrone Carter
Ryan Graves
Tommy Hanson
John Hu
M. Tricia Lee
Fenton Patterson
Howard Ray
Jay Stone
Patricia Van Pelt-Watkins
Bill "Dock" Walls
Frederick White

The potential major candidates who passed:
Tom Dart
Alexi Giannoulias
Luis Gutierrez
Lisa Madigan
Paul Vallas (who endorsed Chico today)

Candidates have until Dec. 23rd to withdraw their candidacies. Here's hoping Roland Burris heeds the will of the people and stays in the race.

Following the 2010 midterms, Facebook published an article on the predictive ability of a candidate's number of Facebook "fans".  The results of the study were impressive: in 74% of contested House races and 80% of Senate races, the candidate with most fans went on to win the race.

Facebook users are typically very selective of who and what they choose to "like". To be a fan is to make a public endorsement to all of your friends for this candidate. Hundreds of studies have shown that recommendations from friends are extroardinarily powerful in growing (or destroying) one's business.

It's early, but here are the results through Nov. 21:
Rahm Emanuel = 33,163 fans
James Meeks = 3,137
Gery Chico = 1,507 (including a spanish-language page)
Miguel Del Valle = 1,507
Danny Davis = 527
Carol Moseley Braun = 469

This is yet another testament to Rahm's organizational strength right now, although some unknown percentage of his fans are certainly from outside Chicago. Either way, it's a big lead helped by having much of the former Obama for America online team.

However, the numbers for James Meeks are very interesting. As I mentioned below, he is pursuing an unorthodox coalition of African Americans, conservatives, and business leaders.  He also has a built-in following from his Salem Baptist Church that may be overstating his fan base. However, Facebook would argue that this indicates a passionate base of support from which to grow his campaign. Time will tell.

Conversely, Carol Moseley Braun needs to get a Facebook page up and running. The obvious conclusion is that she has not run a race in the social media era and is overlooking these mediums. Facebook would suggest that this will cost her in building a grassroots base, and I am inclined to agree.

A busy weekend in the mayoral race as candidates start to create news stories to shape their candidacies with voters.

Gery Chico responds to criticism from Mayor Daley regarding Chico's comments that  the public school system has "lost our momentum once again."

Carol Moseley Braun announces her candicacy, with Bobby Rush on stage (as opposed to say, House colleague Danny Davis), and lays out her case against Rahm and for herself.

The Chicago Sun-Times continues their search for an angle on the Rahm eligibility issue.

Danny Davis, with House in session, weighs in on extension of unemployment benefits, hitting Republicans for voting against extension.

James Meeks announces candidacy and makes overt push for Chicago's Republicans and the business commmunity. Article notes that 20% of Chicago voters went for Kirk over Alexi and notes a range of issues where Meeks is closer to a Republican viewpoint (school vouchers!).

Miguel Del Valle cancels contract with Chicago city car stickers.

And, Kelsey Grammer, a Republican in his personal life, has signed on to play a Chicago mayor in an upcoming Starz series purchased from... Ari Emanuel's firm.

The Chicago Sun-Times' Lynn Sweet published the full memo of a poll commissioned by the Teamsters Union conducted by well-respected firm Anzalone Liszt Research.  Taking the poll at face value, there are three alarming results from the poll for anyone not part of Rahm's team.

1) Rahm is way ahead of the field. He is more than 2:1 ahead of any other competitor: Rahm 36%, Davis 14%, Mosley-Braun 13%, Chico 10%

2) Davis and Mosley-Braun each have 80-90% name ID, as does Rahm. It is not a matter of introducing these candidates to the voters. Today, voters overwhelmingly prefer Rahm among other candidates they know.

3) There is no negative frame on Rahm with any legs just yet.  Voters clearly don't care about residency issues. At 37% agree / 50% disagree, voters may at some point believe that he has a temperment issue if this issue is pursued by an opponent. However, that message will require a lot of money and free press attention; neither likely today given the weakness in these campaigns.

An interesting article in Crain's Chicago Business highlights that Rahm will be holding a fundraiser with many of the top CEO's, board chairmen, and executives in the Chicago area.   I have professional experience with a few of these executives, and I think it's worth emphasizing that these executives may well be (rightly) acting in their self-interest and not, for example, because they want to see better public school systems.

Fundamentally, executives engage because there is something in it for them. They may be asking, which of these candidates would have been most likely to provide $25M in incentives to move UAL Corp to the Willis Tower as did Mayor Daley in 2009?  Which of these candidates would have the standing to stare down the unions, city hall, and the federal gov't to secure the most money for the least strings?  His background in DC and in investment banking makes Rahm the obvious choice right now.

What's not explicit here, but is different from national races, is that donations from individuals, PACs, and businesses are UNLIMITED until the end of 2010. In 2011, new limits take effect. So, this means three things:

1) Rahm is smart to have these fundraisers now.
2) Companies and individuals could theoretically swamp the election with money to support their preferred candidate.
3) Given that these companies do not compete against each other, it is probably in their best interest to all get behind the same candidate.

With no self-funder in the race, and short of national-type money (e.g., big labor unions or Karl Rove's American Crossroads), the executives have a lot of power in the race for the next two months.

Makes you wonder if a Republican candidate wouldn't be the best anti-Rahm...

As I've written about previously, one of Rahm's signature political achievements is his work to recruit Democrats and flip 30 Republican House seats in 2006. After last night's very difficult night for the Democrats, how did the "Rahm Democrats" do?

Well, 4 of them ran for Senate last night but only 1 won.

Winner: Kirsten Gillibrand (NY)
Losers: Paul Hodes (NH), Brad Ellsworth (IN), Joe Sestak (PA)


In the House, 23 ran (3 were defeated in '08) and up to 12 won, which is not bad considering the overall performance last night in swing-ish districts.

Winners: Ed Permutter (CO-7), Joe Courtney (CT-2), Chris Murphy (CT-5), Joe Donnelly (IN-2), Bruce Braley (IA-1), Dave Loebsack (IA-2), John Yarmuth (KY-3), Tim Walz (MN-1), Heath Shuler (NC-11), Jason Altmire (PA-4)
Leading: Gabriell Giffords (AZ-08), Jerry McNerney (CA-11)
Losers: Harry Mitchell (AZ-05), Ron Klein (FL-22), Baron Hill (IN-9), Carol Shea-Porter (NH-1), John Hall (NY-19), Mike Arcuri (PA-4), Zack Space (OH-18), Patrick Murphy (PA-8), Chris Carney (PA-10), Ciro Rodriguez (TX-23), Steve Kagen (WI-8)

Email out from Rahm Emanuel's campaign today to supporters encouraging them to vote on Tuesday, November 2nd. Always interesting to speculate as to why only Alexi is mentioned here and Pat Quinn is not.  I'm sure there's no there there...

Full email below, links removed.

Dear Friend,

Election Day is nearly here, and you don't need me to tell you the stakes are high.

For months the Republicans have been licking their chops over the prospect of expanding their power in Congress and attempting to derail the President and his agenda.

Chicagoans have a particularly important stake in this election. And I wanted to take just a moment to share my thoughts on an important race.

I voted for Alexi.

And I'm asking you to join me.

As State Treasurer, he has been a strong voice for working families. He saved 600 Illinois jobs by threatening to cut the taxpayer funds Wells Fargo managed if they cut positions at HartMarx.

As Senator he will be a strong voice for Chicago, and an ally of the President.

If you'd like to learn more about Alexi, check out his website here, or read his detailed economic plan, Futureworks, here. If you'd like to help Alexi get out the vote in the next few days, you can sign up to volunteer for his campaign here.

Chicagoans have a unique opportunity on Tuesday to stand up for the progress we have made -- progress we need to build upon to ensure that our economic gains benefit all Americans.

Thanks, and please remember to vote Tuesday.

Thanks for all you do,

Rahm

Lynn Sweet broke the news, since confirmed by the campaign itself, that Tom Dart will not be running for mayor.  This is really significant, because Tom Dart had some signs of being able to achieve the anti-Rahm objective of having a strong team as well-known strategist Joe Trippi had signed on as a consultant as well as a familiarity with Chicago voters.

Rahm's early signaling of strength and organization has seemingly intimidated many potential anti-Rahms out of the race: Luis Gutierrez, Jesse Jackson Jr., and now Tom Dart. Right now, there is no current candidate with the structural fortitude to match Rahm.

There is growing sentiment that the Chicago mayoral race will eventually come down to Rahm Emanuel vs. one other candidate, very similar to the 2008 presidential primary where candidates auditioned to be the alternative to Hillary Clinton.  There are four driving factors that would determine the alternative:

1) Natural voter coalition: This is the area of greatest opportunity against Rahm. A recent article estimated that African Americans would comprise about 40% of the vote and that Latinos about 15%. Leaders of these groups, Dan Davis and Luis Gutierrez, the later no fan of Rahm's, are looking closely at their options to unite to oppose Rahm most effectively.

Other prominent coalitions in Chicago are the various union groups, with whom Rahm has done himeself no favors with his charter school cheerleading.

2) Money:  Politico has speculated that a successful campaign would cost up to $10M, and it's been well-reported that Rahm Emanuel starts with $1.1M from his congressional campaigns and will collecting up to $4M at a Hollywood fundraiser in November (per Nikki Finke). Expect Rahm to well exceed the $10M number, and while candidates don't necessarily have to keep pace, they do need to acheive a viable number that approaches the $10M cost throughout the campaign.

Quite honestly, I'm not sure anyone except Lisa Madigan (if she enters the race) could be expected to stay close in fundraising. Of course, coalitions and unions can help bridge the gap.

3) Campaign sophistication: Rahm Emanuel has hired an array of top national-level Democratic resources, from Ben LaBolt to David Axelrod's media firm.  These are top people, although perhaps a little light in Chicago experience.

Among others, only Moseley Braun has assembled a set of top talent.

4) The wedge issue of the campaign: This is the big unknown, at least to me, so campaigns probably have some ability to create this issue. Will it be insider vs. outsider? Will it be education (pitting unions vs. charter schools)? Will it be budget-related?

Burying the lead in a recent Chicago Sun-Times article was the result of an internal poll confirming the CW that Rahm starts in a polling lead for Chicago mayor. Here are the results (conducted for "black business leaders"):

Rahm Emanuel = "mid-20's"
Tom Dart = 12%
Carol Moseley Braun = 11%
James Meeks = 5%

Not a whole lot else released on this poll or the methodology, and no one knows what the final candidate pool will be, but it does suggest one important fact overlooked by the article: almost 50% of likely voters are undecided. 

It's obvious, yes, but this is an "open" race. As big as Rahm is nationally, no one is close to building an impenenetrable lead.

Have a great weekend! Go Bears!

With the news yesterday that Luis Gutierrez would not run to focus on immigration reform (because there's a better chance of this happening after the mid-terms?), Gutierrez moves to the role of kingmaker of sorts. So, the questions are:

1) What does the Gutierrez endorsement mean?
2) What does Gutierrez want?
3) Could Rahm get it?

The answer to #1 is a certifiable seal of approval among the Latino community. Estimates are that Latinos make up about 15% of registered voters in the city of Chicago; as locals well know, Chicago is a community of largely separate local neighborhoods, and the Latino voting block is one of the largest.  Gutierrez represents many of them in Congress, so they know him and presumably trust him.

The answer to #3 is, based on past statements, no. Even before Daley announced he was not running for re-election, Gutierrez felt it important to go on the record in saying he would not endorse Rahm for mayor, even taking a bt of a jab at him:

"He’s not to get my endorsement anytime soon. He should stay in the White House, but then he can go make millions in investment banking," Gutierrez said, referencing the Wall Street job Emanuel held between his post in the Clinton White House and his run for Congress in 2002."

So, this gives other candidates a prime opportunity to cast themselves as the primary anti-Rahm.

Now, what does Gutierrez want? I can't tell. Maybe it's just to oppose Rahm Emanuel. We will see...

For those looking for more depth on Rahm Emanuel's style, I highly recommend interested readers to read a great profile from the Chicago Tribune written in December 2006 entitled "The House Rahm Built." It's notable in detailing a few long-held caricatures, some good and some bad:

1) Rahm the volative expletive machine: Rahm overheard saying to James Carville late in the campaign "James. No James. YOU LISTEN. Can you listen for one [expletive] minute?"

2) Rahm the intimidator: Former Republican congressman Christopher Shays, upon seeing Rahm in the gym and hearing Rahm will spend $3M to defeat him, says "I'll tell you what. Just give me the $3M, and I'll retire voluntarily." Rahm later admits "I wake up some mornings hating me too."

3) Rahm the workhorse: Rahm apparently lost 14 pounds and his hair turned white from exhaustion during the campaign, and sadly lost a little bit of touch with his family.

4) Rahm, not the idealogue: Tells the story of his recruitment of Heath Shuler to run for Congress, he of joining Republicans in voting against both the stimulus and the health care bills. It also talks of him making enemies with the Congressional Black Caucus and the Blue Dogs over fundraising.

5) Rahm the winner: Through it all, Rahm's approach helped the Democrates triumphantly take back control of the House by fielding more competitive candidates and raising more money than thought possible.