It’s just a few weeks until the Democratic primary and I’m struggling to decide which candidate running to replace Dick Durbin in the Senate I should vote for. The leading candidates are:
| Robin Kelly | Member of the House since 2013 |
| Raja Krishnamoorthi | Member of the House since 2017 |
| Juliana Stratton | Lieutenant Governor. She been endorsed by Gov. Pritzker |
While each emphasizes different issues in tone, in Robin Kelly’s case gun control, the central planks of their campaigns overlap substantially: immigration abolitionism, Medicare for All, and opposition to Donald Trump. None has mentioned how how they will pay for “Medicare for All” beyond vague statements about making the “rich pay their fair share”.
Beyond that there is a significant emphasis on demographic representation as a campaign differentiator. Or, in Krishnamoorthi’s case, that he is an immigrant. Robin Kelly and Juliana Stratton are both black women. Mr. Krishnamoorthi also has the largest warchest, much of it from out-of-state donors. He’s been running ads for months and is considered the frontrunner.
This race is a wonderful example of why I reject the notion that the reason our politics are as they are is the voters. My choice is among three candidates all running on what are materially the same platforms. How is that the voters’ fault?
In multiple ads, both Mr. Krishnamoorthi and Lt. Gov. Stratton use the word “fight,” accompanied by footage of protest-style rallies. That rhetoric suggests an activist posture rather than a legislative one. I recognize these ads are not targeted at me. I think they are targeted at what they think are the median Democratic primary voters. If that is what consultants believe motivates the median Democratic primary voter, it is an interesting assumption. I am not persuaded it reflects the temperament of the median Illinois voter or even the median Illinois Democratic primary voter.
In the recent Democratic Senate debate, the three candidates were arguing their various abolish-ICE positions when this “exchange” took place:
“Krishnamoorthi tried to turn the tables on the ICE question, accurately saying that his position of wanting to “abolish Trump’s ICE” is identical to Gov. JB Pritzker’s. The governor is popular enough with his party members to help blunt the ICE attack at a time when polls show strong Democratic support for abolishing the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency.
“I’d be curious if my colleagues agree with this position,” Krishnamoorthi said, gesturing at [Lt. Gov.] Stratton, who did not explain herself.
But Krishnamoorthi then upped the ante: “Rick Pearson asked Lt. Gov. Stratton if she were to abolish ICE, where should the duties be transferred? She said, ‘CBP.’ I think that would be a grave mistake. CBP is who employs Greg Bovino. CBP is who actually shot and killed Alex Pretti.”
https://capitolfax.com/2026/02/02/the-debates-produced-future-ad-fodder/
I can’t imagine any informed Democratic voter that wouldn’t be aware of the role of CBP in the most controversial aspects of Operation Midway, and particularly Greg Bovino’s notorious role, which he embraced whole-heartedly as a provocateur-in-chief. Some of the comments to that link think most voters don’t understand the difference btw/ CBP and ICE, but the Lt. Governor certainly should. I’m confounded by why she would say such a thing and can only conclude she wasn’t paying much attention at the time.
Lt. Gov Stratton (and the other candidates) should be pressed to answer what they mean by “abolish ICE”. Lt. Gov Stratton’s answer suggests she may mean “not enforce immigration laws other than at the border”.
The Democrat Party created the messes in Illinois and Chicago (and other places across the US), and it is hopelessly corrupt. Voting for Democrats will only make matters worse, if that is possible.
There hasn’t been a Republican candidate for Chicago mayor in decades. The only alternatives are to vote for Democrats or not at all. Saying “Leave Chicago!” makes nothing better for those who remain.
@Dave Schuler
Saying “Leave Chicago!” makes nothing better for those who remain.
First, you could run.
Second, do those who remain want something better?
I am not making a value judgement. Chicago got the mayor it wanted, and Illinois will get the Senator it wants. Even if a better candidate could win, that person would need to want the job.
Trump is president because fewer people wanted the other candidate. Trump was the Republican nominee because fewer people wanted the other candidates.
(I suspect open primaries would have better results, but what do I know?)
There are some places I could run but not in Chicago. I’d have to change my name, my whole biography. “Schuler” doesn’t hold ballot appeal here.
I think we want something better. I don’t honestly know who voted for the present mayor. That his approval rating at one point was in single digits is a clue.
I suspect that Trump is president at least in part because enough people can’t believe he is what he appears to be. And the past trajectory has been so bad.
As is common with American presidents he is continuing most trajectories. But he is changing some and that’s enough for enough of his supporters.