I don’t like to post about politics, but after yesterday’s primaries in Illinois, I need to get something off my chest. This is mostly in response to what I’m seeing among the online chatter class (the “chatterati”), specifically lefty political streamers and their followers who don’t live here and won’t be directly affected by these races.
Which, might I add, isn’t stopping them from posting really bad or really dumb takes on primary candidate Kat Abughazaleh’s loss yesterday in Illinois District 9 (IL-09).
For background, I was born and raised in IL-09. I lived there for decades before moving to District 7 (IL-07), which also had a crowded primary this cycle with thirteen candidates.
Incidentally, I voted for one of the progressives who came in fourth, though I’m not sad that La Shawn Ford won. If we had ranked choice voting here, which I’ll say more about below, I would have ranked him.
I should also note that I’m not speaking on anyone’s behalf, and I waited until after the primaries to write this. For what it’s worth, nobody reads this blog anyway ;-), and I’m not on anyone’s payroll. I just think that members of the chatterati often miss the forest for the trees in local and state races, it’s irritating to me as an Illinois resident, and I’d like to explain why.
The Illinois Political Landscape
To understand why any progressive campaign here faces an uphill battle, there are some things you need to know about Illinois politics that you can’t pick up from out-of-state political Twitch streamers, even those who’ve done IRL streams here.
Illinois has a long history of machine politics — entrenched, crony-driven, and resistant to outsiders. It’s not just about seniority (as it is with Congressional democrats, which frustrates many of us to no end). It’s a club, and you have to play ball to get in, or the machine will run multiple candidates against you specifically to dilute your race. Which brings me to the second structural problem: we are gerrymandered to Hell and Gone. IL-09, for example, stretches from the north side of Chicago through the suburbs and all the way out into rural areas. There is no single candidate who will ever be a perfect fit for that wide a demographic.
Those are just some of the conditions on the ground, like it or not.
Ranked Choice Voting: Why It Matters
One reform that would genuinely help in this environment is ranked choice voting (RCV). In a crowded primary with twelve or thirteen candidates, votes get split in ways that don’t reflect what voters actually want. RCV would allow voters to rank their preferences, meaning a strong second choice doesn’t become a wasted vote when a field is this diluted — which is exactly the kind of thing a political machine can exploit.
It’s also worth noting that Zohran Mamdani’s success in New York was aided partly by the fact that New York City uses ranked choice voting. He built a broad coalition and even teamed up with other candidates during his campaign. This matters more when voters can express nuanced preferences. It’s a harder game to play under a traditional plurality system like in Illinois.
Kat Abughazaleh
With all of that said, that’s what progressive candidates like Kat were up against, and she managed to place second in a twelve-person race. Credit where it’s due, this was impressive. Her national platform clearly resonated with a lot of Democratic and progressive voters.
However, I still consider her a flawed candidate, and I would not have voted for her if I were in her district. Here are just a few reasons why…
Inexperience
Kat’s background is in communications, and her work experience seems mainly to be a stint at Media Matters for America (MMfA) founded by David Brock, a former conservative operative. MMfA was something of a mercenary “never Trumper”-style organization in its time. That’s not disqualifying, but a few short years working at a left-leaning media company is a flimsy substitute for experience organizing locally, experience governing, or deeper ties to a district.
No Ties to the Community
Kat moved to IL-07 about a year before the primaries, specifically to run against Rep. Jan Schakowsky. She seemed to come out of nowhere, which can be a good thing when it’s grounded like Mamdani’s mayoral campaign was. The difference between him and Kat though, is that he had actual experience in state government, he was a longtime resident, and he clearly loves NYC.
Failure to ‘Read the Room’
Schakowsky announced her retirement not long after Kat threw her hat in the ring. The race was then flooded with candidates with more experience and deeper ties to the area. Kat never really acknowledged this. She had launched her campaign as a young, maverick-y underdog ready to tear down the old guard (a dubious move in a district with a popular longtime incumbent), and then sort of failed to reposition herself after things changed.
Lopsided Focus on National Issues
She ran almost entirely on national issues while largely ignoring local ones, and she repeatedly campaigned outside of her district.
Grandstanding
The Broadview protests were the biggest example of this. I may be overly cynical, but I never trusted Kat’s motives there. If I didn’t know better I’d say she just did it for free publicity, and now that the race is over, the Broadview facility and the people being held there will all but drop off her radar.
The Village of Broadview is not in the district where she ran (it’s in IL-07). There was nothing wrong with her protesting there per se, but she did it in a way that centered herself as the only candidate who cared. What she should have done was acknowledge she was out of district, reach out to local community organizers before showing up there, and build a coalition that included her progressive counterparts in IL-07. That kind of cooperation would have brought visibility to all of them. Instead, it was like she put herself in front of the parade as the baton twirler rather than a more humble position as a rank-and-file member of the marching band, which is what she was as an out-of-district candidate.
If there’s one thing Illinoisians don’t like, it’s grandstanding. So that kind of behavior hurt her with some voters.
An Ungracious Concession Speech
Her concession speech last night sort of cemented my opinion of her. It was self-congratulatory and ungracious. Though she acknowledged her supporters and campaign volunteers, she centered herself as the champion of the issues and the only person who can “fix things” in Illinois, like we’ve all been living in caves until now and are just starting to walk upright.
There was not a single word about any of her opponents or congratulations to the candidate who won. She came off as angry that *she* lost, which again, is a self-centered stance. (Watch it here for yourself.)
Though she may have some political instincts for national issues, instincts aren’t the same as a solid record to stand on, and a national profile isn’t a substitute for community roots.
If she’s serious going forward she should stay in the district, do some local organizing, run for a local position, build some genuine bona fides, and try again in a few years.
If she’s not serious (and I suspect that she is not), she will move and try again somewhere else. Or just launch a Twitch career now that she’s built up a large online following.
Political Streamers’ Misplaced Priorities
It was unfortunate for this important primary that Twitch streamers and political commentators focused almost exclusively on Kat, which gave her a national platform and visibility that the other progressive candidates running in IL-09 and elsewhere didn’t get. They covered her as if she were the only progressive running anywhere in Illinois.
She wasn’t.
You’d never know after months and months of punditry that there were multiple other great candidates in the race. It also should have been notable that so many people were stepping up to run for office — I don’t remember the field being this crowded, ever.
A Final Word on the Chatterati
Political streamers and their audiences aren’t wrong to care about Illinois politics, or to want more progressive representation. But caring isn’t the same as understanding a state or a district, and visibility isn’t the same as strategy. When you boost one candidate to the exclusion of others, distort a nuanced story about a rival, and treat a complex, machine-entrenched, gerrymandered state as if it were a simple morality play, you’re not helping the movement — you’re making noise.
Illinois politics does sometimes reward people who do the unglamorous work of building coalitions, understanding the local landscape, and playing a long game. It seems like progressives need to keep re-learning this lesson every election cycle.