which one was/is a better mayor?

I can't judge their individual efforts, both with distinguished careers, but I can definitely say Daley's much more likeable. Giuliani's like a cold fish.

Daley is way better.

Daley for sure.

Daley, World's Greatest Mayor.

I'm not the biggest Daley supporter-- even though I grew up a couple blocks from the daley family home-- but I absolutely loathe Giuliani.

Wow, always thought people liked Giuliani. Better not go against the grain, I'll say Daley.

Daley by a longshot. Rudy is a jackass.

like michigan ave , i thought it would be a closer call than this . i def pick daley but i always though giulianni was looked at as a great mayor who cleaned up the city in a simular way that daley did (how he cleaned up time square) or was that somone else im thinking of. also they both had their fair share of corruption.

Wow, always thought people liked Giuliani. Better not go against the grain, I'll say Daley.

me too...? :dunno:

Long live our KING= Daley the 2nd!!

People hated Giuliani until 9/11.

I'm not an enormous fan of either, though they both certainly have done some good things.

I'm afraid to vote for the other guy. I've met my precinct captain ;)

People hated Giuliani until 9/11.


Exactly. IMO, that's no reason to "like" someone. Afterall, he didn't do anything but survive it, and basically do anything anyone in his situation would have done... What did one expect a mayor to do? Make a run for the Poconos?

I was wishy washy about Giuliani before and after 9/11. I almost got tricked into thinking he wasa moderate... But he cemented his status as just another corrupted rightwing hack when he served up the red meat to the wolves at the RNC. What a pathetic display.

Richard M. Daley sees being mayor of Chicago as being the most important job in the world. Rudi Guilliani had no such feelings about being mayor of New York.

To me, that speaks volumes about who is the better mayor.

Daley--and here's why:

Rescuing Chicago was much more of an uphill battle than rescuing New York. Chicago is in the less-reknowned midwest, it has been much more dependent on manufacturing than New York has, and it probably lost a bigger chunk of its population than New York had by the time Daley took over.

New York had natural advantages for Guiliani to work with--a much bigger media center, more large companies, and its preeminence as the financial powerhouse that it is. This is not to mention its location on the job-rich east coast with all of its universities and corporations. Oh, and the nation's capital is only a few hours away by train.

With Chicago, a city that looked like it was about to collapse, Daley excecuted a turnaround that I think will go down in the history of cities. He turned a crumbling midwestern industrial center into a world-class city ripe with new businesses, great global corporations, a financial hub (the booming options/futures exchanges), and a corporate services sector that continues to slowly replace Chicago's manufacturing base. He also created a huge nidus for arts and theater that attracted major dance troups, artists, and is slowly turning Chicago into a theater center on par with the best in the world.

Obviously, New York takes these things for granted. But Chicago had to work its ass off to be what it currently is, and I give Daley a lot of credit for turning a rusty old city into the great metropolis that it has become

I so very agree^ thank goodness for Daley that Chicago isnt like one of those other rust belt cities. If it wasnt for Daley, chicago havent would grow back to nearly 3 million in the 90's

Daley---but if this CTA thing goes through, he's image will be tarnished to me. Not sure if that's justified or now, but that's just how I feel.

I don't think Daley alone can be credited with not letting Chicago being like another rust-belt city. It would never have happened that way, how the city's economics, politics, and everything else Chicago had going for it.