As a Black man living in Chicago, most people assume I’ll always vote Democrat. That assumption has never sat right with me. I lean Republican and right-of-center these days, but I’m not married to any party. If the right Democrat emerges—one focused on results over ideology—I’m open to crossing the aisle. Right now, though, it feels like the Democratic Party has drifted far from the concerns of everyday Americans.
To me, the modern Democratic Party is no longer the party of the working class or low-income families. It has become consumed with cultural debates—endless focus on LGBTQ+ inclusivity, questioning the definition of a woman, and prioritizing symbolic gestures over practical outcomes.
Look at the cities run by progressive Democrats for decades:
- Chicago, my home, struggles with crime, failing schools, and fiscal chaos under one-party rule.
- New York City now has a mayor who campaigned heavily on socialism and fare-free buses.
- San Francisco—a beautiful city I’ve always wanted to visit—now grapples with rampant homelessness, open drug markets, and a recent push for reparations that feels more performative than solvable.
These aren’t just anecdotes. They reflect a party that often seems more interested in ideological purity than in governing effectively.
That disconnect played a big role in my 2024 vote for Donald Trump. The Biden-Harris administration, in my view, spent more energy on DEI initiatives and global symbolism than on delivering concrete results for Americans—controlling inflation, securing the border, or keeping cities safe. I wanted leaders willing to govern, not just signal virtue. To me, Republicans—at least at the national level in that election—appeared more focused on measurable outcomes.
That said, Republicans are far from perfect. Here in Illinois, I voted twice for Governor Bruce Rauner… and I’m glad to never have to do that again. The point is simple: neither Republicans or Democrats has a monopoly on competence.
Looking ahead in Illinois, Governor J.B. Pritzker is running for a third term in 2026. Unlike Rauner, Pritzker has actually governed—he’s kept the state running, made decisions, and pushed his agenda through. But I disagree with much of that agenda. The recent law allowing assisted suicide is one example among many progressive policies enacted since 2019 that I find deeply troubling.
Could I vote for Pritzker if no strong alternative emerges? It’s possible, though unlikely. His ongoing public feud with President Trump might hurt him with some voters, but Illinois is deep blue—whether that feud matters will depend on turnout and whether voters prioritize competence over tribal loyalty.
 |
| Created by AI |
I’m also open to a credible third-party or independent candidate, even if their chances are slim in this state. At the end of the day, my vote goes to whoever I believe can best do the job—whether that’s president, governor, mayor, or state legislator.
Bottom line, I don’t owe blind loyalty to Republicans or Democrats. Expecting Black voters to automatically support Democrats just because of history or identity feels outdated and condescending. I’ll support policies and people that make sense—strong economy, safe streets, good schools, personal responsibility, and common-sense governance.
If I ever run for office myself (unlikely, but never say never), I know that it's a must to pick a formal lane. Until then, I remain an independent thinker who votes for the person, not the party.
What about you? Are you locked into one party, or do you judge candidates individually? Drop your thoughts in the comments—I’d love to hear where others stand as we head into another election year.
