<p>
</p>
<p>No. The term “political machine” was coined in the 20th century to describe tightly organized and highly disciplined political party operations in a number of cities, counties, or states. The most powerful of them effectively created one-party rule in their respective jurisdictions, and often were headed by a single powerful “boss” or a small circle of powerful chieftans. The “boss” might or might not be an elected official, but often (though not always) was the titular head of the political party in control. At various points Boston, Chicago, Kansas City, New York City, and Philadelphia were said to be controlled by political machines–mostly Democrats, but Philadelphia for many generations was run by a powerful Republican machine, and the highly organized Republican parties in some suburban counties like Nassau County, Long Island; Dupage County, Illinois; and Orange County, California have at various times been described as political machines.</p>
<p>Chicago was most clearly run by a machine during the era of Mayor Richard J. Daley (mayor from 1955 until his death in 1976 and chairman of the Cook County Central Democratic Committee from 1953 to 1976). Daley exercised autocratic control over city government, with the City Council a pliant rubber stamp. He controlled party politics in Chicago and Cook County, deciding who would get the Democratic nomination for virtually every office–and most of the time getting the Democratic nomination was tantamount to election. He also indirectly controlled Cook County government, because the people who ran it were his lieutenants and, effectively, his appointees. He had great influence over statewide elections; no Democrat could get elected statewide without the Daley organization pulling out all the stops in Chicago, and in many cases no Democrat could even be nominated without his blessing. Thousands of city and county employees got and retained their jobs through political patronage, which meant they needed to be loyal foot soldiers in political campaigns. The city of Chicago is divided into 50 wards; the Democratic Party (or “regular Democratic Party” as it came to be known) in each ward was headed by a ward committeeman, 90+% of whom were Daley loyalists; each ward committeeman had a precinct captain in every precinct; and each precinct captain often had several assistants. The ward committeemen took their marching orders from Daley, and the precinct captains and their assistants took their marching orders from their ward committeemen. Through this tightly organized structure, the Daley organization was able to reach into every household in the city, communicating the machine’s message and often dispensing small favors (Need a new garbage can? We can get that for you. Want that pothole in the street in front of your house fixed? Let me talk to the ward streets & san superintendant) in order to influence votes.</p>
<p>Chicago politics mostly doesn’t work like that anymore. There are still remnants of it in some wards, but it’s a shadow of its former self. After Richard J. Daley’s death, the old machine broke into factions, and some parts of the city broke from old-fashioned machine politics entirely. Rifts developed between the city’s black and Latino populations and the mostly white-dominated regular Democratic organization, especially when the independent-minded Harold Washington, a black congressman from the south side who had successfully bucked the machine and won reelection several times, had the audacity to run for mayor and win, becoming the city’s first black mayor, on an anti-machine platform. Old-style dispensing of public patronage jobs was made illegal. After Washington’s death, Richard J. Daley’s son Richard M. Daley became mayor and re-consolidated some of his father’s power, but he was never the kind of autocratic political boss his father had been, and he was elected more on the basis of modern PR and media politics than old-fashioned machine politics.</p>
<p>People who make reference to a modern-day “Chicago political machine” generally either don’t know what they’re talking about, or are falsely and maliciously using the label to smear present-day Chicago politicians. There are remnants of machine-style politics in some corners of the city, but the city’s politics overall are much more fractious, polycentric, and contested than in the bad old days of the Daley machine. The Obamas came to political maturity in that more complicated, polycentric, and contested political environment. In Chicago, they’ve worked hard to stay on good terms with virtually all factions, from the remnants of the old machine to “independent Democrats” (i.e., anti-machine Democrats) to genuine independents to new interest-group voters (e.g., LGBT communities). The allegation that Barack Obama is a “Chicago machine politician” is a bald-faced lie, intended as a political smear.</p>