Richard M. vs. Richard J. Daley

Okay, guys, I really want your insight into this, especially those of you who know Chicago and its history very well (b/c I sure as hell don't) What do you think of the different mayoral styles of the current mayor and his late father? Were they similar? Who was more effective? Who was better/worse for the city? Surely there are some similarities, but undoubtedly different times called for very different people. My take, from the best of what I know, is this: Richard J Daley took reigns in the 1950's, when Chicago was at its greatest peak, but was still largely industrial. It was a much more conservative city that was filled with families, and had a large population of black immigrants from the south that whities didn't want in their neighborhood. The car was beginning to dominate, as well. That reflected in his style--conservative. Also, he built the same public housing highrises that his son would now demolish. Even though he took control of a very powerful city, during the entire time he was in office Chicago would lose population and jobs to the suburbs, a process he knew he couldn't reverse. In a sense, R.J.Daley had to deal with a great city on its decline, and surely that made his job enormously tough! Richard M Daley, on the other hand, had a different city to deal with. It was a more diverse city in a more open-minded era, but also still had great issues with racial division and crime. He was dealing with a post-WWII city that had deindustrialized and had likely bottomed out. Yet luckily for him, it was a city that was still very healthy with a very strong financial presence (thanks in part to the CME formed in the '70's). But he had new energy and vision, but he was also lucky enough to take office during an economic boom (the '90's) and an era when people were starting to criticize sprawl and move into cities. The city's population leveled off and even increased, while Daley tapped into this newfound energy by measures to make the city and its neighborhoods more livable. Also, Daley had insight and vision for a new city--one with a 24/7 core rather than just a financial core. But should Daley take credit for his vision or is Chicago's rebound more a factor of demographics out of everyone's control (just as population losses in the 60's and 70's were out of his father's control)? Those are my thoughts. I would truly enjoy hearing opinions from anybody who is interested in this discussion >