Special comment/rant here, does anyone else find it incredibly annoying that CBS/NYTimes, Marist, SUSA, Quinnipiac, Siena, CNN/Opinion Research, PPP and even Rasmussen will insist on polling the NY-Gov race when I can't get polls on at least 8 different competitive House races in the last week or two, including some within the vicinity of NYS/Connecticut research/polling institutions, like NY-25? This is not just annoying because I like to know the latest news, it's annoying because it's useful to know where to channel resources in the last two weeks of an election.
In the case of races like Mayor Steve Pougnet's race in CA-45, there's no public polling at all (I've only seen private). Yet an average of 4.25 polls per week came out since the week of Sept. 27th on the NY-Gov race, every single one of them showing leads for Cuomo as small as 14 and as large as 37. I just saw one out today showing him up by 20. And this is still important? Even New York State political junkies like me find it overload. It's like some kind of perverse statement on the media's interest in characters like Paladino and conflict.
I mean, I think it's pretty cool to demonstrate that Paladino saying crazy stuff about gays, Sheldon Silver, Andrew Cuomo's prowess, and other sundry topics can transform his deficit of 10 points to into 14 or 37, but here Cuomo is close to breaking the statewide record for percentage of the vote in a gubernatorial race. For crying out loud, let's move on.
It's like some kind of joke. Here's Carl Paladino's much-awaited "major announcement" today:
This is a 3-minute ad buy on TV on three local stations back home in Buffalo.
After picking myself up off the floor, some thoughts:
Someone teach this man to read a teleprompter without looking like a stooge.
Someone teach this man to sit still.
Someone teach this man to say sentences like "I just don't understand" without looking like he's a marionette of his media handler.
What in the world did he announce? Nothing.
I like this "kindler, gentler" Carl- much better than his message of the day being "what tirade shall I unleash on Cuomo/Shelly Silver today"? The non-apology apology for screaming at Fred Dicker and threatening him is funny, too.
That was a creepy zoom-in on his face.
The cut to Naples (she's this Wall Street banker who served a few terms as County Comptroller of Erie County, and narrowly lost the open seat race to Rep. Brian Higgins in 2004 and never got over it) for her to make the money ask is the most hilarious thing. It's like some sort of bizarro political telethon.
The nonsense about Cuomo refusing to debate is demonstrably false. Paladino is actually the only candidate who hasn't responded to the planned Newsday-sponsored debate.
For me, the man continues to be living, breathing, content for an awesome version of one of those famous person's fake Facebook pages. I can see his status updates now: "Hosting a backyard party for my 10-year-old daughter. Taped Silver's face on the pinata, but my daughter kept frggin' missing with the bat I gave her. Hey, you fucking New York Post photographer, no pictures, no pictures!"
With "Tea Party" giving it a thumbs-up like button.
Yesterday, NYS Attorney General and presumptive gubernatorial nominee selected Bob Duffy as his running mate. I actually know Duffy from my time at the University of Rochester. The 2005 Democratic Mayoral primary was a hot topic, and I met and volunteered for Duffy's opponent in the race, City Councilman Wade Norwood. Norwood had a lot more grassroots and union support back then, and I supported Norwood because I thought he was more in touch with problems of the city and their residents vs. Duffy, whose biggest issue at the time was crime (Rochester has had problems in that area, and Duffy was the police chief) and eventually schools. I still have a lot of friends back there and like to get back for alumni weekend, so I've kept up.
On his policies, he's not the most outspoken progressive around. He is possibly most well-known for pushing for an NYC-style mayoral takeover of schools in his administration and may get it through (the Legislature needs to approve such a move). He is a supporter of same-sex marriage equality and pro-choice, which is good, having seen David Paterson rise from LG to Governor and become, I would say, one of the fiercest, if not the fiercest, elected official advocating for the marriage bill to move through the legislature. Crime has improved I would say in part due to his administration. One of Rochester's biggest problems is development, and he has a mixed record there. The Renaissance Square project failed during his administration, which has been disappointing, while the Brooks Landing project- a mixed-use space of new campus housing, coffee shops, restaurants across the Genesee River from U of R- is already partly built and pretty nice. But he has at least paid a very close eye to development, which I like. And, of course, there's the "upstate regional balance", which I always find overrated, but there's that. And I do think he would be qualified to serve as governor if elected. Overall a pretty good pick, politically and to some extent policy-wise, and it sure beats Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown.
Duffy has said he will continue serving as Mayor until the election. If elected, the Rochester City Council will appoint a new mayor in January (although it cannot be a Councilperson) to serve until the November 2011 general election. The person elected at that time will serve out the remainder of Duffy's term through early 2014.
Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani is expected to announce tomorrow that he's not running for governor, U.S. senator or any other office next year, the Daily News' David Saltonstall reports.
Instead, he's expected to declare that he's staying in the private sector for now and endorse fellow Republican Rick Lazio for governor.
As I wrote before, once he bowed out of the gubernatorial race, I never thought Rudy would engage in a year-long campaign to become (likely) 100th in seniority. Personally, I thought his rumor-mongering of running for weeks was aimed at (a) alleviating his own boredom (b) drumming up consulting business (c) done because he was upset at the diminishing number of daily Google News hits on his name (d) all of the above.
At any rate, Lazio will get crushed by Cuomo or (we nervously hope) by Paterson, although I do remember an unknown State Senator by the name of Pataki running against the titan, papa Cuomo, in '94. Speaking of that unknown State Senator, he is still in the mix to run against Gillibrand.
A few months ago I wrote about the prospect of Spitzer running for office again in NYS. Well, it looks like that may happen:
Eliot Spitzer, who stepped down from the governor's office amid scandal, is now strongly considering a run for state comptroller, sources told The Post.
Spitzer has in recent weeks had discussions with some Democratic donors and insiders about the position currently held by Tom DiNapoli.
DiNapoli, a former assemblyman from Long Island, was appointed comptroller in 2007 after his predecessor, Alan Hevesi, pleaded guilty to using state workers as chauffeurs for his wife.
A Democrat who spoke with Spitzer said, "He's seriously thinking about it."
"He wants to run if he can," said another source. "He's still talking about it."
Gov. Paterson backed the idea.
"The type of way that former Gov. Spitzer managed would be most useful these days in the finance area rather than in law enforcement," Paterson said. "As you can see our biggest problems are - and the current comptroller has handled them very well, warning the Legislature over and over again what's going to happen if we don't act - so those who want to make change I think would be inclined to move in the finance area."
DiNapoli, who was a former Assemblyman appointed to the position by the legislature, is, aside from Paterson (who may not be the nominee), the weak link in the NYS-2010 ticket- even if Cuomo abandons the AG spot to run for Governor. His polling numbers and name ID are still low. And personally, I'm way over Spitzer's scandal, which is now a few years old (and not uncommon in politics, or personal life) and I'm all for him getting back into politics. He is a bar fight primary kind of Democrat, someone who seeks confrontation rather than conciliation first, and in the midst of all this Wall Street mess (his specialty), anyone the Chamber of Commerce declared a "War on Spitzerism" over is someone we could use. He also campaigned on the stump in support of marriage equality when running for Governor in 2006.
The interesting thing is if he took a Jerry Brown-esque approach to get back to the Governor's mansion some years from now. For now, though, he would be a great Comptroller, and I hope he runs.
To follow up on my post re former AG and Gov. Spitzer considering a comeback, the musing and maneuvering has begun. Immediately after The Hill and Danny Hakim at the NYTimes reported he was considering it, Spitzer came out with a full denial Tuesday night, then announced yesterday he was planning on teaching a course on law and public policy at City College of New York. Of course, this doesn't preclude doing a campaign as well, but it does try to bat down the rumors. Meanwhile, Survey USA did a snap poll, finding that 62% of New Yorkers would definitely or consider voting for Spitzer if he ran again for public office. It also found that 41% of voters think Spitzer is more qualified than Paterson to be governor, with 31% going for Paterson and 35% unsure. This follows up on a May poll finding 51% would rather have Spitzer as Governor over Paterson. While Spitzer's numbers do tank against Giuliani (if he runs) in the SUSA poll, and this is all speculation until Cuomo makes up his mind on running for Governor or not, I think there is some positive sign there that he could definitely run for office again and win, perhaps for Comptroller.
I should also mention that the New York State Comptroller is a guy named Thomas DiNapoli, who was most recently a member of the Assembly until chosen by his peers to replace the previous Comptroller over a scandal. An August 24th Siena poll found a whopping 74% had no opinion of DiNapoli, despite taking office in early 2007. To be honest, he's maintained a low profile, and I think can be beaten in a primary. I see that, or running for Attorney General if Cuomo opts to run for Governor, as the most likely possibilities.
The one other thing I did want to address was opinion over respect and forgiveness. After the news came out Tuesday evening on speculation that he might run again, I chatted with my mom and my sister about it. My mom was previously a die-hard Spitzer supporter. I interned in his Buffalo office when he was AG many years ago, and the same office intervened on our behalf when a car dealership tried to screw her out of their warranty obligation when the car was broken. And, as she would say, he's a good Jewish boy.
I was shocked by the flat refusal to support him (at least, in a Dem primary), and it was because of the prostitution issue. To me, I don't care about his personal life to any extent, unless he's using state resources or severely breaking the law, or it's rape. To her, and my sister, cheating on your partner is one thing, but cheating on your partner via prostitution is another. It's supporting an illicit industry, I was told, condoning a lifestyle that shouldn't be condoned, even if it's to support a child. It's taking advantage of women, even if it's consensual. It's interesting to note my mother and my sister are both die-hard feminists and Hillary backers (their reactions to the McCain campaign's targeting of Hillary supporters by picking Palin inspired me to write this piece last year analyzing the effects of it), so perhaps that has something to do with it. Each is entitled to their own opinion, but I am concerned this may by more prevalent than expected, at least among women or a certain demographic of women. It would certainly an important concern in any Spitzer campaign.
The Hill and Danny Hakim at the NYTimes, who usually has a good ear on what's going on in state politics, are reporting that former AG and Gov. Eliot Spitzer is "considering a comeback", possibly for Comptroller, his former post as Attorney General, or to primary Kristen Gillibrand for U.S. Senate.
A couple of quick reactions (native New Yorker and former Spitzer intern- many generations ago- that I am, I can't resist):
There are a lot of musical chairs here. Spitzer's running for Attorney General is predicated on Cuomo vacating the seat to challenge Gov. Paterson, should Paterson choose to run again, which is also not clear, but I'm told is extremely doubtful. Meaning, I don't think Spitzer would run in a primary for AG, and I am not sure he would beat Cuomo if he did.
While Spitzer against Gillibrand would certainly be interesting, I'm not sure it is the best expenditure of resources in terms of his candidacy. I'm not the world's biggest fan of Gillibrand, particularly her movement on LGBT issues around her appointment, but I also think she's been solid in terms of voting, and admire her leadership on marriage and Don't Ask, Don't Tell since she's come in.
According to the NYS Board of Elections, he has only $268,914 in his 2010 campaign account. He would face an uphill climb there, especially if it's against Cuomo or Gillibrand.
Regarding running for any office, yeah, conventional wisdom says he's too hurt by the scandal, it's only been two years since, yada yada. I say it doesn't matter. I remember when I was younger Bill Clinton had sky-high approval ratings in New York all through the Lewinsky episode and the same time period afterwards. Hell, if he was Constitutionally permitted to run again, he would have won New York easily. We're also the state that's elected two carpetbaggers- Hillary and RFK- to Senate. Plus, Spitzer's a Democrat from Manhattan. It's his base. I don't pretend to be an expert on NYC politics, but the Democrats in Manhattan I know see this stuff all the time, and shrug their shoulders. It is Manhattan, after all. If he were a Republican and his base was Cattaraugus County (where my Grandpa lives), it would be a problem, but he's not.
Spitzer as Comptroller is not the most exciting thing in the world, but the guy gets numbers and finances. When I flip on the cable morning shows and the topic is the economic crisis/Wall Street, he's there more often than not on panels, explaining how x led to y led to z and how to fix it. He's also done a number of op-eds on financial regulation, a particularly good one here, where he attacks free market fundamentalism. All of that helps him. I still occasional bring up his name back home, and the most common reaction I get is that the guy was smart, tough, and knew what he was doing re financial stuff. Don't forget he made his name as the "Sheriff of Wall Street". Plus, it can be a stepping stone.
My one true wish is actually that Spitzer runs for Governor again in 2010, Cuomo stays where he is, and Paterson opts not to run again. I have enough problems with Paterson's electoral viability, and Cuomo's noted lack of caring about any issues except housing, along with running to the media as soon as he gets a big settlement, to see this as important. Spitzer is a bar fight primary kind of Democrat to me. The opening of his resignation statement still makes me grin.
For the past nine years, eight years as attorney general, and one as governor, I have tried to uphold a vision of progressive politics that would rebuild New York and create opportunity for all. We sought to bring real change to New York and that will continue.
She did not provide answers about other issues that may prove more controversial. Ms. Kennedy did not say whether she supports a cap on local property taxes in New York, something that has sharply divided Democrats and Republicans in Albany. And she did not say whether she supports raising state or federal income taxes for the rich to help balance the budget and pay for government programs.
In her responses, Ms. Kennedy expressed strong support for Israel and said an undivided Jerusalem must be the country's national capital.
New York Governor Patterson just proposed a cruel and regressive budget that closes a massive budget gap without raising taxes on the wealthy, a budget Kennedy endorsed. I get that Kennedy can't go against Patterson, but refusing to answer a question about Federal income taxes is a pretty clear indication that her instincts are not yet honed enough for a major political seat. And you can throw in the deeply problematic answer on Jerusalem for good measure, which I see simply as evidence that her campaign is being entirely driven by a center-right aristocratic New York consulting class.
This is why elections are useful, though to be fair, they do have those pesky voter people.
[Kennedy] didn't support a Democrat in 2005. Fernando Ferrer, the Democratic candidate and first Latino ever nominated for citywide office, says she didn't support him. And one source recalls seeing her at a Women for Bloomberg event, though Stu Loeser, the mayor's press secretary, says she was not a member of the group.
Isay runs a consulting firm that literally feasts on its ties to Bloomberg. His clients include the Partnership for New York City, the NYC Cultural Institutions Group, NYC & Co., Forest City Ratner, Primary Care Development Corporation, and the Building Trades Employers Association, all of which do business with Bloomberg City Hall. He's got a metal bat company out of California that lists itself as having lobbied the mayor against a council ban, and a taxi company that's approved by the Taxi & Limousine Commission to put driver and passenger information monitors in cabs. He did the television ads for PlaNYC 2030, the premier initiative of the Bloomberg administration, paid for by the Real Estate Board of New York and others.
The opening page of Knickerbocker's website consists solely of a Schumer blurb, and both he and the newly hired campaign manager for Bloomberg 2009, Bradley Tusk, cut their teeth with Schumer. Knickerbocker's last great senate campaign was Joe Lieberman in 2006, and Bloomberg granted unusual leaves to three of his City Hall aides to join Isay in turning that campaign around. Isay's company is a subsidiary of Squier Knapp Dunn (SKD), the major Washington-based consultant that handled Bloomberg's media in 2001 and 2005. SKD's last big winner was Blagojevich, handling his 2002 and 2006 campaigns. Coincidentally, Tusk went from a stint in Bloomberg City Hall to become Blagojevich's Deputy Governor from 2003 to 2007.
This Schumer-Bloomberg-Lieberman axis is dominant in New York and national politics, a sort of pay-to-play racket for Wall Street, lobbyists, and developers. It's sad that Kennedy has enmeshed herself with this crew. And I have to say, they could be doing a better job of PR on her behalf.
City Board of Elections records show Kennedy has failed to vote in many elections since she registered in the city in 1988 - including votes for the Senate seat she hopes to fill and numerous Democratic faceoffs for mayor.
"It doesn't speak to a deep-felt commitment to the electoral process," Baruch College political scientist Doug Muzzio said when told of Kennedy's ballot breakdowns.
Records show Kennedy did not pull the lever for any of her fellow Democrats in city primary races for mayor in 1989, 1993 and 1997 and 2005, which Republicans went on to win three out of four times in the general election.
She was also AWOL for the primary and general elections in 1994, when Sen. Daniel Moynihan was running for reelection to the seat Kennedy hopes to hold.
The New York Daily News is kind of scummy, so I'm curious how she handles this. So far, the PR campaign of Caroline Kennedy isn't looking so hot. Well, not when she has to deal with the public, anyways.
In her first visit to Buffalo and upstate since trying to clear the field by clearing her throat on a phone call to the governor, Kennedy went on a "listening tour" by listening first to political insiders in private meetings.
You can't get any more "seasoned" than that.
No average Western New Yorkers expressing kitchen table concerns. Not much of a give-and-take with pesky reporters asking questions that working stiffs might want answers to. Instead, it's mostly private sit-downs with political pooh-bahs, just like a veteran insider.
It's that kind of seasoning that has cooked our goose as a region.
Her visit was arranged as Kennedy apparently leads the governor's shortlist to fill the seat Hillary Clinton will vacate to become secretary of state. But if the Democratic superstar wants to start at the top despite never holding office at any level of government, the least she could do is pretend to be a different kind of politician.
If she really wants to know upstate, she could adapt the model of the senator she wants to work with and the one she wants to replace. Both Chuck Schumer and Clinton made a point of visiting every county in the state. Kennedy could make a point of visiting every one of the 939 cities, counties, towns, villages, school districts and other assorted taxing entities in Erie County.
Constituents get all huffy sometimes, when you, like, ignore them.
Also (Adam): Dead on, as I'm one constituent who's feeling ignored. In the first place, she looked weak and indecisive when hesitating over whether to take questions after the Syracuse meeting, then deciding just to go to the car, yet taking questions after the Rochester and Buffalo meetings. In the second place, Byron Brown is an ineffective loser of a mayor who no one thinks has any idea how to fix anything in Buffalo. He will likely even get a primary challenge in 2009 from Hoyt, the Assemblyman from the city. If you're going to meet with anyone in Buffalo and invite the media and look good doing it, meet with Higgins (if he'll do it) or Slaughter or even Golisano. In the third place, the whole concept of meeting with mayors and pretending like you're trying to learn about the region is stupid. So she meets with Brown for 30 minutes, leaves his office with a stupid little Buffalo pin on her jacket and smiles proudly pretending like she just learned a damn thing about the area when everyone knows she's trying to gauge whether she can get Brown's support. People just roll their eyes, and Watson, who is a very respected BuffNews voice, called her on it.
I don't have anything particularly insightful to add about Caroline Kennedy. I don't like aristocracy in general, and I don't know what she believes. Two interesting notes - one, she's a cousin-in-law of Arnold Schwarzenegger through her cousin Maria Shriver. And two, she's given to Presidential candidates and Kennedy's since 1979, but the only downticket non-Kennedy donations she's made have gone to Chris Dodd in 1997, Harris Wofford in 1991, and Ned Lamont in 2006.
Ugh, I hate dealing with stupid and clumsy smear campaigns, but it's got to be done. This ignorant article is being circulated among right-wing bloggers purporting to find deep questions about Spitzer's campaign operation.
Just since the first of this year, Spitzer 2010 has taken in $5.6 million and spent $4.2 million on a campaign that doesn't officially start for at least two years. Among the largest reported Spitzer 2010 expenditures to date are payments totaling $3,161,112 to Global Strategy Group, a media consultant group, for "TV ads."
The wingnuts are asking why, if Spitzer is up for reelection in 2010, would he be collecting money this early. The answer takes a passing familiarity with New York politics; Spitzer spent $3 million plus in an ad war with SEIU over health care plans. The wingnutosphere has woken up and finally started grabbing onto the toenail clippings of this scandal, milking every last headline in what is rapidly becoming a show trial. Meanwhile, Spitzer keeps doing stuff like allocating more money for affordable housing and working to enroll more kids in the health plus program. Ack, these right-wing freaks are just awful.
Meanwhile, the wingnuts are also out to get the New York Times's excellent Supreme Court reporter Linda Greenhouse, concocting a fake scandal about her not wanting to appear on C-Span. This one's much stupider than the Spitzer smear. Spitzer's problems are at least a result of his administration's own mistakes, both ethical and political. This is just Linda Greenhouse not being told that C-Span was going to film a panel, and when she arrived at that panel, saying she would not be as comfortable expressing herself to a nationally televised audience as an intimate group of journalism professors. That's literally the 'controversy'. Slate has a rundown, as does the AEJMC forum.
I know and like Greenhouse and I like her reporting. She's accurate and passionate, which is probably why the right is going after her. Anyway, it's just important to get it on the record that she's being unfairly attacked.
Again, right-wing smear campaigns are really really irritating, often because the accusations are so stupid as to make them hard to rebut. You mean there was a controversy about C-Span cameras? No, there had to be more, right? No, in fact, there is nothing else here, except a right-wing witchhunt. Ack, these people are just freaks.
What's been going on for weeks in New York state is part of the standard conservative 'kill them in the crib' strategy of destroying progressive icons and politicians. In this case, the target is rising progressive star Eliot Spitzer. Spitzer is considered especially dangerous to the right-wing, because he's a real populist who has taken on Wall Street in extremely high profile cases. He was so effective that a few years ago, the corrupt US Chamber of Commerce declared a 'war on Spitzerism' to reign in state attorney general officers that sought to aggressively enforce the law against corporate elites. The scandal that's taking place now, while ostensibly caused by Spitzer's mistakes, has more to do with these established enemies of populism combined with a peculiar set of incentives for local politicians and insider journalists in New York to pile on an anti-Spitzer frenzy.
Anyway, what happened today is that the Republicans themselves in the state Senate publicly investigated the behavior of the Spitzer administration, even though nonpartisan agencies with more credibility are already looking into what happened. There is no reason for state Senate leader Joe Bruno to be doing this except vengeance and the desire to drag out a scandal and prevent an investigation of Bruno's own corruption, as Rochester Turning notes (though perhaps Bruno just loves the attention, having preened around on national TV for days now).
Meanwhile, New Yorkers and leaders in the state are beginning to ask the government to, well, get back to work. Stuart Appelbaum, of the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, is asking the state Senate to pass paid family leave and expand access to health care instead of engaging in these investigations. Both policies are Spitzer priorities. Spitzer himself is actually still governing, working to review and fix New York City's subway system that broke down simply due to thunderstorms. As the Cunning Realist put it, the 'Bloomberg is off the rose'. Having progressives govern makes a difference; years of Giuliani and Bloomberg in the Mayoral seat has of course led to decaying infrastructure, because cross-dressers or not, they are Republicans and Republicans cannot govern.
Many of us have become jaded by a lack of accountability by our politicians at the top, and so the notion that 'getting something done' should take precedence over grandstanding investigations sounds like spin. But in this case, it's not. Every day, I get an email from Michael Caputo of NYFacts.net bashing Eliot Spitzer, and Caputo is a former aide to George H.W. Bush, well-established in right-wing orbits, and obviously directing a smear campaign.
This is really a collection of insiders, press people, angry coddled legislators, Joe Bruno and right-wingers trying to destroy Eliot Spitzer's capacity to govern New York. They tried it with Deval Patrick in Massachusetts and Jon Corzine in New Jersey, and they'll try it with every progressive who takes on a political machine. In some ways, this is exactly what the right did in impeaching Bill Clinton, using Clinton's sloppiness and mistakes to try to overturn a popular electoral result. Destroying progressives is what the right does well, and it's in fact the only thing the right does well. This time, it's not going to work, since there are already investigations going on that are not grounded in Republican partisanship, the scandal has been on every paper in the state for weeks, and yet Spitzer is still pretty popular.
More than that, the public is paying attention and isn't falling for it. They are seeing, with the collapse of infrastructure in Minnesota and New York City, that people in government actually do have stuff to do.
I've been following the Spitzer nonsense in New York. Basically, Spitzer made a mistake, took a hit in the polls to a 48-28 approval rating (as if that's bad), but his archenemy Joe Bruno is immensely unpopular, at 33-40 approve/disapprove.
The state Senate Republicans are going to hold a hearing today to dig into Spitzer, so we'll see how aggressively Bruno goes out. Bruno's been all over the national news and the talk shows, so I can't imagine he'll be conciliatory. Nevertheless, he should be. He's deeply corrupt, and voters know it. He effectively hurt Spitzer, but he should beware of overreeach.
Despite the hyperventilating press, voters can see where the problem lies: 'Voters are more certain, 43 - 26 percent with 30 percent undecided, that further investigation will show Bruno did something wrong.'
STATE BLOGS
