....November 25, 12:39 PM
 
 
 
The Sad Story Of
The New York State Democrats
By MICHAEL SCHENKLER


Follow me on Twitter @QueensTribune

I’m a lifelong Democrat.

In spite of what some may think, that does not mean this paper and I have not supported Republicans – two of the four real contested seats in this past Council race as well as the Republican Mayor received our endorsement over the Dems.

But on the political spectrum, I almost always fall with the Dems – or to their left.

Dad was a Dem, mom, the whole family.

Nuff said, I’m a “D.”

So as 2009 began and the Dems, for the first time in my life, took control of the Governorship and both houses of the State Legislature, I hoped for change.

Well this is New York and I should have known better.

And this is the State Democratic Party and they care more about self-preservation for their members than accomplishment.

So here we are, approaching another statewide election, and we may be giving it all back.

Yup, the Dems have come further towards control of the State than anytime in modern history and well my friends, they are on the verge of giving it all back – or much of it.

Yup, these Dems either eat their young or grovel in incompetence or corruption.

Up for re-election is the State’s best vote-getter U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer who will waltz to victory with little opposition. However, running with him, his selection to fill Hillary Clinton’s Senate seat, is Kristin Gillibrand, appointed earlier this year by non-elected Gov. David Paterson who gained his seat, when Eliot Spitzer was caught in hooker-gate, and is also up for election. Comptroller Tom DiNapoli, who acquired his seat during Hevesigate, joins the non-elected Democratic group. And finally there is Andrew Cuomo, with high numbers and name recognition, sitting as Attorney General and perceived as the front-runner for Governor.

The marvelous State Senate spent a good portion of the summer on political hiatus, stymied by one or two Dems willing to trade their allegiance to the G.O.P. for a promise and a song and a big title and budget, but soon traded back for the same from the Dems. The Dems have demonstrated such inadequacy politically and legislatively in the State Senate that this lifelong Dem is considering advocating that every incumbent member be thrown out of office. Their pathetic performance, coupled with the anti-incumbent winds which blew in the 2009 election, does not bode well for the Democratic Party. Remember, their victories in 2008 were helped by having Obama at the top of the ticket.

This year, they may be below the five named above Dems running Statewide, only two of whom have actually been elected to statewide office.

The Assembly will be Democratic until hell freezes over.

David Paterson’s approval rating is lower than the temperature in the winter. As he postures, fundraises for and talks re-election, he scares almost every incumbent below him on the Democratic line.

Kristin Gillibrand has failed to win over the hearts and minds of downstate Dems. The buzz in the City and the buzz on Long Island are still in search of an alternative candidate. But Schumer’s heavy-handed interference in this race appears to have scared out all the strong candidates. Downstate liberals hope that one of them has a change of heart.

With moderate Republicans Rudy Giuliani’s and George Pataki’s names bandied about for the Senate seat, it will take considerable magic for Gillibrand to win the seat as long as liberal Dems consider her unacceptable.

DiNapoli is untested and could use both top of the ticket help and a weak opponent.

Paterson needs more than a weak opponent to keep his seat.

How do we see it all?

Andrew Cuomo will be the next Governor of New York. David Paterson will find a soft landing in a plum appointed position. Kristin Gillibrand will, with Chuck Schumer’s help, remain the Democratic candidate who loses a seat, which this past Saturday night was essential to move the Health Care Plan to the Senate floor. She cannot beat Rudy (or George).

Tom DiNapoli will be in the fight of his life.

The longer it takes for Cuomo to announce for Governor, the less time a Democratic successor will have to mobilize. However, Republicans will also be reluctant to actively jump into a race until they read the Cuomo tea leaves — a toss up for a vacant AG slot.

The NYS Senate – fuggetaboutit!

The Dems will experience a bad – real bad — 2010 election cycle in New York State. Assembly, Senate and Congressional seats will be in jeopardy. Putting together a strong top of the ticket sooner, rather than later, is a key to survival.

Advice: Get Paterson out quick.

More advice: The State Senate (and the Assembly) must act decisively and effectively in dealing with the State budget.

Finally advice: bet GOP in New York in 2010.

Sorry.



MSchenkler@QueensTribune.com

Michael Schenkler can be reached via this contact form.
 
 
Why The Lethargy In The Mayoral Race?

Henry Stern
By HENRY STERN

This was written as the mayoral race was fast approaching its finish line.

We have not seen a mayoral election which aroused so little excitement since Mayor Robert F. Wagner (Dem-Lib) won a second term in 1957 by defeating the Republican candidate, Robert K. Christenberry, who was postmaster of New York in the Eisenhower administration.

Mayor Wagner, the second mayor in the 20th century to be elected to three terms, (the first was LaGuardia and the third was Koch) was the son of New Deal Senator Robert F. Wagner, author of landmark legislation protecting labor’s right to organize and establishing Social Security.

We ask why there has been relatively little excitement about this election. An article on that subject appears in this week’s Village Voice, written by Tom Robbins. He criticizes his colleagues in the press as well as the mayor and notes it “is an odd blessing for a man who made his fortune as a media mogul.”

Another irony is that, critical as many people are about various things the mayor has said or done over the last eight years, and annoyed as they may be over the term limits extension, they are likely to vote for Bloomberg because this is a race between two men, not between the mayor and an abstract standard of virtue.

The argument that while many politicians are corrupt because they take money, Bloomberg is suspect because he gives money is hard for people to swallow.

Some people believe that it is unfair for one candidate to spend much more than the rivals. The most expensive campaign will founder if people do not believe the candidate’s message, no matter how often they see it on television. Political history abounds with stories of rich men who ran for office and lost. Ross Perot and Tom Golisano are two. For an earlier example, William Randolph Hearst ran for Mayor of the City of New York, in 1905 and 1909, and Governor in 1906. He had a printing press as well as a fat purse, but he did not win. In the classic film loosely based on his life, “Citizen Kane,” two stacks of newspapers have been prepared for distribution as soon as an election result is reached. One says “KANE ELECTED.” The other says “FRAUD AT POLLS!”

Wealth gives a candidate an edge, and allows him to bring his message to the voters, but unless the message resonates, and is supported by credible evidence or persuasive argument, it is unlikely to succeed. Between two candidates of similar reputation and level of recognition, money is an important factor.

Many voters will support or oppose candidates because of their race, religion, ethnicity, gender, physical attractiveness or sexual preference. Others are concerned with ability and ideology. Most make their choices for a combination of the categories listed above. That’s the way it is.

In most cases, when an incumbent is challenged, people will vote on the basis of whether they believe the incumbent has done a good job, and whether they think that the challenger can do better. When the race is for an open seat, advertising and campaigning is likely to have a greater impact.

One fact not mentioned so far this year is an old belief that African-American candidates do better at the polls than at the voting booths, because people don’t want to appear prejudiced, but have no problem expressing racial preferences in private.

Now that we have a black President, black Governor and a black candidate for Mayor, these matters are looked at differently than they were years ago.

But as some aspects of American life have changed for the better, others have changed for the worse. By measuring children born out of wedlock, prison population, drug addiction, unemployment and underemployment, education and language gaps, the loss of what are viewed as 19th century virtues, and lack of participation in public affairs, we know that social problems remain. We cannot help observing, however, how little elected officials have to do with many of these issues, and how in fact they try to avoid them rather than spending that elusive asset known as “political capital.”

The strength of a democracy is based in part on how much its citizens know.

StarQuest@NYCivic.com

Not4Publication.com by Dom Nunziato
Michael Schenkler can be reached via this contact form.