Skip to comments.For the City's Democrats, a Grim Future Could Last Long Beyond Tuesday (NYC)
Posted on 11/06/2005 2:12:05 PM PST by neverdem
As Democrats pursue an uphill battle to recapture City Hall on Tuesday, this year's mayoral campaign has already exposed the long-term fracturing of Democratic power in the city, from splinters in the black and Hispanic vote to defections in liberal bastions like the West Side.
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg's popularity and his $66 million in campaign spending are two pressure points as the campaign winds into its final phase this weekend. Yet it is the permanent structural changes in New York politics - such as term limits, campaign finance reforms and evolving demographics - that are really shaking the once-dominant party and seem bound to hamper it for years to come, leading Democrats and political consultants say.
The Democrats have lost the last three mayoral elections, and if they lose Tuesday's it will be their longest stretch out of power since the consolidation of New York City in 1898. And the recent Republican successes have only empowered the mayor, whether in rooting out patronage in government or in pushing controversial priorities like the Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn. As for the impact on voters, Democratic leaders say a lack of unity weakens party efforts to build more affordable housing, rein in apartment rents, allow gay marriage and battle for more school aid from Albany.
Democrats complain that fund-raising caps and term limits have deprived the Democratic challenger, Fernando Ferrer, of a political machine to confront the vast resources of the Bloomberg campaign. And he has not been able to spread his message in even traditional hotbeds of party loyalty - a sign, some Democrats say...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
That sentence and the title remind me of Edward G. Robinson in Little Caesar, "Is this the end of RICO"?
Rent control is one of the main reasons that more affordable housing is NOT built. The market sets the amount of the rent, and the market delivers the housing. If the housing is too expensive it will either lie vacant, or will be rented to people who can afford it.
"the guy from the block who works hard for the party doesn't stand much chance"
Good old Chuckie Rangel. Hey, Chuckie, "the guy who works hard for the party" may not be the citizens' choice of a leader. How about someone who works for the people?
Democratic leaders say a lack of unity weakens party efforts to build more affordable housing, rein in apartment rents, allow gay marriage and battle for more school aid from Albany.
My God, it sounds like the Labour Party (New Zealand)!
Imagine if the mayor were a REAL Republican.
What is the bet that Labour is not in power for much longer in New Zealand?
I don't know. New Zealand tilts left, but even in this extremely favourable condition using conventional wisdom (strong economy, government surpluses, strong support for government stance on foreign and defence and social policies, conservatives wobbling as usual in fact of MSM assault), the Left could only secure 50% of votes with the other 50% opposing it.
Maybe next term?
What is this "Democratic" challenger? I can't seem to find him on the ballot.
I can find a Democrat challenger but not a Democratic challenger.
The story doesn't mention the only Conservative and Republican in the race, Tom Ognibene. I'll take what satisfaction I can get at the apparent demise of the dem's NYC machine. FReepmail me if you want on or off my New York ping list.
Then the voters of New York would elect the Democrat.
In any two way race the winning candidate had to get at least a few votes to the opposite side of center. By definition 50 percent of the elegible voters in a race are to the left of center and 50 percent are to the right. To win in a tow way race it takes 51 percent of the votes.
For a Democrat that means getting at least 1 percent to the right of center and for a Republican it means getting one percent to the left of center.,
But center in liberal states is alot more liberal than the center of a conservative state. Typically a person well to the left of center in south carolina would be well to the right of center in New York.
What most of use would describe as a conservative would in New York have 99 percent of the voters too his left.
A conservative who could be expected to get 80 percent of the primary votes in South Carollina, would bet less than 3 percent of the primary votes in New York city.
Bloomburg is well to the left of nearly ever Freeper. But he is well to the right of the average New Yorker.
What Democrats tend to do in very liberal states is in many cases run very leftist candidates. Candidatea that can not get any votes to the right of the New York Center. Often times they can't get leftist voters close on the left side of center. While a candidate like Bloomberg can.
People on the right make the same mistake people on the left make.. The think the candidates that appeal to them would appeal to the majority of voters.
A successful movement never tries to elect all purists. Especially in states where they are a distict minority.
If democrats ever figure out that they should only run candidates that are not too liberal to win, they will rule the world. I have zero hopes of ever educating the right to only run candidates right enough to win.
A Republican candidate that is not too far right to win, is always preferable to a Democrat that is not too far left to lose. And is very preferable to a leftists who wins because the Repuplican candidate is way to right wing to win.
The transistion of states is a slow process. A Republican who is left enough to win will be just a tad to the right of the populus. Over his term he can move the electorate a tiny bit to the right. That means the replacement can be a tiny bit to the right of his predecessor. Over 30 to 50 years state can change from very much to hte left of the national average to only a little bit left of the natioal average.
It takes a long time to move an electorate. Those who think a leftist electorate will elect a right wing candidate are like those who think a right wing electorate will elect a leftist. It never happens.
Bloomberg could have spent 1/10th of what he did - and still won. The Dems are all children, until they field a candidate who appears to be an adult, people here are going to be reluctant to turn over the capital city of the world to a child to run.
The Rs need to start grooming a candidate for 2009 - Ray Kelly, Bernard Kerik, Bill Bratton.
Whoops! Mark Green, Mark Brown, Mark Purple... whatever... He's still never been elected to any office that ever mattered. And never should be. (No, Public Advocate doesn't count. And he'd make an awful attorney general)
LOL. Democrats championed "campaign finance reform". Now it bites off their a$$.
The fact is, as a NU Yawka myself, that Bloomberg has done a good job. He made some decisions that upset people, but overall, he is a common sense businessman who uses the same in his decision making process.
Ferrer is Dinkins redux.
A preposterous supposition from an enterprise doomed to be renowned as an irrelevant waste of trees,as if the re-election of King Bloomberg is nothing more than the voters distinction between hardcore communist and the regular NYC breed of socialist crook baby killing sex pervert.
Bloomberg is about as Republican as FDR, and hasn't done a thing to decrease the tax burden on those American citizens foolish enough to reside in NYC.
In 2005, morons comprise the largest voting block among democrats. And, supposedly, it is the moron vote that will get them back in office. Yep...
LOL! It's hard for me to see why he's popular (having lived in NYC until about 5 years ago), because he doesn't strike me as a very convinced Republican. But it clearly indicates that people really don't like whatever it is the Dems are selling.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.