From Leonie Haimson
Bloomberg’s slim victory, with only 51% of the vote despite spending $80--$100 million or more (we won’t know the full amount until a month from now) is a moral victory for the other side.
No matter what spin comes out of Wolfson’s mouth, the Bloomberg camp was shocked at the narrowness of the win. His money may have allowed him to continue on for a third term; but as Abraham Lincoln said, you cannot fool all the people all the time. I wonder if those who sat on their hands feel any remorse.
See the following articles from the Daily News, starting with the indispensable Juan Gonzalez, one guy that the mayor has never managed to fool. Excerpt:
The mayor will still call this a democratic victory - final proof that New Yorkers endorse his naked power grab last year to overturn term limits.
He fools no one.
In the midst of the city's worst economic crisis in 60 years, Bloomberg spent money like a million drunken sailors to buy his job for the third time. Quite simply, he buried democracy under mountains of cash - because he could.
See also Juan’s and Errol Louis’s statements on education:
Juan: - “The mayor's biggest claim has been improving the school system. But as more independent reviews come out of his reforms - from charter schools to improved test scores - proof mounts that much of the progress is smoke and mirrors. City test scores could prove to be as reliable as all those Triple A-rated subprime mortgages Bloomberg's Wall Street friends peddled.”
Errol Louis: “When it comes to schools, the department of which the mayor is most proud, there's a gap between the statistical improvements Bloomberg touted, and the perception of parents and educators who think that students are learning how to take tests rather than how to think and thrive. “
Empty voting machines tell story: The disgusted & disaffected
Wednesday, November 4th 2009, 4:00 AM
The seven empty machines in the auditorium of Middle School 117X in the South Bronx said all you needed to know about this year's mayoral contest.
By 9 a.m., not a single voter could be spotted at any of them. Several machines had registered barely a dozen voters in three hours, and during the next half hour no one would walk in to cast a ballot.
"The low turnout is surprising," said Kathleen Larkins, one of the veteran election coordinators.
It was the same story from East New York in Brooklyn to Bushwick, to Washington Heights: poor voters, those most disaffected by the Bloomberg years, stayed away from the polls in droves.
His opponent Bill Thompson, despite a lackluster and poorly financed campaign, almost managed to pull off a stunning upset.
No doubt, many voters rebelled against the constant harangue of Bloomberg flyers and those nasty Bloomberg commercials and phone calls and just wanted them to end.
The mayor will still call this a democratic victory - final proof that New Yorkers endorse his naked power grab last year to overturn term limits.
He fools no one.
In the midst of the city's worst economic crisis in 60 years, Bloomberg spent money like a million drunken sailors to buy his job for the third time. Quite simply, he buried democracy under mountains of cash - because he could.
Mike Filippou, a former worker at the Stella D'Oro factory, was one those in the Bronx who voted for Thompson.
A Connecticut private equity firm shuttered Filippou's factory a few weeks ago. The closing followed a yearlong struggle between the plant's owner and its unionized workers. The owners wanted to drastically cut pay and benefits. When they couldn't succeed, they closed the plant and sold the brand to an Ohio company.
"Bloomberg never lifted a finger to save our jobs," Filippou said. "At least Thompson tried."
Governing during this third term will be far tougher than the mayor and his aides ever imagined.
Watch for key accomplishments Bloomberg has touted to blow up, much as happened during Ed Koch's third term.
The likeliest areas:
1) Computerization of government. Under Bloomberg, city agencies spent billions for new computer systems that haven't delivered what they promised and have exploded in cost - beginning with the new 911 system. Many of those contracts were awarded with little or no bidding. It's a scandal waiting to be unearthed.
2) Land development. Bloomberg's people spent years giving favored developers public spaces, city subsidies, and friendly zoning for huge megaprojects - many of which stalled in the economic slowdown. The price will now come due.
3) Education reform. The mayor's biggest claim has been improving the school system. But as more independent reviews come out of his reforms - from charter schools to improved test scores - proof mounts that much of the progress is smoke and mirrors. City test scores could prove to be as reliable as all those Triple A-rated subprime mortgages Bloomberg's Wall Street friends peddled.
So let Bloomberg version 3.0 begin. He sure paid enough to barely beat Bill Thompson.
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/election_2009/2009/11/04/2009-11-04_empty_voting_machines_tell_the_story_the_disgusted__disaffected.html#ixzz0VuG2fdMo
Mayor Bloomberg's narrow win means he must build groundwork for next mayor
Wednesday, November 4th 2009, 4:00 AM
http://www.nydailyn
Honda/Getty
Mayor Bloomberg won his third term, but now much make sure things are set for whomever succeeds him.
In the end, lightning did not strike for Bill Thompson: he could not overcome Mayor Bloomberg's billions and the power of incumbency.
Still, Bloomberg's surprisingly narrow election to a third term means he must go beyond his status-quo campaign promise to "keep the progress going."
Instead, he should focus on the parts of his legacy that go beyond the policy successes endlessly trumpeted in one commercial after another.
That starts with dropping the pretense of being above and beyond politics.
The hundreds of millions Bloomberg spent greasing palms to bend laws, secure endorsements and buy loyalty - or, at least, silence - make him a one-man political organization, better funded and more disciplined than any county machine.
He has proved his ability to beat the city's Democratic organization three times over, against white, Latino and black candidates - Mark Green, Fernando Ferrer and Bill Thompson, respectively.
We don't know if Bloomberg's Party of One has staying power. He has anointed no successors, transformed no political institutions and created no lasting infrastructure to carry on beyond his time in office.
If the main rationale behind a third Bloomberg term was to prevent the city from slipping back into the clutches of Democratic orthodoxy, then the mayor must ensure that he hasn't merely postponed the day of reckoning by 48 months.
He should begin grooming and supporting a farm team of public leaders across the city.
Some might be candidates for state and city office, others might be commissioners and agency heads recruited for a future in electoral politics.
Preparing others for the public spotlight would begin convincing skeptics that the Bloomberg years were more than an exercise in ego.
It would also allow for new approaches to problems whose solutions have eluded Bloomberg for the past eight years.
We clearly need an entirely new approach to the record homelessness that the mayor had vowed to cut by two-thirds.
When it comes to schools, the department of which the mayor is most proud, there's a gap between the statistical improvements Bloomberg touted, and the perception of parents and educators who think that students are learning how to take tests rather than how to think and thrive.
When it comes to public safety, more of the same isn't good enough in neighborhoods where shootings are on the rise and a generation of teens are being doubly traumatized - witnessing horrific gang, drug and domestic violence and then being told that the city has never been safer.
Above all, we need to stop the middle-class flight that led 1.1 million people to leave an increasingly unaffordable city on Bloomberg's watch.
It's one thing to marshal stats and slogans for a campaign, and quite another to write a new chapter in the history books. Let's hope Bloomberg is wise enough to tell the difference.
Tense night for victorious Mayor Mike Bloomberg's camp as results are far closer than expected
Wednesday, November 4th 2009, 8:41 AM
Mayor Bloomberg celebrated his victory Tuesday night in the same way he achieved it: with lavish spending and an obsessive attention to detail.
But the luxe party he threw at the Sheraton New York turned into a longer - and tenser - evening than expected when the vote count showed the cakewalk turning into a tightrope.
Cheers that went up when NBC projected the mayor an early winner died away as the vote counters uncovered a squeaker and potential upset.
As thousands of supporters milled around waiting for a victory speech they expected hours earlier, Bloomberg aides sat glumly in an anteroom staring into their BlackBerries as the embarrassingly close results trickled in.
"This is not what they expected," a Bloomberg campaign consultant fretted. "People are going to think it's a waste of $100 million."
Another aide sorrowfully checked his iPhone, muttering, "This is hardly a mandate."
Campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson, who can spin any failure into smashing success, declared it was "the most difficult environment for incumbents since 1994" and called Bloomberg's narrow win "an enormous victory."
"Given the climate, Mike Bloomberg won and won big," Wolfson said.
The mayor's victory speech made no mention of his narrow escape. The campaign kept all news off the TVs in the ballroom, even avoiding showing Thompson's concession speech.
The party was as over the top as the mayor's $35,000-an-hour campaign.
Revelers had the choice of wine and beer at six open bars.
Various food tables were laden with hot pretzels, hot dogs, pizza, cookies and brownies.
Movie theater-style poppers dispensed bags of freshly popped corn.
Tuxedoed waiters passed trays of minisliders and regular hot dogs, which must have been the city's priciest - beating even Yankee Stadium's wieners.
Big TVs scattered throughout the room flashed images of the mayor campaigning in different neighborhoods with various ethnic groups.
Bloomberg's slick campaign ads played one last time.
An 11-piece band played soul and rock tunes, and Ed Koch kept the crowd going.
Armies of operatives in headsets scurried around, ensuring the elaborate production went smoothly.
Nothing was left to chance: the campaign even had hand-painted banners on hand to suggest a grass-roots campaign.
In wake of 5% loss to Mayor Bloomberg, Dems left asking, 'What if we'd done more for Bill Thompson?'
Wednesday, November 4th 2009, 2:41 AM
The most nagging question among Bill Thompson's supporters on Wednesday is this: What if fellow Democrats had actually backed - rather than abandoned - him?
In the end, despite polls showing him trailing by 18 points in the final days of the campaign, Thompson lost to Mayor Bloomberg and his $100 million campaign by a mere 5 points.
So what if?
What if President Obama - instead of delivering a squishy, nonendorsement-
"There are a number of people around Bill who felt that he was let down and that, yes, it could have helped if President Obama had campaigned with him," one senior Thompson adviser said last night. "But that's not who Bill Thompson is. He has not been bitter."
Bitter or not, the question remains.
What if Vice President Biden, in town Monday to raise money for other Democrats, had taken 10 minutes to say something nice about the controller?
What if City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, instead of sitting on her hands for months, used the power of her purse strings to rustle up some support for Thompson?
What if the Rev. Al Sharpton, who was happy to stand onstage last night at Thompson's concession speech, had stood a little closer during the campaign?
What if the more powerful city unions like the United Federation of Teachers and SEIU Local 1199, Democratic check writers or for-hire strategists had stayed true?
"A lot of Democratic donors who sat on their wallets are kicking themselves tonight," said Rep. Anthony Weiner, who bowed out of the race for mayor early on, but did what he could for Thompson down the stretch.
One senior campaign official conceded no one thought "we could come that close."
"Could we have gotten more support, from people who endorsed and the party itself? Yes," said the official. "We won't know what would [have] put us over the top, but it would have helped - extremely."
Others were not sure anything could have saved Thompson, who never exuded the passion voters want in a mayor.
"It wouldn't have done a thing, just like Bloomberg's money didn't make a difference," said Hunter College's political Prof. Ken Sherrill. "People who have lived in New York know what their lives are like and whether they are satisfied with Bloomberg."
No comments:
Post a Comment