Issue 32: NYC LOCAL ACTION

New York…we have a problem. Our mayor really in no way represents us. He represents developers, millionaires and Republicans, not your average working class New Yorker. He tries to prevent us from exercising our freedoms of speech and assembly, he excludes us from the decision making meetings on development that affect our neighborhoods, and he never, never stands up for NYC against the verbal and financial assaults that Pataki and Bush wage on us. Most recently, his only response to Karl Rove’s exploitation of New York’s 9/11 dead was to make a general statement that no one should politicize 9/11. Well, I am sorry Mr. Bloomberg, but the Republicans have been politicizing it since the moment it happened and you have NEVER called them on it.

Everyone I know predicts that we will re-elect this man who doesn’t in any way represent us. Why? I hear many people say that the Dem candidates just aren’t no good! Well, I think we DO have some good Dem candidates. I think ANY of the Dem candidates would be better at leading and representing NYC than Mr. Billionaire, Developer friend Bloomberg. There is no question that none of the Dem candidates really stands out as perfect. None of them has yet connected with the voters. But that doesn’t mean we should be abandoning them and satisfying ourselves with Mr. Bloomberg! The following is drawn from comments I made on Daily Gotham:

By now I have heard three of the four Dem candidates, and heard two of them more than once. I think there is no question that so far they have failed to spark much interest among New Yorkers. There is a big problem there. But, I do not see them as having no message. In fact I have rather liked the message of at least two of them...more than liked, I have thought they kicked ass and one of them I found extremely inspiring all three times I have heard him.

What is going wrong? Part of it is that politics is still very racial in NYC and this applies far more for Dem candidates than Repub candidates. I guess NYC expects and accepts white candidates from the Repubs, but often demands ethnicity from its Dem candidates. Each Dem candidate has a huge uphill battle getting even noticed outside his or her particular cultural group. It takes a real orator and some connections within different communities to get your message out there. All of the Dem candidates have a lot going for them, but none is a great orator, and connections aren't being made.

Part of the problem is that, in some ways, at least two of the candidates may be running TOO MUCH on message alone and not enough on charisma. Wiener and Miller are appealing mostly to our reason and not enough to our heart. I am personally very attracted to a good message and that is why I like two of the candidates a great deal...not just as being better than Bloomberg, but being excellent in and of themselves.

Part of the problem is the same things Democrats do almost every election at all levels. Democrats spend more time dissing ourselves than in dissing the opposition. Republicans rarely do that! Instead they hammer away at their message more or less in unison. I do not advocate that kind of blindness, but I do advocate a more positive attitude among ourselves. It is true that some candidates don't deserve our support (and this time I am not referring to the mayor’s race, but Zell Miller comes to mind...). But I have found in many elections going all the way back to Mondale that a really excellent, intelligent, caring, visionary candidate will be put down by his own party as not being good enough. I have found that since the media doesn't do a good job of presenting candidates, I have to find out what a candidate is like myself. Often when I do so, I am impressed and I find it hard to believe why so few Democrats see what a good candidate the person is. To use Mondale as an example again, did anyone talk about how he led the Civil Rights movement in Congress? Did anyone talk about his instrumental role in the Camp David talks? Did anyone talk about how he had been called the "strongest vice President this nation has ever had" and it wasn't meant as damning with faint praise? No! Everyone just picked up the media line that he was boring. So he lost big even though he was one of the best Dem candidates ever.

Al Gore also suffered both from his handlers and from the fact that few even in his own party bothered looking beyond the image the media portrayed. Yet I think he would have been among the best, most environmentally aware and active presidents we have ever had. But instead, we complained about him and so he won…er, I mean lost…well, okay he won but Bush was allowed to steal the election.

I don't know what to say to help change this image that the Dem candidates for mayor are somehow incompetent or lack a message. I don't think that this is true at all. They have indeed failed to connect with the people. In some cases I think that is due to personality. Ferrer, for example, comes off condescending, even though I think he has a lot going for him as well. In other cases I think it is harder to understand. Miller really impressed me as having a message, with considerable detail, and he communicated it well. And he is out there among the people in a way that the other candidates haven't been. I see him everywhere and he seems willing to talk to any group of any size.

I think the mayoral hopefuls do need to get their acts together. But I have begun to think that the voters also have to get THEIR acts together because nationwide for decades now voters have passed over superb candidates for dingbats like Reagan and Bush and Bloomberg who are much, MUCH more removed from the world of the common American, yet manage to use the media and their connections better to get elected. Few candidates seem to combine BOTH the skills it takes to get elected with the skills it takes to kick ass in the position they are running for. Looking at the Brooklyn DA race, the best-connected candidates (Hynes and Sampson) and the most charismatic candidate to reform-minded folks (Peters) are in my opinion lousy since they are, respectively, absent, corrupt, and too slick and inexperienced to be good DAs. The two best candidates I know of, who actually have the skills, passion, and vision to be superb, honest DAs (Kriss and Wooten) are largely ignored by the voters. So they can't get the money to put up a good fight. It is sad! And it is something I am finding very frustrating as someone who is fighting hard to get the really good people (rather than simply the most electable people) elected.

Democrats spent a great deal of time dissing Mondale, Kerry, Dean and Gore, yet the bottom line is they were all superb leaders who would have been far better presidents than those they ran against. It is good that we have high standards for our politicians, but are we killing ourselves because we sometimes can't see that a candidate does meet our high standards?

The mayoral candidates DO need to get their acts together. But so do we because without enthusiasm from us, they have no chance and we are left with Bush, Pataki, Bloomberg...and a whole line of truly horrible people who don't come anywhere near the high standards we set. So I ask you to help me get rid of the guy who won’t stand up for us. I ask you to help get rid of Bloomberg.

Please get active in your local DFA meetup and/or Dem club (see below). And, please check out and get involved with BOOT Bloomberg out of Town, a non-partisan anti-Bloomberg group.

And let’s get a REAL New Yorker in the mayor’s office!
A way to get hooked into any NYC candidate’s efforts (including mayor, Public Advocate and Brooklyn DA), please sign up on the Democratic Leadership for the 21st Century of New York’s website.