What's the Matter With NYC?

and I must admit, New York politics puzzles me a bit. This kind of crap would never happen in San Francisco.

a chance of winning there.

It's sad to see Bloomberg getting a second term.

Now THAT's the kind of local politics I could support!

compared to police-state Giuliani? :puke:

demonstration in NYC under Bloomberg than it was under Giuliani.

Bloomberg is pretty much a non-political mayor, doing the job he ran to do. And yeah, he is a lot better than Giuliani AND a lot of us think he's a lot better than Ferrer who is, after all, just another hyped up political hack.

A city that looks to people like Ferrer as political saviors and leaders would really be a city in trouble. Do we really need more of the same old, same old, just because it has a "democrat" label stuck on it?

I, for one, thought we were supposed to be voting on issues and so forth.

A recent Harvard University study disclosed that only 38 percent of our New York City school children graduate on time. The picture is even worse for African-American and Hispanic students, who graduate on time 32 and 30 percent of the time, respectively.

Only about 18 percent of New York students earn a Regents diploma--including 9 percent of African-Americans and 10 percent of Hispanics--indicating a system that is failing to provide too many children with the skills they need.

http://www.ferrer2005.com/main.cfm?actionId=globalShowStaticContent&screenKey=engNews&htmlId=3227

How can you support a mayor who isn't doing anything about this? And why fall back on the lame "political hack" excuse. That's what I always hear when somebody wants to vote for someone they know they really shouldn't be voting for. We've got to have Democratic voices out there and winning NYC ought to be the place to start. If they're all political hacks anyway, at least choose the one who isn't going to further the Republican agenda.

And what is the deal about Ferrer being a "political hack"? ( It's not just you... lot's of people are bandying this around along with "machine politician".)

Ferrer acutally came-up through the reform ranks of the Bronx DEM organization. ( produced Robert Abrams, Herman Badillo and others). He and it *opposed* the corrupt DEM regular organization... the leader of which, Stanley Friedman, ultimately went to jail in the 1980's. To the best of my recollection,( I live in the Bronx) Ferrer was ALWAYS on the outs with and in opposition to the regular organization.

This "machine politician" business should be relegated to the category of urban mythology unless people can make a case for it being applied in the case of Ferrer. So far I've yet to hear any substantiation.

Yet it is repeated and the myth persists. Makes it appear as if people are looking for an acceptable reason to support Bloomberg.

petition so that we could protest the Iraq war (2003), flip flops on social issues as to appease both the city and the satanic cult (the GOP) that he belongs too. :eyes:

Bloomberg is a scumbag, PERIOD.

this gem to the NY forum?

Should be required reading for people trying to persuade themselves that Bloomberg is somehow better than he actually is.

Bloomberg was a Democrat before he ran for mayor; the only reason he switched Parties was because it would be easier for him to win the Republican Primary. People from outside of NYC get all caught up on the (R) after his name, but Bloomberg's policies really aren't that conservative; if he were on the national scene he would probably be considered a moderate Dem.
No national Republican figure would get the endorsement of the majority of labor unions, get endorsed by NARAL, oppose the nomination of John Roberts, and march in the Gay Pride Parade - Bloomberg has done all these things. Being a Republican in New York is simply different from being a Republican everywhere else in the country.

Just because Bloomberg is a member of the same party as Bush, should not be held against him. Hell, Paul Wellstone and Zell Miller were from the same Party - it's only a label.

I don't know who I'll vote for mayor; I have reservations about both Bloomberg and Ferrer. However, it would be stupid to vote for anyone to vote for Ferrer just because he is a "Democrat" while Bloomberg is a "Republican."

But NYC deserves better than a pretend pro-choice ( he didn't know that Bush was going to pack the court with anti-choice justices? Uh-huh. Really dedicated to the idea of choice.) and a pretend pro-gay rights mayor ( see the Village Voice article posted in the NY Forum re Bloomberg's machinations and maneuvering around this issue.).

Aside from the fact that he's not really pro-choice, that he's not really pro-gay rights, that he's pro-war, that he's pro-Bush, that he's anti-constitution, that he contributes $$$ to republican conservativces all over the country....he's "really" a Democrat.