but that is such complete nonsense that it represents nothing less than a massive failure in messaging by the campaign.

Dan Squadron is not a Bloomberg Democrat. He does not want to "privatize" our schools. I mean, really, do some people even bother reading what the man is saying before they form their opinions?

Here's what's happening: we Progressives are so used to having our guys run god-damn fucking abysmally incompetent and lazy and impoverished campaigns that when someone actually works his butt off, we assume that that's just not the way Progressives run their campaigns, so he can't be one of us. I mean, heaven forfend that someone actually get elected, instead of running around striking insipid poses and spouting lame-ass vapid rhetoric at whomever isn't smart or quick enough to get away. That's what progressive campaigns in New York City look like, period, and I'm tired of it. Maybe that's good enough for you and Daniels M & J, but you are being had, plain and simple. You're being played just like you were in the Dahroug race.

Squadron is being backed by the WFP. He's one of the most exciting candidates running this cycle in this state. Connor has the enthusiastic backing of Gatemouth. He's now being primaried two cycles in a row by people fed up with what he has on offer. And along the way, he's being out-worked and out-smarted by a kid half his age. And the only people upset about that are some blog lefties dismayed by a competent campaign and hired hacks like my friend Gatemouth, who has his own unstated reasons for taking sides here. What more do you really need to know?

Squadron has been a supporter and apologist for Bloomberg's privatization of our schools, something Joy and I have had to suffer through and which led to a huge fiasco in pre-K registration this very year thanks to outsourcing to a private company in Pennsylvania. Squadron was part of this process and has supported it consistently. Sorry, but when someone brags about his participation in the Bloomberg "reform" of our schools I can't help buy cringe being part of a family that has had to navagate those reforms. So far successfully, but Joy was set back months in her graduate work because she had to take so much time off for the Middle School application process, something working class parents could never do.

Sorry Michael, but what I am saying is not nonsense, but is serious dissatisfaction with a Bloomberg process that Squadron was an active part of and has expressed pride for when he spoke to us at IND. I said nothing about this race before hearing Squadron himself at IND and hearing the comments from people who heard him and Connor at CBID and DFNYC. Keep in mind that the very organizations at the forefront of the challenge against Connor in 2006, DFNYC and CBID, refused to endorse Squadron and came close to endorsing Connor (though both went for no endorsement) because of the very things I am mentioning. CBID was the center of Ken Diamondstone's campaign, and yet Connor almost won their endorsement this time around.

I have never been a Connor fan. I have been in direct opposition to some of what he has said and done. I was completely open to a challenge this time around, and certainly wasn't eager for another Diamondstone challenge. I respect you and what you do, but I think you are dead wrong about Squadron. And you know full well I do not take stands without thinking about them and hearing what a candidate personally says or says through proxies (as in the case of Towns).

As to WFP, they screwed up a chance to defeat a Republican in a State Senate race in 2006. They worship money, sometimes to good effect, sometimes not. I am happy they are out there, I love Tish James, and I even have donated to WFP. But they are more interested in the money a candidate can generate than they are the actual positions that candidate has, within some limits.

I was watching Connor back when you thought such local races were beneath your notice. If I thought Squadron was better than Connor I would have jumped on his candidacy in a second. I also have backed some winners I don't remember you backing, like Eric Adams who won by over 70% of the vote. I backed him early. Don't remember you interested in that race. I know full well the frequet lameness of the left and have railed against it before, to the point of being accused of trolling on Daily Kos. But that doesn't mean accepting someone whose hero seems to be Bloomberg from what I HEARD HIM SAY in person.

We are on opposite sides on this one. I assume we can do so amicably.

we can do this amicably, but that's not the point. What I'm seeing here is that some people, to my astonishment especially on this blog, have decided to blame Squadron for every failure caused by Bloomberg's experimentation with the schools system. That really opens up several avenues for debate, among them, can we ever afford to do such experiments - and mind you, the idea of getting competent private-sector contractors engaged where bureaucracies fail isn't all that controversial - when, in the event that they don't produce the results we want for our famously dysfunctional school system, the participants are smeared as being directly responsible for every such failure? If you try to change something, the results are not guaranteed.

But what really gets me, and I restate that it's nonsense, is that Squadron is running from the right. It's just not true. Connor, who I've pointed out before isn't a bad guy, is the one who voted to authorize Bloomberg's reforms. That gets lost here. He also takes PAC money, not a small matter.

Meanwhile, over what I think are trivial matters, all of you are missing the point. I'll say this again: would you rather stand with Gatemouth, who goes out of his way to viciously smear every Progressive for whatever spurious reason he convinces himself is relevant, or with the WFP? And don't even get me started on what I really think of the safacity of the organizations you mention.

It's really very simple to me, and that's what I posted: we Progressives are just so used to seeing our candidates run crappy campaigns that we get suspicious of competence, and Squadron is nothing if not competent. He's worked harder for that district than anyone probably ever has.

And that, in turn, makes him suspect, kind of like Obama is being attacked by the right for being too smart and too successful. It's exactly the same thing.

Problem is Squadron has bragged about his role in Bloomberg's "reforms." Being a part of Mayoral control and his role helping Schumer write his book were the two main accomplishments he emphasized when I heard him speak. So I based my decision, which started biased AGAINST Connor, on what Squadron and Connor themselves said, how they billed themselves.

As to Gatemouth, where he stands almost never influences where I stand one way or another. His endorsement or condemnation means little to me when I make a decision. In fact the main factor in my decisions are my own impressions of politicians when I meet them and hear them talk to and be questioned by groups. This is, in fact, why I find IND and CBID useful to me. IND is where most local politicans show up to make their pitch. CBID is less well respected, but they are tougher in their questioning of a candidate by a fair amount, so I get to see the candidate on the hot seat on the rare occasions I can be at CBID and hear the goings on. I also get a great deal of insight from my wife's view of candidates, often formed independent of my own. Only on rare occasions do we disagree (I endorsed Obama while she was still a Hillary person, though she came around eventually).

But IND and CBID are only a minor component of the equation. But next to my own personal opinion and my wife's impressions, endorsements also play a role in my decisions. So, and I may do this as a diary without comment just for people's info, here are the endorsements both list:

Squadron:
U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer • Working Families Party
UAW Region 9A • Downtown Independent Democrats • CWA District 1
The New York Hotel and Motel Trades Council and UNITE HERE! Local 23-25

Connor:
Lambda Independent Democrats, Gay and Lesbian Independent Democrats (GLID), Stonewall Democrats of New York City, UFCW Local 1500, Coalition for a District Alternative (CODA), Independent Neighborhood Democrats, Village Reform Democrats, Gramercy Stuyvesant Indepenent Democrats (GSID), Lower East Side Democrats, Harry S. Truman Democrats, Seneca Democratic Club, United Democratic Organization of Chinatown, Bridge and Tunnel Officers Benevolent Association, DC 37, New York City Board of Education Employees (Local 372), New York State Court Officers Association, United Food and Commercial Workers (Local 1500), Velmanette Montgomery (who I know and like), Eric Adams (who is precisely the kind of candidate the left can, and did, get behind and win big with), Jerrold Nadler (who I know, like, respect AND have issues with), Ed Towns (well...I think enough virtual ink has been wasted on him around here these days), Carolyn Maloney, Liz Krueger, Thomas Duane (who I have met and liked), Nydia Velazquez (who I know and like).

When I compare these, I find the impressions Joy and I formed re-enforced. I am comfortable siding with those Connor lists, more or less.

As to the lameness of the left...again, I have complained about this since 2005. But I don't see that as applying to this race. Neither candidate is my ideal candidate. Both are competent. Connor unquestionably is the smarter of the two (and I admit a bias for nerds). What is the answer for the left? So far I see them only winning in cases where they can form an alliance with either the mainstream of the party or with strong unions. Now I see how Squadron could fit that description...but in this race at this time he doesn't. Primarily he has big donors and Schumer. And it is the big donors who brought in WFP.

You ask if I want to side with Gatemouth or WFP. I ask if you want to side with Schumer and WFP or with Nadler, Velazquez, Adams, Montgomery, Lambda, Stonewall, etc. We are making separate choices but I know I for one am not basing my decision on Gatemouth.

We are different kinds of Democrats, who sometimes agree and sometimes not. But, at least give me credit for bringing the Dear/Yellen race to your attention.

Otherwise, I'll admit, that when you progressive divide, Connor excepted, I'm usually not to be found on your side.

Usually, the one I agree with is Bouldin.