Backlash reversed. IND Rebellion Against State Party Defeated
Last night's special Independent Neighborhood Democrats (IND) endorsement meeting ends the lengthy IND endorsement process for 2006. And it has been an exciting one. I am sure IND President, Karen Johnson, is glad to have it finally behind her!
In the last spate of endorsements I reported the surprising results that IND rebelled against the State Party Machine because of the thugguish, strong-arm tactics that the State party practice at the State Convention. District Leaders were threatened if they didn't toe the line on endorsements, and Eliot and Cuomo were forced down the throats of New York Democrats. In the case of Eliot, well, with all due respect to Suozzi, Eliot really is the only choice. In the case of Attorney General, Cuomo is the least qualified and least palatable of choices, making the State Party's tactics particularly galling.
Partly in rebellion against the State Party, IND endorsed Suozzi for Governor and Denise O'Donnell, arguably the most qualified candidate, for Attorney General. For a club that is sometimes criticized for opting for winners rather than the best candidate for their endorsement, this rebellion was a surprise and that particular meeting seemed to be kind of an exiting one for all. There seemed to be a sense of the little guy standing up to the bully and winning a small victory.
Well, the protest vote for Suozzi seemed to come more from dissatisfaction about Spitzer than from support of Suozzi because, shall we say, IND is not living up to its reputation for excellent petitioning when it comes to Suozzi. State level candidates are on separate petitions, so are not included on the IND slate petitions. Members are urged to carry state level petitions, but only do so if they feel like it. The large stack of untouched Suozzi petitions I saw last night shows that not many IND members have gone to bat for Suozzi.
The O'Donnell endorsement was different. There was a sense of rebellion, but there also was a sense of backing an excellent candidate. That excellent candidate dropped out the day after IND endorsed. Sean Patrick Malony had been a close second in that meeting's endorsement, but the withdrawal of O'Donnell meant IND had to have another meeting to endorse for Attorney General. That meeting happened last night.
Turnout was low. That of course meant that the candidate whose supporters made the most phone calls to get turn out got the endorsement. No candidates came (though Charlie King had been expected). Mark Green was barely even mentioned and sent no surrogate. Former State Senator and candidate for AG Karen Burstein spoke for Maloney and Matilda Cuomo (Mario's wife and Andrew's mother) spoke for her dear son.
Karen Burstein was magnificent. She reminded me of an old-style, fiery Jewish Socialist. She gave a passionate, inspiring speech that I loved. She outlined Maloney's qualifications, and they are lengthy, as an investigative attorney and as a member of the Clinton Administration.
Matilda Cuomo...well, her proud mother speech was endearing, though somewhat marred by the bruiser body guard who accompanied her. That bruiser's presence may have been the reason why the club President did not keep her to the allotted time limit and let Matilda ramble on for I don't know how long. Much of the speech had nothing to do with Andrew Cuomo but was all about Matilda and Mario. All very nice and very charming, but not quite what people wanted. Ultimately, the little she mentioned of Andrew was how good he was as head of HUD. Great. So now I will eagerly vote for him for head of HUD. But very little was said about his qualifications for AG.
Karen Johnson was in top form. Not only were her jokes funnier than usual (I say with trepidation lest I enourage her to make more jokes!), but her hard ball question regarding Andrew Cuomo's lack of actual qualifications was not only an excellent question getting to the heart of the problem with Cuomo, but it was phrased tactfully and excellently. Of course Matilda really simply reiterated how qualified Cuomo was for being head of HUD, but the question was great.
Buddy Scotto, who was the lone voice speaking against the last meeting's rebellion, had done his work well. He had presumably made some phone calls and his people came. I don't think either Karen Burstein's or Matilda Cuomo's speeches swayed anyone. The Cuomo contigent had turned out and Cuomo got the endorsement on the first ballot with Sean Patrick Maloney coming in second. Mark Green got very few votes.
The rebellion against the State Machine is over, crushed by the Tories in the ranks led by Buddy Scotto. The Irish candidates made the best showing last time, but the Italian got it in the end.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
2006 Elections | Attorney General | Candidate | Elections | Government | Governor | Politics | New York | Andrew Cuomo | Democratic Party
Yes and no
Submitted by mole333 on 30 June 2006 - 5:03pm.
The Suozzi vote at IND was largely a protest. But no one would consider an endorsement of Denise O'Donnell or Mark Green or Sean Patrick Maloney as "just" a protest vote. Protest against the State Thugs was a part of the original anti-Cuomo sentiments, but no one would argue that the other three candidates weren't solidly qualified. In fact, the candidate whose qualifications are most called into question are Cuomo's! Had turnout been higher last night, Cuomo would not have gotten the endorsement and I think most IND members would be proud of going against Cuomo. Most are not so happy with their endorsement of Suozzi, but most would have been happy with a vote against Cuomo. Just shows that those who show up are those who win the day.
Second, IND is already taken seriously. Not so much state-wide, but in Brooklyn certainly. They don't have to prove themselves. Current events not withstanding, they are an influential, generally reform, mainstream group. A protest vote from them DOES mean something.
As for the less mainstream groups, they do have something to prove. But that doesn't necessarily mean endorse all winners the way WFP tends to do these days. What it means is that if they do make a protest endorsement, they need to try even harder to get their members petitioning and getting out the vote to make that protest a strong one.
brigite bardotsvs
Submitted by brigite bardotsvs (not verified) on 15 July 2006 - 2:40am.
Geben mir bitte eine Brotchensvs
MickeyRourkenbq
Submitted by MickeyRourkenbq (not verified) on 14 July 2006 - 8:52pm.
Geben mir bitte eine Brotchennbq
MickeyRourkenbq
Submitted by MickeyRourkenbq (not verified) on 14 July 2006 - 8:52pm.
Geben mir bitte eine Brotchennbq
protest endorsements
I think groups needs to be careful when they do "protest endorsements" This is because endorsements can go a long way towards getting the establishment to take you seriously as a group. If you are constantly endorsing protest candidates that have no chance to win, you risk creating the perception that you are a fringe group, not a group that is aspiring to influence and credibility.
Earlier this week, DFNYC-- of which I am a longstanding member-- endorsed Jonathan Tasini for U.S. Senate over Hillary Clinton. This was an anti-Hillary anti-war protest vote and nothing more. I doubt even those who voted for Tasini really think that Clinton has not done a good job in general as a Senator, or thinks that Tasini is really qualified for that job. I cringed when I saw the results because I want DFNYC to be taken seriously and become an influential mainstream group within the party. Yet what will the party establishment think when they see DFNYC has endorsed Tasini? They might think DFNYC is an anti-war protest group or a group of Hillary haters, but they would be unlikely to think of DFNYC as a credible mainstream group whose endorsement is important and valued, because the group made an endorsement based on one issue, or on personality. Or worse made an endorsement based on disliking one of the candidates as a candidate in a future race.
I have no doubt the DFNYC turnout was low, I didn't even vote myself because I didn't attend the mixer that was the "senate event" and thought the vote was a foregone conclusion anyway. I was shocked when Tasini won overwhelmingly. Obviously Tasini brought a lot of people to the event and the low eventual vote count skewed the results.
It just shows how important it is that CBID and DFNYC and NDM and every other group take their endorsements seriously because every endorsement affects how outside people see the group.