Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Should Obama, et al. really be dictating who can run for GOV in NYS?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 10:32 AM
Original message
Should Obama, et al. really be dictating who can run for GOV in NYS?
Edited on Sun Sep-20-09 10:34 AM by Smarmie Doofus
And... are we to understand that Paterson's failure to to appt. a laughably unqualified intimate of the President is at the heart of the WH dissatisfaction?

The story suggests as much. Yes there are low poll numbers for Paterson but poll numbers can change. In a heartbeat - in this media-mad milleu... i.e. NYC. Example: Bloomberg zoomed from a 12 pt lead in the last Mayoral go-round to a thirty-point lead in the aftermath of a "terrorist scare that never existed" in early fall of that year ( 2005?)

Anyway... some of us dues-paying, DNC supporting members in NYS might prefer to have a primary. Don't we have a say?


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/20/nyregion/20paterson.html?hp


WASHINGTON — President Obama has sent a request to Gov. David A. Paterson that he withdraw from the New York governor’s race, fearing that Mr. Paterson cannot recover from his dismal political standing, according to two senior administration officials and a New York Democratic operative with direct knowledge of the situation.


The decision to ask Mr. Paterson to step aside was proposed by political advisers to Mr. Obama, but approved by the president himself, one of the administration officials said.

“Is there concern about the situation in New York? Absolutely,” the second administration official said Saturday evening. “Has that concern been conveyed to the governor? Yes.”

The administration officials and the Democratic operative spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions with the governor were intended to be confidential.

The president’s request was conveyed to the Mr. Paterson by Representative Gregory W. Meeks, a Queens Democrat, who has developed a strong relationship with the Obama administration, they said.

The move against a sitting Democratic governor represents an extraordinary intervention into a state political race by the president, and is a delicate one, given that Mr. Paterson is one of only two African-American governors in the nation.

But Mr. Obama’s political team and other party leaders have grown increasingly worried that the governor’s unpopularity could drag down Democratic members of Congress in New York, as well as the Democratic-controlled Legislature, in next fall’s election.

Mr. Paterson and his aides did not respond to repeated requests for comment Saturday. Mr. Paterson arrived on Long Island Saturday evening to attend a dinner, but walked hurriedly past a reporter who tried to ask him about the White House request.

An aide to Mr. Meeks said the congressman could not be reached Saturday.

“The message the White House wanted to send — that it wants Paterson to step aside — was delivered,” said the Democratic operative,, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions were intended to be confidential. “He is resistant.”

The general election is more than a year away, but Mr. Obama and his political team are moving now in part because of signals from Rudolph W. Giuliani, the former New York City mayor, that he may run for governor, according to Democrats who have spoken with White House officials. Many Democratic leaders believe that Mr. Giuliani’s presence at the top of the Republican ticket could spark enthusiasm among his party’s voters, who might otherwise have little desire to go to the polls.

Leading Democrats in the state have expressed deep concern about Mr. Paterson’s ability to hold on to the office. But most have been wary of openly suggesting he step aside.

The White House move could give them cover to abandon Mr. Paterson and endorse another candidate, most likely Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo, who has been debating for months whether to take on Mr. Paterson in a primary.

Mr. Paterson, who was elevated to governor from lieutenant governor in March 2008, in the wake of Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s resignation after a prostitution scandal, announced in October that he would seek a full term.

But in the intervening months, White House officials have watched the deteriorating political fortunes of Mr. Paterson with growing alarm, as his popularity plunged and he committed a series of missteps that raised questions about his ability to govern.

In addition, the relationship between Mr. Obama and Mr. Paterson has been shaky, dating to the governor’s selection of a replacement for Hillary Rodham Clinton, who resigned from the Senate to become secretary of state. White House officials had received assurances from Mr. Paterson that he would not pick Kirsten E. Gillibrand, then a little-known Democratic congresswoman from a heavily Republican district outside of Albany, according to a prominent Democrat who discussed the matter with a senior White House official.

The White House and Democratic House leaders were concerned that her sudden departure from the House would give Republicans a prime opportunity to reclaim the seat. Aides to the president conveyed those concerns to the governor, according to Democrats who have discussed the matter with Mr. Obama’s aides.

In the end, Mr. Paterson selected Ms. Gillibrand anyway, infuriating White House officials and Democratic leaders in Washington. Making matters worse, the governor also publicly snubbed Caroline Kennedy, a close personal friend and ally of Mr. Obama’s, who announced in December her wish to be chosen as Mrs. Clinton’s replacement, but then withdrew her name from consideration in January, citing personal reasons.

The concerns of Obama aides deepened last month, when the governor, speaking on a radio talk show in New York, suggested that criticism of him was racially motivated and that Mr. Obama would soon suffer similar attacks. Mr. Obama’s advisers, who have long sought to defuse the issue of race, found the comments inflammatory and expressed their displeasure directly to the Paterson camp.

The move by the White House will probably bring new attention to Mr. Cuomo, now the most popular Democratic figure in the state. While only 30 percent of voters in a Quinnipiac poll last month approved of the job that Mr. Paterson was doing, 74 percent approved of Mr. Cuomo’s job performance.

The situation between Mr. Cuomo and Mr. Paterson has been a complicated one. Mr. Cuomo is still haunted by the fierce backlash he stirred in 2002 when he decided to run in the Democratic primary for governor against H. Carl McCall, the first serious black candidate for governor.

Now, Mr. Cuomo effectively has the blessing of the nation’s first black president to run against New York’s first black governor. That will probably neutralize any criticism he may face among the governor’s prominent black allies, including Representative Charles B. Rangel of Harlem, who warned this year that the party would become racially polarized if Mr. Cuomo took on Mr. Paterson.

Angela Macropoulos contributed reporting in New York.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
secondwind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 10:33 AM
Response to Original message
1. You have a say, but it might not amount to anything if things get really close (bad).....I
think Obama is doing the right thing here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 10:35 AM
Response to Original message
2. Certainly, Sir

My preference is for a Party which acts as cohesive bloc, on a national scale. The President is the Party's leader, when in office, and he, and the Party's lesser office-holders, should act like it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #2
27. Hear, Hear!
This principal seems self evident.

:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cherokeeprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #2
75. When I read "acts as a cohesive bloc", my first thought was
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dionysus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 09:03 AM
Response to Reply #2
91. but Sir! we must be mad about this and insist patterson run, and lose in a landslide, like he will!
:sarcasm:

if patterson was compentant and stood a chance at election, this wouldn't have happened. the dumbass who leaked this to the press should get a talkign to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #2
120. Yup. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 10:37 AM
Response to Original message
3. Obama already dictated his choices for Senate to Democrats in Colorado and Pennsylvania
and they in turn should reject Obama's interference in their respective states' affairs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #3
29. As should we... I'm thinking. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #3
48. Well if the President dictated something along those lines
Andrew Romanoff and Joe Sestak clearly didn't get the message.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalmuse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 10:38 AM
Response to Original message
4. He's sort of the head of the Democratic Party, so yes, but...
Paterson has a right to ignore him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Obama supports Arlan Specter in Pennsylvania primary race
and has thrown his support behind Bennett in Colorado, who is facing a progressive challenger in primary. If Obama stays true to Stalinist form, he will probably support Evan Bayh against his Democratic challenger in the primary.

People in middle America don't like being told who to pick in their primaries, particularly from people in the Beltway, President or not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bumblebee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 10:38 AM
Response to Original message
5. a. yes b. the post really should not be this long. just a link and one paragraph
are usually enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 10:41 AM
Response to Original message
6. In effect he is the leader of Democratic Party
His input is of value for his concern of who has the best chances of winning the election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #6
11. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
stray cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #11
14. You really need to read some history!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spiritual_gunfighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #11
17. Obama is acting like Stalin?
Glenn Beck is that you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. Stalin? Extreme hyperbole. Obama is stating a preference, not dictating.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spiritual_gunfighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #18
26. Tossing rhetoric such as comparing Obama to Stalin
doesn't make the winguts on the right look very sane, it looks worse when the wingnuts on the left do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #11
19. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #19
24. Obama has thrown his support behind Arlan Specter in Pennsylvania
and put pressure on the Pennsylvania Democrats to not mount a primary challenge to Specter. There is nothing democratic about that!

This has become a pattern with Obama, and it must be challenged.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #24
30. So go challenge it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal_Stalwart71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #24
40. I will definitely be driving a couple of hours to PA to work as hard as possible for
Joe Sestak. That's a promise!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChimpersMcSmirkers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #11
28. Stalin? I thought he was Hitler or the last of the Romanovs. I'm confused.
Edited on Sun Sep-20-09 12:24 PM by ChimpersMcSmirkers
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigwillq Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #6
63. Who is the leader of the DEM party when a Repuke
is in the white house?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rvablue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #63
100. The chairman of the national party as far as electoral politics go.
And the Senate and House leadership, as far as policy goes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Historic NY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 10:43 AM
Response to Original message
8. Why not Paterson keeps shooting himself in the foot...
http://www.1010wins.com/Paterson-Vetoes-Bills-Aimed-to-Protect-Disabled/5242895

Several bills intended to protect the disabled from discrimination and abuse were among the 18 that New York Gov. David Paterson vetoed Thursday.

For example, Paterson vetoed a bill to require polling places to meet federal accessibility guidelines for the disabled within six months. He said Thursday it would create an unreasonable financial burden for places that currently have federal waivers for the requirements.

Another vetoed bill would have increased penalties against caregivers who endanger the welfare of an incompetent or physically disabled person, making it a felony.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #8
33. Apparently Cuomo is Obama's designated candidate.
1. Has Andrew explained why and how he would have handed these specific problems differently?

2. Are we sure that he WOULD have handled them differently at all?

3. Are these ( those you cite above) the reasons that Obama wants Paterson out?

I don't know about either of the first two but # 3 is not likely the case.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Historic NY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #33
69. You know the article was based on anonymity in the press which just means bullshit...
Cuomo can jump in to capture the nomination in a primary. I tend not to believe nameless spineless surrogates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rvablue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #33
101. Is Cuomo Obama's "chosen candidate" or is Obama supporting Cuomo because his
agenda is in line with his own -- as is Patterson's -- but his popularity rating is more than three times higher than Patterson's.

Obama doesn't want to see a nasty primary fight that could end up hurting Congressional seats...get it?

It's called electoral politics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theoldman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 10:43 AM
Response to Original message
9. All previous presidents have voiced their opinions on who should be elected.
I don't see anything wrong with an opinion for or against a person running for office. G. W. Bush certainly had his opinions so why shouldn't Obama be able to voice his opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 10:43 AM
Response to Original message
10. Yes, being the head of the party and if he wants us to win any races in NY
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. lol thats funny he can't even dictate to dems in congress yet he wants others to be his serfs nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #12
21. He is not really dictating, just suggesting and having support for certain candidates
It is usually what the President of the party in power does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #21
25. Telling Pennsylvania Democrats to not mount a primary challenge to Specter goes beyond suggestion
It is dictating! Obama has done the same thing in Colorado, and now New York. Who's next? Bayh in Indiana?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #25
43. No it's really not dictating
Both Bennett and Specter are getting serious primary challenges in spite of the President's endorsements. The President is expressing a preference. Doesn't mean that voters have to listen to him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #43
55. It will wound... perhaps mortally... the challenger...
... if the challenger wins the primary.

Obama should stay out of the primary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 03:21 AM
Response to Reply #55
85. No, if anything, it would just hurt the President
The national party (and the President if it's the party in the White House) often backs a particular candidate in a primary and sometimes that candidate loses. If so, the challenger looks incredibly good for winning a race against the odds and the President look kind of stupid for backing the wrong horse. But they quickly endorse the nominee and unite the party because keeping the seat in Democratic hands is in everybody's best interest.

Presidents have been getting involved in primaries since FDR tried to get voters in southern states to defeat their conservative Democrats in primaries in 1938. It didn't go particularly well for him since the voters resoundingly rejected his suggestion and sent their representatives and senators back to congress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 08:10 AM
Response to Reply #85
88. FDR is a poor example. First, he died 65 years ago.
Second , the dixiecrats whom you reference opposed new deal legislation in congress, allying themselves with GOPers, lending a practical urgency to the situation.

Paterson is NOT in congress and if he were he'd be supporting Obama there; NOT acting as an obstructionist.

If you can find examples of FDR... or any president thereafter... opposing a sitting governor of his own party ( before the governor even has announced opposition!) where there are no policy considerations involved..... please post them here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #88
109. Patterson will still be governor during the November elections
Pissing him off, while he controls all those patronage jobs, could spell doom for Obama's pick for governor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #109
116. In that case , they've managed to create a lose-lose situation.....
... for whomever we nominate.

I cannot see *any* circumstance under which Paterson... having survived a primary challenge ( which, believe me, is still very possible) can win a general... thanks to the oafish intervention of the Obama WH.

Cuomo *might* be able to win but people ( here and in DC) are overestimating his appeal ( he's not Mario; sorry, but he's not) and there is the question of backlash from Paterson and from those who feel Paterson got a bum deal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #21
36. They generally stay out of local primary fights....
... unless one of the candidates is , say, David Duke.

Governor Paterson is no David Duke.

Perhaps the WH inner circle is so outraged at the senate pick rejection that they are unable to tell the difference?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #36
44. No, they usually don't
When the party is in power the DNC is essentially run by White House political operatives and they get heavily involved in local races to pick the candidates that they see as having the best chance of winning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #44
95. if they think Bennet has the "best chance of winning" in CO
then Obama's political operatives seriously have their heads up their asses.

Bennet is an outsider with little name recognition here. The only thing he has going for him is money and east coast political connections. Maybe that's enough for Obama, but I don't think it's going to be enough for Colorado's voters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raine1967 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #21
62. Remember this: It's OK If You Are Republican.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #12
31. Oh, fuck your "serfs" stupid
Edited on Sun Sep-20-09 12:51 PM by Cha
talk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anonymous171 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #12
110. Good point. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #10
35. We could run Derek Jeter and surely win.
Winning can't be looked on as an absolute value.... though it certainly should be considered.

I don't think there's sufficient reason to believe that Paterson cannot win the general elestion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stray cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
13. Patterson will do what he wants to and NYers will elect or trouce who they want
If NY wants to tell the dems to go to hell and elect repubs they will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 10:58 AM
Response to Original message
15. lol@ "dictating" how funny nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #15
38. Not so funny, if you look at it objectively.
Several accomplished Congressional representatives expressed a desire to challenge the underqualified and lightly experienced ( and very conservative) Kirsten Gillibrand ( ironically,a Paterson choice) in a DEM senate primary this year.

Steve Israel, Carolyn McCarthy, Carolyn Maloney. The Obama WH frowned. Each dropped out.

We ( NY DEMS) have Kirsten Gillibran as our candidate, whether we want to have her or not.

"Dictate": Hard to come up with a better word. "Order"? Whatever... the political dynamics are such that local pols will not cross him ( Obama) and/or them ( the people around him).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #38
46. Then Israel, McCarthy, and Maloney don't deserve to be Senators
This whole "fairness" thing is a crock of shit. Nothing is fair in politics and when we expect it to be we have a tendency to get our asses kicked by the Republicans. Incumbents are always favorites and primary challengers are always underdogs unless the incumbent is very unpopular. It is in the President's best interest to endorse the incumbents not to create a level playing field so that everybody has a quantitatively equal chance of becoming a Senator. If New York feels that Gillibrand isn't in their best interest they are welcome to say "No thanks Mr. President" and elect somebody else.

But as Harry Truman once said "If you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen." If Israel, McCarthy, and Maloney let the President's endorsement scare them out of a Senate race then too fucking bad for them. They don't deserve to be Senators if they're not willing to run. Maybe they could learn a thing or two from Joe Sestak who is running against Specter in spite of the President's endorsement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #46
53. Neither does Gillibrand.
For exactly the same reason: spinelessness... if indeed that's your point.


>>>If New York feels that Gillibrand isn't in their best interest they are welcome to say "No thanks Mr. President" and elect somebody else.>>>>

If they were running for class president of jr. high I'd say you had a point. But it's much more complicated at the grown-up level. If it weren't we'd have about 100 lesser known politicos coming out of the woodwork to challenge Gillibrand. $$$ money and logistics and keeping in the good graces of the state party apparatus hinders it.

In NY, anyway; I don't know enough about PA to comment.

Re. HST: ( and apropos of nothing else) remember: he quit after one and a half terms rather than face a whupping by IKE in '52. In retrospect, maybe he was trying to talk himself into something. i.e. bailing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #53
59. Well Gillibrand is a Senator
Yes her path to it was easier and that's probably not fair, but frankly I don't care. You're right this isn't Jr. High class President and thus the playing field isn't supposed to be level. And I fully understand that campaigns have money and logistical issues. Challengers would face an uphill battle but it's by no means an impossible one. If they aren't willing to face the uphill battle then they don't deserve the job. It's going to be extremely tough for Sestak to unseat Specter in Pennsylvania but he is willing to face the uphill battle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalpragmatist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
16. Their concern is the House
Edited on Sun Sep-20-09 11:32 AM by liberalpragmatist
There are several New York Democrats in the House who were elected in '06 and '08 in Republican-leaning districts. The big concern is that if Paterson is on the ballot and looks likely to lose, Democratic turnout could be dismal, Republican turnout could be high, and Republicans could win back 3-6 House seats in New York.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backwoodsbob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #16
22. you nailed it
like it or not ghouliani is popular with repukes.He will get out the vote if he runs.
We have seats vulnerable and need a popular candidate
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #16
37. Yes, that is a big concern and it looks like PO is getting active
on strategizing the Dem population in Government.

But, there are some who will whine about anything PO does..even the obviously anti-bush policies so they've renderded themselves useless critics, imv.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #16
42. This has the stench of Rahm Emanuel all over it
and it sucks as much as Rahm's deal with Big Pharma.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rvablue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #16
102. +1,000,000!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Meeker Morgan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 11:32 AM
Response to Original message
23. Please. The president is making suggestions not giving orders. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
32. Think of the President as the standard bearer. He's the coach. The ship's
captain.

Yes. He should definitely have a strong and influential say in whether we lose the governor's post in a state we need to carry for Obama's re-election.

And in any event, I don't see the case for Paterson's re-election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robbins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
34. Oh Please
Do you want Saint Rudy as Governor of New York? This may happen Inless Patterson Is persured not to run
or Curmo doesn't run In the primary.Patterson can not win.He makes Corzine look popular.

Now If I lived In PA and not Missouri I would for Sestick and not Magic Bullet Spector In the primary.

Patterson may also be suffering for how he tweated Carolane Kennedy.No other governor forces possable
appointed senators to go through hoops.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal_Stalwart71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 01:33 PM
Response to Original message
39. This bothers me greatly as well. He and Biden are inserting themselves into PA politics as well...
by trying to dictate who can and cannot run against Specter.

With all due respect to the president, this is not a dictatorship where you get make that decision.

I love the president dearly but stepping on the democratic process in this manner should cause great concern for anyone, whether you support the president or not.

Let the citizens of the states of New York and Pennsylvania decide for themselves who should and should not run.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #39
41. and in the Colorado senatorial primary as well!
Once they get started dictating what they want to the Democratic voters in those states, there is no stopping them elsewhere.

Remember that Obama supports Lieberman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal_Stalwart71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #41
45. Saddens me deeply. I knew that he was no progressive from the beginning,
but his treatment of progressives has been despicable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autumn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #41
60. I'm in Colorado and there is no
way in hell I will support Bennet. Andrew Romanoff is running.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #41
64. Good god. That's what I'm saying.
>>>>Remember that Obama supports Lieberman.>>>

Is winning *everything"? Doesn't it even matter WHO wins? If we "succeed" in elected a Lieberman... have we even succeeded at all?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #39
105. with all due respect, the president and his team aren't dictating
They are leading the Democratic party. You might not like the decisions they are making but I suspect if they made different decisions about who they supported you'd be cheerleading for their participation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
47. Yes he absolutely should
One of the greatest advantages of being President is that you are the leader of the party and the party machinery is controlled by your White House. It is in the President's best interest to get Patterson off the ballot and there is no reason he shouldn't act in his best interest.

However, if the voters of New York think it's in their best interest to keep Patterson then they should most certainly keep Patterson. This "dictating" stuff is nonsense. The President endorsed a candidate and the voters are perfectly welcome to reject the candidate endorsed by the President. Democracy means that the voters get a choice. It doesn't mean that there has to be a level playing field for every candidate that wants to run.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalFighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
49. The article states request. Not dictate. BIG difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
50. I commented on this on another post last night.
I think the president should stay out of any state's internal politics. A bit more of an argument could be made regarding elections for US House and Senate, although even that is suspect, but state politics should be totally off limits in my opinion.

If I were a New Yorker, I'd be pretty pissed about this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #50
56. I am a New Yorker and I'm not one bit pissed..Au contraire
..I'm glad the president is thinking about strategy for the New York Dems in Congress for their re-election in 2010.

And, I'd like the next Gov of New York to be a Dem. Anyway Patterson is running in the primary..should be wild.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #56
57. I guess it's the libertarian in me
(a product of my western upbringing, I guess) that says national politics and state politics should be kept separate. Also I'm still smarting from Rahm Emanuel's interference in Alaska's Congressional elections in 2006 and 2008.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #57
58. I understand..I just hope we don't get
Ghouliani.

I don't know of all the reasons Patterson has such low polls but it can't have been easy to come in after Spitzer(darn him) and trying to preside over the deficit and the New York state assembly.

If Spitzer were still gov..I imagine it would be totally different but as fate would have it..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #56
66. Suppose Paterson wins the primary anyway.
Doesn't Obama's obvious desire to see him dumped hamper Paterson against the GOP in the general?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #66
71. We'll cross that bridge when
we come to it. Hillary didn't want Obama to win the primary and he didn't want her to win..but, look at them now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #66
79. I'll answer my own question: YES, of course it does.
How does that help the DEM party in NYS?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quiller4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 02:21 AM
Response to Reply #66
84. Cuomo leads Patterson by more than 2 to 1 in latest polling and
Cuomo's lead is even stronger among Black voters. Patterson supported tax increases on middle income folks and opposed increases on the very wealthy. Cuomo is picking up way more money than Patterson and is pulling key endorsements. While it isn't impossible, the chance of Patterson making it through a primary isn't great.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 04:49 PM
Response to Reply #66
99. if patterson can overcome what you apparently see as a big roadblock
thrown in his path by President Obama then I doubt Obama's actions will hurt Patterson in the general.

Your entire approach to this defies logic. First, the President and his political team aren't "dictating" they are expressing a preference. And its one based on pretty clear facts that Patterson is a historically unpopular governor and his pursuing the nomination will lead to a destructive, costly primary battle that he can't win but that may harm Cuomo, who will win the primary unless he's caught in bed with a hooker between now and the election (actually, he might defeat Patterson even if that happens given that polls indicate that the voters would prefer Spitzer over Patterson at this point).

As for your notion that Patterson is somehow on the verge of a miracle comeback, pointing to bloomberg's ascension in the polls after the terror alert in fall 2005 -- even before that "surge" Bloomberg had a double digit lead over Ferrer. And the boost he got from the terror alert was largely dissipated by the time the election was held a few weeks later. In other words, it was a non-factor in the election. Going from Patterson's numbers -- which are in the sewer -- to a lead? Not. Going. To. Happen. Period.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #99
117. "Historically unpopular". "Historically"?! He became GOV on 3-17-08.
Edited on Mon Sep-21-09 08:00 PM by Smarmie Doofus
What "history"?


>>>As for your notion that Patterson is somehow on the verge of a miracle comeback, pointing to bloomberg's ascension in the polls after the terror alert in fall 2005 -- even before that "surge" Bloomberg had a double digit lead over Ferrer. And the boost he got from the terror alert was largely dissipated by the time the election was held a few weeks later. In other words, it was a non-factor in the election. Going from Patterson's numbers -- which are in the sewer -- to a lead? Not. Going. To. Happen. Period. >>>

I entertain no such notion. Bloomberg had a 12 point lead ( as I note in the OP) prior to the "terror" scare. ( "There was no plot." the NY FBI guy said after three or four days of hysterical news coverage, stoked by Bloomberg and his team.) There's no basis for your assertion that it was a "non-factor" in his 19 point win. But go ahead and assert it if you wish.

Obviously Bloomberg and Co. thought otherwise.

Otherwise they wouldn't have hyped it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #117
122. You may not like the fact that he's dropped farther and faster than anyone in NY history
But that doesn't make it any less true.
Here's February : 2009 when he hit a historic low http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news/politics&id=6688134
Here's April 2009, when he had fallen even lower. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22082.html
Here's the most recent poll, where Patterson surges up from his 19 percent bottom to a lofty 20 percent (actually, between April and September he jumped all the way to 21 percent, so the current number shows him dropping again). http://maristpoll.marist.edu/916-paterson’s-approval-rating-at-20/

How bad are Patterson's numbers?: 70 percent of New York voters don't view him as a viable candidate, including 65 percent of Democrats.
http://maristpoll.marist.edu/916-voters-say-“no-go”-for-paterson-in-2010/

So exactly how do you think he's going to come back from these numbers? What rabbit do you think he can pull out of his hat?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GivePeaceAchance Donating Member (950 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #56
70. +1 to that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yavin4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 03:31 PM
Response to Original message
51. Obama Is Trying To Prevent Guliani from Being NY Governor
Paterson Is Toast In NY. He Has Zero Chance of Winning.All that he can do now is be a spoiler and stoke discontent.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #51
52. Obama is doing Rahm Emanuel's dirty business
How else can you explain Obama telling Pennsylvanians to not challenge Specter, or Coloradans not to challenge Bennett in their primaries.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iceman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #51
61. This is absolutely correct.
Paterson is fooling himself if he thinks he has even a slim chance of being elected.

If he cared at all about the best interests of the party, he wouldn't even run.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 07:45 PM
Response to Reply #61
65. Exactly why is he so unelectable? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iceman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #65
76. For ONE thing,
he supported a state budget that contained numerous REGRESSIVE tax increases, but ruled out raising taxes on millionaires.

You need look no farther than ANY public opinion poll of New York voters to get a sense of what Paterson's chances are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #76
78. I thought the millionaires were fleeing the state because of HIGH taxes:
From wiki re. Tom Golisano


>>>>>Golisano brought the Independence Party an automatic ballot line for the succeeding four years. Golisano has an associate's degree from Alfred State College. There was speculation that he would run for governor on the Republican ticket, but he announced on May 15, 2009 that he was moving to Florida to escape New York state taxes. He said the move would save him $13,800 per day in income taxes, plus unspecified amounts from lower sales taxes, gasoline taxes, utility taxes, and property taxes. He stated that by moving to Florida, we would be able to spend the money to fund "worthy causes," instead of spending it to fund "Albany's bloated bureaucracy, corrupt politicians or regular handouts to the spe>>>>

Let's blame Paterson for THAT too!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whistler162 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #51
67. We will see in another year....
but Governor Patterson has done a good job with what he was given to work with. His handling of the State Assembly debacle was excellent.

In the primary if he runs I will vote for him unless something changes drastically in the coming year.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SuperTrouper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #51
87. That's right. Rudy Giuliani is still very popular in NY with the GOP and with him at the top
of their ticket they will trounce Paterson and his ticket. Remember that Giuliani destroyed the hapless and inept NY Mayor David Dinkins who seems to have been a previous incarnation of Paterson. I think that Giuliani will be Governor because he will probably defeat Andrew CUomo. And I think that Kirsten Gillibrand is still vulnerable and may even get a primary fight from...Robert Kennedy, Jr. even if that is against Obama's wishes. The Kennedys are eager to have someone in Congress from their clan (after Teddy's death), who is strong and respectable and now weak like Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 04:52 PM
Response to Original message
54. Dictating? He is just suggesting.
I am sure he has the inside numbers. We need to win everywhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 08:01 PM
Response to Original message
68. I'm not a fan of the Federal gov't injecting itself into state gov't affairs -
- and I doubt I'm alone. I fear such will become a rally point for the right and those who are passionate about the separation of federal and state power.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl_interrupted Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #68
72. It maybe more than Paterson's low poll numbers but a video he made regarding union workers
In it he bashed disabled Union workers. I know..Paterson is legally blind himself and said he was offended by SNL skits of himself, but he turned around and did the very same thing to disabled Union workers who were protesting health care cuts. I couldn't believe my eyes and ears when I saw this video. It is beyond hypocritical & personally I found it disgusting. Unions will not support or donate to him now, they have been giving to Cuomo. I don't want to think how the republicans would use this video. Judge for yourself: http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2009/04/patersons-sight-gag.html


Now combine that with this: New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo leads Gov. David Paterson 61 - 15 percent among Democrats in a primary contest for the 2010 governor's race, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today. In this latest poll, former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani leads Gov. Paterson 53 - 33 percent in a 2010 general election, while Cuomo tops Giuliani 48 - 39 percent. http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1318.xml?ReleaseID=1364

While I'm not a fan of anyone telling a state who should run and who shouldn't, when a candidate is 46pts behind in the polls, the handwriting is on the wall. I don't know what Paterson thinks he can accomplish here and I think its sad he has to be told not to run, its painfully obvious. The people didn't elect him in the 1st place and they don't want him now. What else does it take? This will only serve the republicans who then sit back and watch the 2 democrats bash each other in a primary, then use their material.

And for those who think its "spite" because Caroline Kennedy was Obama's choice...put that to rest. Caroline never led Cuomo in the polls for Hillary's seat. Once she opened her mouth it was over. Cuomo was the one NY'ers really wanted for senator and every poll indicated that. Cuomo and the Kennedy's have had their own "issues" since the Cuomo/Kennedy divorce. So I dont see how Obama wins in this, if that was his intention, which I dont believe it was then or now. I think he is more worried about losing this race. Cuomo is now the popular choice for governor. He can easily defeat Paterson AND Guiliani. Perhaps Obama should have met privately with Paterson? Or maybe he did, I don't know. But I don't want to lose my state to another republican and thats what Paterson should be considering, not his own ego.

And one more thing, there was a thread here earlier, that because Paterson is black, NY'ers dont want him. Let me make it clear... we have all different races, relgions, etc here and we manage to get along. Many blacks are congressional leaders. NY'ers elected David Dinkins, our 1st black mayor, years ago. Paterson was never elected as our governor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Historic NY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #72
73. He lost this state months ago. People that don't live here just don't know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl_interrupted Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 09:35 PM
Response to Reply #73
74. Historic NY Have to agree with you! And that video was the last nail in his political coffin
I still can't get over it! What the hell was he thinking?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 10:26 PM
Response to Reply #72
77. Thanks for more information on why
Paterson is not polling well in NY.

And, Race is certainly not the reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl_interrupted Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 11:22 PM
Response to Reply #77
80. You're Welcome Cha! I wish more people understood.
It most certainly isn't about race or vendetta's. The only one who sunk Paterson was himself. His approvals in NY are 20%. Cuomo's are at 69% for his job as Attorney General. The Unions are beyond pissed at Paterson and you can't blame them. What else can you say? Apparently Obama has spoken to him privately, but Paterson will not relent. I think that shows he is more into this for himself, then for the people of NY. http://www.huliq.com/3257/86615/despite-pressure-white-house-paterson-says-will-run
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #68
104. how is this the "federal government" inject ing itself into state govt affairs?
Edited on Mon Sep-21-09 05:05 PM by onenote
This isn't Obama acting as the head of the executive branch of the federal government or Patterson acting as the head of the executive branch of the state of New York. Its Obama, the nominal head of the Democratic party expressing, through his political team, a preference for what Patterson, as a potential Democratic nominee, should do.

Your hyperbole was truly over the top.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #104
106. Sorry but I disagree. As President, Obama is the HEAD of our Federal Government -
- his position within the Democratic party became secondary when we, the people, elected him to govern us all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #106
107. well, I guess we'll just disagree. But I do have a question
Edited on Mon Sep-21-09 05:14 PM by onenote

would you have a problem with Obama campaigning for Democratic candidates against repubs in the general election in a governor's race?

And a second question: do you have a problem with state governors (elected to represent everyone in their state) campaigning for presidential candidates in their states?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #107
111. IMO, campaigning on behalf of a candidate vs. influencing who should -
- or should not be the candidate are two different things. I think the people of the state should be given the opportunity to decide their candidate in a primary.

I don't have a problem with a president campaigning on behalf of a confirmed candidate senator, governor, etc. because he is President over all the states, senate, house, etc. Similarly, I don't have a problem with a Governor campaigning for a chosen presidential, senatorial, etc. candidate within their own state. I just feel that the campaigning should be done AFTER the people have chosen their candidate and not before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #111
121. To clarify: you don't mind "federal interference" so long as it occurs after the primary?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #121
123. Campaigning and interfering are two totally different things -
- they are not interchangeable. To campaign is to advocate for a person, position, etc. To interfere is to come between, to hinder or alter an outcome.

I don't mind campaigning after a primary. I very much mind interfering at any and all times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DonCoquixote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 11:22 PM
Response to Original message
81. OK, Back up
We have a president whose agenda is getting trashed because many Democratic State Governments are leaning conservative, and packing the Senate with conservative cronies! In New York, we have an example of that, where not only does the Governor bash unions, but he turns down Caroline Kennedy for a very conservative Democrat, one that dollars to donuts will probably vote against the Public Option!

In all fairness, how the Hell is Obama going to rein in the Blue Dogs if people go "shame shame, you cannot even recommend anything, even if every other President did it, because people don't like you!" Of course, when he does not use his power, he is considered a wimp. Things like this make me wonder if we elected Obama so that he can be the second-class hired help to clean up the mess, then get sent out back to chop cotton when he is done. Oh, speaking of thinly veiled references to race, he is attacking an unpopular Black and Disabled candidate for being an arrogant, unpopular fool that has lost the trust of his voters. OMG, Obama must be a secret teabagger!

We can't yell at Obama for being too light and too strong at the same time..well, we can't, unless we want to lose again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl_interrupted Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-20-09 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #81
82. DonCoquixote Kirsten Gillibrand is for public option & you can sign her petition here:
NY Senator Kirsten Gillibrand's petition to guarantee the public option: 'Political opponents are proposing nothing but the status quo. To me, that is unacceptable. I plan to stand with the President so that we move forward on health care reform, and I hope you will join me. I'm hopeful that over the next several weeks Republicans will now come to the table in good faith...if not, we must move forward without them.'

Health Care is a Right, Not a Privilege

http://www.democratsenators.org/o/44/t/825/petition.jsp?petition_KEY=177
Thanks!

She's also written an article on Huff Post.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-kirsten-gillibrand/turning-tragedy-into-comp_b_283784.html

Caroline Kennedy has nothing to do with Paterson's low ratings. In fact Gillibrand's approvals are very high.

And you are right, we can't afford to lose NY
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DonCoquixote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 05:03 AM
Response to Reply #82
86. Thanks for the info
All the same, this does not change the fact that the GOP would love nothing better than to take NY. If they can get governorships in NY and CA, they can then get second wind, saying "we are not just the Southern Party."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #82
98. Thanks again, girl, ..Kristin Gillibrand
Edited on Mon Sep-21-09 03:50 PM by Cha
really came around after she got appointed by Paterson..but, the way it was done made me upset.

That's okay..Caroline is stronger than all that..it wasn't meant to be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TreasonousBastard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 01:05 AM
Response to Original message
83. Absolutely! This is politics in real life, not a civics text or...
the Democratic Debating and Chowder Society.

There is always a very real danger of losing seats in the midterm elections, and it takes tough stands to hold on to what we have, or reduce the losses.

Paterson is wounded and weak, and everyone smells the blood-- the Republicans will run their strongest candidate against him and hope whoever it is has coatails enough to drag along some House seats, and maybe evern Gillibrand's seat.

A primary is ALWAYS damaging, and in New York it's about as democratic as succession in the Royal Family, what with all the tricks and machinations to get on the ballots. If either Gillibrand or Paterson have to go through a primary, it could mean a major loss of Democratic power in this state. Not just House and Senate seats, but the legisture has lately been sorry enough to cause much hilarity and weeping without the gridlock we had with a Republican Senate. The New York Governor has little power compared to other states, and all he can really do is use his popularity to hammer the legislature. Paterson has little of that left, but a popular Democrat with a Democratic legislature might get something done.

EVERY President, from Washington on, has been involved in state politics, and this time I think Obama called it right-- don't ask for trouble and keep the Governor's mansion and Gillibrand's seat in Democratic hands without risking too many House seats.

Talking Gillibrand's competitors out of a primary battle kept Peter King out of the Senate race, and if you want a real nightmare, think about him in the Senate. Having Paterson step down and the state party anoint Cuomo or someone else with a good chance of winning keeps assholes like Prince Rudy from running.

The Republicans don't have a bunch of "good citizens" running around talking about choices on the ballot and all that other stuff from 8th grade civic books and citizenship tests-- they have a bunch of operatives who know how to win elections.

But, hey, losing a Governor, three or four House seats, a Senator and half of the state legislature is a small price to pay so someone can brag we have real democracy and real choice on a primary ballot.







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 08:18 AM
Response to Original message
89. Very strange: not a single reply defending the president....
Edited on Mon Sep-21-09 08:26 AM by Smarmie Doofus
... mentions the senatorial appointment. In the sense of : the *pique* factor.

The Times story says that Paterson made the WH "furious", and implies that it is in fact the heart of the matter.



>>>In addition, the relationship between Mr. Obama and Mr. Paterson has been shaky, dating to the governor’s selection of a replacement for Hillary Rodham Clinton, who resigned from the Senate to become secretary of state. White House officials had received assurances from Mr. Paterson that he would not pick Kirsten E. Gillibrand, then a little-known Democratic congresswoman from a heavily Republican district outside of Albany, according to a prominent Democrat who discussed the matter with a senior White House official.

The White House and Democratic House leaders were concerned that her sudden departure from the House would give Republicans a prime opportunity to reclaim the seat. Aides to the president conveyed those concerns to the governor, according to Democrats who have discussed the matter with Mr. Obama’s aides.

In the end, Mr. Paterson selected Ms. Gillibrand anyway, infuriating White House officials and Democratic leaders in Washington. Making matters worse, the governor also publicly snubbed Caroline Kennedy, a close personal friend and ally of Mr. Obama’s, who announced in December her wish to be chosen as Mrs. Clinton’s replacement, but then withdrew her name from consideration in January, citing personal reasons.>>>>>

Gee...I hope they don't get furious with *me*.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #89
103. What "Times" story? Is there a link? Maybe some of us don't
believe every coporatemedia article.

And, we're not out to get the President either over a "times" article.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #103
115. It's in the OP.
The Times likes Obama and *seems* to dislike Paterson.

For the most part. ( There are "camps" within the Times.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 08:33 AM
Response to Original message
90. I'm from NY and Paterson never had a snowballs chance before Pres. Obama said anything anyway....
Paterson has been a huge failure from day 1.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
graywarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 09:07 AM
Response to Original message
92. I don't consider him as dictating. He's practicing his community organizing skills which he is
brilliant at.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phx_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 10:58 AM
Response to Original message
93. No one is "dictating" anything, but he's the leader of the Democratic party, so yes
he absolutely has a right to weigh in on a race where the Governor ans little chance of winning a very blue state like New York.

Patterson has been an absolute disaster from day one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 11:50 AM
Response to Original message
94. I'm not sure - but wish he'd campaign for progressives who run against blue dogs. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
96. He's not dictating
If here were, Paterson would have already dropped out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
97. The head of the party always influence in these areas. If Dr Dean was pushing a candidate
few would care. In this case the President is also head of the party and is well within his rights to coordinate which candidates he wants to push. There is no actual interference of consequence. If candidates want to run in opposition to to leadership they may and if the electorate wishes to overrule the the wishes of the President then they are free to do so as well.

Most people's issue is that the President is not pushing who they'd prefer rather than the fact he pushes anyone. This from someone who will contribute to and help Sestak any way I can. Agreeing with leadership and agreeing leadership has a right to make the calls are two very distinct issues in my mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ejpoeta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 05:14 PM
Response to Original message
108. i don't understand why this would be out there like it is. I mean, one would think
the president asking patterson to NOT run would be a quiet conversation so that if patterson did run and won the primary it wouldn't look so awkward when obama was supporting him. It just doesn't make any sense to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 08:10 PM
Response to Reply #108
118. Exactamente. See my post # 89 re. "fit of pique".
>>>>It just doesn't make any sense to me>>>>

That's the only way that it DOES make any sense. It appears to be "payback" of a sort... probably not from Obama himself ( who frankly seems to be above that sort of thing) but perhaps from some Obama groupies who, flushed with victory and power, shall have no gods before them.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 08:16 PM
Response to Reply #118
119. Yeah, and your imagination is
in overdrive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ejpoeta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-22-09 05:45 AM
Response to Reply #118
125. but here is where we are right now in NYS... we have mr 911 himself ....
Patterson's approval ratings are 20% right now... then they are talking about dumbass pataki to run against gillibrand... and polls show he is favored in that contest.... I am seeing a republican takeover of the state!! which i do not like the sound of.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-22-09 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #125
126. Paterson has been gov for all of 18 months.
I'm skeptical of the polling data. I'd like to see data re. what percentage of the general electorate could even pick him out of a police line-up. My guess is that this a state where if you stopped 10 people on the street and asked them who the governor of the state if you would get at least 5 wrong answers.

Four of the remaining 5 likely know Paterson from the SNL sketch and/or from his principled postion of GLBT rights ( uwaveringly, unabashedly and unequivocally in FAVOR; in contrast to the ... ahem... "nuanced".... positions of certain other DEM pols.) Principled postion, but not popular even with much of the liberal DEM primary electorate( although they will deny it to the death).

This being the case.... it's not hard... to account for low poll numbers... esp since the media here ( conservative and relentlessy commercial) can't find anything good at all to say about the man.

But I really get the feeling they're not looking very hard.

Electability is important... you are correct. The trick is keeping electability in perspective. CT DEMS could have nominated Lieberman... in 2006. Certainly more electable than his opponent. Problem his: the opponent was a DEM and Lieberman was not.

Maybe we can solve the electability issue by simply nominating republicans?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vidar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 06:40 PM
Response to Original message
112. He's not dictating. He made a suggestion, which was rejected, by the way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backscatter712 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 07:18 PM
Response to Original message
113. As President, Obama is the head of the Democratic Party.
That means that he can indeed make these sorts of requests.

Gov. Patterson can decline to follow Pres. Obama's requests, but Pres. Obama does have the ability to raise all sorts of political hell for him...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #113
124. Will Rogers: I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat.
I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat.

***

Democrats never agree on anything, that's why they're Democrats. If they agreed with each other, they would be Republicans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuaneBidoux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
114. No.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 17th 2024, 09:51 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC