Google Ads


Site Stats

NY-Sen-B: McCarthy Vows to Challenge Gillibrand

by: James L.

Fri Jan 23, 2009 at 3:05 PM EST


Full speed ahead:

Rep. Carolyn McCarthy on Friday vowed to challenge Sen.-designate Kirsten Gillibrand in New York's 2010 Democratic Senate primary, citing Gillibrand's support from the National Rifle Association in past campaigns.

McCarthy became active politically after her husband was killed when a gunman went on a shooting spree on a Long Island Railroad train in 1993, and has made gun control her signature issue since entering Congress in 1997. Her son was wounded in the shooting and still has health problems.

"I certainly have never forgotten why I came into politics, so you can imagine how I felt when I heard that the next Senator from New York would be a person who got the endorsement of the NRA," McCarthy said during an interview on MSNBC just minutes after Gillibrand was named to the Senate by New York Gov. David Paterson (D).

McCarthy told the cable network that she had spoken to Paterson two weeks ago to air her objections to a possible Gillibrand appointment.

"This is a personal issue to me," McCarthy said. "It has nothing to do with politics. ... I'm not out here to make trouble. ... I had to speak up. I had to let the people know who their next Senator is going to be."

If McCarthy does indeed follow through with this, Paterson may come to regret opening this can of worms. Of course, it's possible that any choice he made could have been subject to a primary challenge, but this one has the potential to be especially divisive. Oy.  
James L. :: NY-Sen-B: McCarthy Vows to Challenge Gillibrand
Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

NY-Sen-B: McCarthy Vows to Challenge Gillibrand | 139 comments
This can only be good news for the voters
Gillibrand will actually have to adapt her positions to those of New York Democrats. There is already evidence that she is doing this.  
There was an article about her having
support for full equal marriage rights.  (First NY Senator to do so)
[ Parent ]
Yeah
At the press conference, she was talking about how she wants to work with Rep. McCarthy on preventing gun violence and enforcing background checks, and then said she supports gun control but wants to protect hunters rights. Probably political posturing, but it's what she has to do to avoid a primary.

22, Democrat, AZ-01
Peace. Love. Gabby.
[ Parent ]
Everyone should fear a primary
and this is a good example of why.
[ Parent ]
eesh Carolyn
"This is a personal issue to me,"

way to make this sound like a personal vendetta against gun owners.

I know McCarthy and I like her too...I have a feeling if Gillibrand is popular in a year, this primary crap will go away. This could merely be a threat to bring Gillibrand toward the center/left on guns.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

It's an idiotic non-issue
Outside of the 100 or so Dems in Congress from big cities who despise guns there are practically no votes for major gun control.  All people like her do is hurt the party and get nothing accomplished as far as guns go.

If it's so personal to her what has she actually accomplished on gun control in the decade or so she's been in the U.S. Congress?

[ Parent ]
actually a lot,
but she still didn't even change her registration from Republican to Democrat until 2002, six years after being elected under the Democratic party line. She initially wanted to run against Frisa as a Republican, but when local party officials gave her a cold shoulder she courted local Democrats who took the opportunity. The Republicans even wanted her to switch parties and run as a Republican for reelection in 1998. She's not especially liberal on anything but gun control so people shouldn't pushing her as a more liberal alternative.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
Her husband
Her husband was shot and killed by a mass murderer on a killing spree on the Long Island Rairoad.  Her son was wounded by the same man and around 20 others were also killed by Colin Ferguson.  When the local congressman sneered and fell into the I love the NRA line, McCarthy first organized and then ran against the fool and beat him.  It was one of the few wins by any opponent that year.

Yes, it is very, very personal to McCarthy.  It would be to you nrafter if you were in her shoes.

[ Parent ]
just because one nut
abused the right to own a gun does not mean that all Americans should have to pay and give up their right as well. The 2nd amendment is pretty straightforawrd, and doesn't waver or leave room to doubt. If you support freedom to privacy, religion, and press, you also have to support freedom own guns. One reason the amendment is in the constitution is so that the people would have the means of overthrowing an oppresive government.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
Exactly
We're supposed to be the that gives people freedom of choice.  Curbing gun rights over one or two nuts who go unhinged makes no sense and is very counterproductive.  And as much as we all like to poke fun at places like Texas (mostly deserved), that nut probably couldn't have shot 5 people, much less 20 or so before an armed citizen would have taken him down.
[ Parent ]
Bullshit
The Second Amendment speaks of a militia.  Despite the efforts of you and your Republican friends on the Supreme Court.
[ Parent ]
On "our" side?
The repubs on the court are most certainly no friends of mine.  However something like 75-80% of the American people are on our side of this issue.  Don't make this a party issue when it's simply not.
[ Parent ]
Fine, Conservatives
It's an issue of judicial interpretation.  And judicial restraint.
[ Parent ]
OK then
What is progressive about curbing the right to bear arms?  If you ask me taking away that right is very anti-progressive.
[ Parent ]
Are you asking constitutionally, or as a matter of policy?
Constitutionally, there's no problem regulating the purchase and ownership of guns, especially handguns.  As a matter of policy, it's up to the various cities and states to make that decision.
[ Parent ]
I'm a socialist
who is pro-gay rights and pro-environment. Not a Republican, I'm actually extremely liberal. I just like having prominent moderates in the Democratic party. I don't want a tyranny of the majority, it goes against my ideals.

Besides that, the Second Amendment is also fairly clear in saying:

the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

But I do believe in regulations because that is left open in it. I support background checks, safety locks, among other things.

You are refering to:

A well regulated militia

which I believe means people having the ability to stand up and fight their government, or, a foreign invading force.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

[ Parent ]
No
Militias had a very specific meaning to the framers.  It was a collective meaning, not an individual one.  States wanted reassurance that the federal government would not disband the state militias.
[ Parent ]
I disagree.
The framers had just been through what was basically a successful civil war to seceede from Britain because they felt like they were being oppressed and ignored, to put it in a quick nutshell. They were able to succeed because local people had the ability to take up arms against the government, and I believe that they wanted to remember that in their new works. The 2nd amendment is kind of like another check and balance going along with the Declaration of Independence which basically gave people the right to rebel against a government they thought was oppressing them. And, in order to do that they would have to have weapons. Guns in many ways are on of our greatest civil liberties.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
Have to agree with ArkDem
How was it said in V For Vendetta?  "A people should not be afraid their government, a government should be afraid of it's people."  When all else fails the only thing left to keep a government from going too tyrannical is an armed citizenry.  The founders knew that and that's why I believe that line in the 2nd Amendment is to guarantee the rights of citizens to bear arms.
[ Parent ]
You sum up my feelings on this perfectly, Chad.

[ Parent ]
I hate to sound like a conservative...
...but rights come with responsibilities.

The UK doesn't exactly have the best gun laws in the world. We banned handguns completely unnecessarily after the Dunblane killings in the mid 90s, and their use in violent crime actually went up after that.

Still, before I could get a license to own a gun (I don't own a gun, but I do occasionally make use of my father's shotgun) I had to convince a representative of the local police that I was of sound mind, knew how to handle a weapon so that I didn't kill myself or anyone else and had a reasonable cause to own a weapon (for sport). The weapon in question also had to be kept in a secure gun cabinet.

These should not be difficult things to accomplish. But America seems to have a fixation with guns, which is entirely unhelpful - you have a lot more armed burglars, at least partly because they expect you to respond to trespass with lethal force.

McCarthy's out on the edge here, but she has good reason for that and a more nuanced version of her position is eminently reasonable.

Especially because you are not overthrowing a 21st century nuclear power with your granddad's hunting rifle.

[ Parent ]
yes
but I doubt I would engage in a primary challenge against a Senator who hasn't even been sworn in yet over the issue.

I'd look for common ground with said person and if I didn't get it...THEN enter the primary.

I'm fully aware of what drove Carolyn to Congress...I grew up on Long Island and I know Carolyn.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

[ Parent ]
I predict no primary challenge from McCarthy
In the piece, McCarthy doesn't actually commit herself to running against Gillibrand in a primary, even though that's what the reporter says.  I wonder if they're editoralizing here or if there was more said by McCarthy that just wasn't quoted.

Also, I strongly suspect McCarthy will back down in the end.  Assuming Gillibrand has the support of Clinton, Schumer, and Paterson and given her proven campaign abilities, I think McCarthy would get crushed and McCarthy is a smart enough politician to know so.  Maybe I'm wrong, but are there really that many single-issue gun control voters in the NY Democratic primary?

Not just single issue
She can become the vehicle for all those Democrats who do not want a blue dog in the senate.

She's seems pretty clear that she's going to run.  And she's far better known in the NYC metropolitan area than Gillibrand.

[ Parent ]
Maybe not a single issue, but ...
Are we that sure that Congresswoman McCarthy is more liberal than Congresswoman Gillibrand?  Looking at Progressive Punch (I know, not perfect, but it gives some general indication) says otherwise:

McCarthy -- lifetime progressive score 83.44 (rank 192nd)
Gillibrand -- lifetime progressive score 87.48 (rank 167th)

Further, McCarhty is not ranked in the top 100 most progrssive House members in ANY major category.  Gillibrand his a "perfect" gay rights record.  McCarthy's is mixed at best.

I can buy any argument against Gillibrand being too moderate for the district (not sure I fully agree with it, but I can buy it) -- but I doubt if McCarthy can fully hold herself up as the liberal alternative on anything other then the gun issue.

[ Parent ]
Gay rights
According to the HRC, Gillibrand had the lowest score of any New York Democrat.

McCarthy is far from my ideal choice.  But at least she's not a Blue Dog.

[ Parent ]
Can you or the HRC cite specific votes so we can see why?

[ Parent ]
Well, they gave her a rinking endorsement today
Today they said her appointment was "a step forward for the LBGT community" and then lists her pro gay rights record on every single major issue facing the gay community.  It's on the front page of their website.
[ Parent ]
what;s your problem with
all blue dogs? Many of them are are most effective and respected congressmen. John Spratt, Ike Skelton, Bart Gordon, and many others. There's nothing with a blue dog moderate representing a state like New York. There are plenty of moderates there and Gillibrand is hardly conservative. She's one of the more liberal blue dog members, and, unlike some here, I don't demand ultra-liberal representation from every blue state, despite being rather ultra-liberal. I like having moderate senators that disagree with me sometimes. Both parties need moderation, to keep them from bullying the other party. They need them to scrutinize and heavily consider legislation, which stops bad ideas from being passed. Moderates are what stop us from having a dictatorship of the majority, which is one of the most beautiful things in this country; that minorities still have rights.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
They're not progressives
And prevent the Democratic party from advancing a progressive agenda.  If they want to be Republicans, or form their own party, let them.
[ Parent ]
And they come in all stripes
Stop lumping Gillibrand in with people like Allen Boyd.  The two have nothing in common. Gillibrand rarely if ever goes along with the Blue Dog agenda and from the best I can tell only joined to make herself appear moderate in her moderately conservative district.
[ Parent ]
Look
No one made Gillibrand join the Blue Dogs.  If she didn't want to be lumped with the Borens and Boyds, she shouldn't have joined.
[ Parent ]
you make me laugh


Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
On What?
On what issues will Gillibrand prevent the Democratic party from advancing a progressive agenda?  The only issues I've heard suggested are gun control and immigration reform (which I haven't heard any specifics except she was against drivers' licenses for illegal aliens--an extremely unpopular idea nationally).  But, especially now that she's representing NY state, I strongly suspect she'll be with the Democratic majority on any reasonable/moderate legislation that Obama might support (I'm doubtful gun control will even be an issue).  And, if Congress is politically foolish enough to push unpopular, but extemely liberal, legislation, I want someone putting the brakes on.
[ Parent ]
Way to shrink the tent
Did it ever occur to you that maybe the progressive agenda isn't popular in their districts? Plus, even I am wary of shoving a progressive agenda down the throats of a skeptical populace (as I think the president is as well). If we are to compete in all 50 states, we need to find candidates who can win in conservative areas--and that usually means looking to the blue dogs.

Personally, I don't have a problem with most of the blue dog caucus. There are a few I distrust and think maybe we could do without (Boren, Bright, and Marshall come to mind), but the rest, including Gillenbrand, are fine with me.

[ Parent ]
most of them are nowhere near
being Republicans, you idiot. Its people like you that would have us relishing in a permanent minority, (that's where we'd be without blue dogs). Most Democrats in the country are compacted into urban areas, leaving us with a ton of super liberal districts and representatives that only account for maybe 100 out 435 districts. The rest are marginal districts, and many are areas that lean conservatively, dozens actually, in presidential races and are moderate in their politics.

Still, the worst Blue Dogs, (Gene Taylor and Jim Marshall), still vote with dems over 75% and against maybe 25%, (and they are by far the worst, with their only competition coming from Allen Boyd and Dan Boren), any Republican in their district would vote against Democratic policy 99% of the time or get primaried by the right. Because of them many progressive policies also get passed that owuld be blocked if all of their seats were held by Republicans and much of the time they merely force the Democratic leaderhsip to compromise with them, rather than actually vote against Democratic bills. They don't want to be Republicans, they want to be Democrats, they believe in most Democratic ideals, just not all so you want to get rid of them like a Club for Growth nut ranting about moderates in his party.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

[ Parent ]
also, has it never
occured to you that Democrats are not just the party of progressives. I love the party, and know it will be successful because it has such a large tent, it invites multiple races and idealogies in with only a basic belief in fairness and the neccessity of government.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
Excuse me?
Moderates are what stop us from having a dictatorship of the majority

And it was the moderates of the time who were fighting for the abolition of slavery? Or maybe it was the moderates who were fighting for civil rights? Or maybe it was the moderates who ultimately created this country and the Constitution? Do you want to know what the moderate position on slaves was back in the day? The Missouri compromise.

She's one of the more liberal blue dog members...

I'm one of the taller members of my family, but I come from a family of midgets, so what does that tell you?

I like having moderate senators that disagree with me sometimes

Yes, because as we all know, there are no moderate Democrats in the senate already... (Carper, Dorgan, Kent, Baucus, Tester, Feinstein, Warner, Rockefeller, Bayh, Hagan, Ben Nelson, Bill Nelson, Landrieu, Johnson, Casey, Lieberman, Begich, Pryor, Lincoln, Byrd, Inouye, and Webb) Seriously, we have a caucus that is already filled to the brim with moderate to conservative members in the Senate, so I would much rather have New York be represented by an "ultra-liberal" (as you like to call it) than an ultra-moderate.

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!

[ Parent ]
Very good
The Senate is crawling with corporate Democrats.  Now one more has been added.
[ Parent ]
Schumer is more of a corporate
Democrat than her. She's not beholden to Wall Street like him. She actually voted against the terrible first bailout plan and has expressed the need for transparnecy and oversight.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
Actually to some extent it was
Moderate republicans from places like the northeast and upper midwest were instrumental in the civil rights legislation that was finally passed in the 1960's.  
[ Parent ]
Gillibrand is not,
an ultra-moderate and she will probably will vote a lot more liberally in the senate, especially with Obama guiding and pushing through most of the policy going through.

I don't think you can ever have too many moderates. Have you already forgotten how Obama spoke about trying to get over harsh, divisive partisanship, and how to have a broad base of people working together for a common goal. That's what moderates do. In the senate I suspect she will be nothing less that a moderate liberal, assertive, and effective.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

[ Parent ]
I have no problem with reaching out
...an ultra-moderate and she will probably will vote a lot more liberally in the senate, especially with Obama guiding and pushing through most of the policy going through. I don't think you can ever have too many moderates. Have you already forgotten how Obama spoke about trying to get over harsh, divisive partisanship, and how to have a broad base of people working together for a common goal. That's what moderates do. In the senate I suspect she will be nothing less that a moderate liberal, assertive, and effective.
Well, you and I are going to have to disagree, moderate Democrats, in my opinion, haven't done a good job of protecting anyone's rights. People can disagree, and I don't demand ideological purity (I have some disagreements with my newly minted senator, Tom Udall, but that didn't stop me from strongly supporting him early on) but being open minded does not mean supporting a candidate who is too conservative on too many issues, especially in a state that is really not. Maybe she'll become more liberal in the senate, but her house record so far (and her earlier decision to scape-goat immigrants doesn't bode well for her).

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!

[ Parent ]
Tom Udall was among
the 50 most Liberal Democrats in the 2007 session, and that's with a substantially moderated voting record. Tom Udall is pretty darn liberal by anyone's standards.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
NM-03 is actually more liberal than the PVI would suggest
And it tends to give quite a bit of support to Greens (to the extent that a Republican was able to win a special election in 1997). There's a bit of a necessity to be extremely liberal in that district.

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!

[ Parent ]
you said you had some problems with him
though and that was what I was refering to.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
I do have a few problems
For one thing, I wasn't particularly happy with his position on oil drilling during the Senate campaign (I oppose drilling) but then again, in New Mexico drilling is quite a popular position, so I pick and choose my battles.

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!

[ Parent ]
Except her voting record
is exactly the same as Gillibrands except for gun control, so she's going to use one issue to make her seem more progressive.

Good plan...people are stupid and they'll believe anything.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

[ Parent ]
Not any choice
Only Gillibrand.  None of the others mentioned would have engendered a primary challenge.
Breakdown
2006 Gubernatorial primary
400K votes in the five boroughs
362K votes in the rest of the state

72K votes in Nassau and Suffolk

Out of the five boroughs, 55K in the Bronx, 132K in Brooklyn, 120K in New York, 82K in Queens, and 11K on Staten Island.

So using the 06 numbers.. Gillibrand winning 2/3rds of the vote upstate is a lead of 193300 to 96700, a majority of over 96K.

So basically McCarthy would need to run up big majorities in New York City to have any shot.

Also, a cloud or two would damper enthusiasm for McCarthy too.

Gillibrand would win more than
2/3rds of the upstate vote. More like 80%. Plus, you'd have to think she'd win Staten Island big, and she is a New York City native, and asa surbanite of it she would still play very well in the outer areas. McCArthy would probably win it, but by nowhere near enough votes, and I think Gillibrand's race would bring out record turnout in upstate New York for a Democratic primary, so look for that to pad her margin as well. She'll have to spend the next two years working on gaining as much support and loyalty as she can from local NYC politicians, but with the party machine already behind Gillibrand McCarthy has little chance.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
Nassau and Suffolk too
I can also see Gillibrand doing well in Nassau and Suffolk Counties as well, because she can probably sell herself quite easily as a fellow suburbanite, even though she comes from suburbs on the other side of the city.

This isn't specifically for you, ArkDem, but for anyone to answer: of the 5 burroughs, were would Gillibrand be the strongest?

[ Parent ]
it really depends
on what kind of support she gets from the local black political establishment in many of these areas.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
but obviously Staten Island,
which is more blue dogish than the city, and law and order dems, would likely be a very strong borrough for her.

It also depends whether Cuomo jmps in in as well, becuase that would split the NYC metro vote in half and end any chance of knocking her off in the primary.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

[ Parent ]
Against McCarthy?
McCarthy is from Nassau County.  She'd mop up in Long Island.
[ Parent ]
probably do well in Manhattan
too, as she was once a lawyer there, so she has a semi-local thing going for her there.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
Gay community
her stance on gay marriage may help her with the LGBT community in NYC, who are anti-gun, but would probably overlook that for a Senator who supports marriage equality...something McCarthy doesn't.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens
[ Parent ]
Former NY Senate Leader Bruno Indicted
http://timesunion.com/AspStori...

Never a dull moment in NY politics.

did she really "Vow" to run against her in a primary?
i'd like to see the quote.  she would be an underdog in the primary - even today - and she would give up a fairly secure house seat.

and what if gillibrand votes for or authors some anti-gun legislation?  then does mccarthy run?

Link
[ Parent ]
The assault on the Blue Dogs
This constant attack on the Blue Dogs makes no sense to me.  Would you folks genuinely rather see a Republicans who votes against our interest 98 percent of the time versus someone who votes with us 90 percent of the time.  As far as I am concerned the only Blue Dog who deserves a primary is Dan Boren because there isn't a populist bone in his body it appears.

Sometimes when I read some of these comments I feel like I am reading something from the Club for Growth political handbook.  Must purify the party!

Please donate to amcharities.org to help build more after school centers in the Miami area.  

23, Democrat, IA-2

Bobby Bright
is beginning to irk me.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
but it is club for growth stuff,
and as for Bright, I wouldn't primary him, he's just really beginning to irk me.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
Thanks for finally admitting this
because you hurled personal insults at me for attacking Bobby Bright.
[ Parent ]
well that was before Bright
voted against SCHIP among other things. So far I don't think he's voted with Democrats on a single one of the major issues. Almost as bad is Marshall, but I give him slack because he's been gerrymandered once now and he'll probably gerymandered again in 2012.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
Marshall is nowhere near as bad
When it came up for standing up with middle class families in 2005, Marshall voted against extending Bush's tax cuts, the bankruptcy bill, eliminating the estate tax, etc.  Jim Marshall voted for the Employee Free Choice Act.  He also voted for the equal pay acts.  He is nowhere near as bad as Bright.

Let me say it again, Bright is a Republican who will switch parties if the Dems lose control of Congress.  He loudly attacked the Democrats for supporting the auto bailout, loudly denounced EFCA, and voted against the most basic of Democratic bills.  This guy is a Zell Miller, and I will say it again, I wish Jay Love had won last year.  

[ Parent ]
he'll
probably be better than Love was, like a moderate Republican who votes with you occassionally. However, I no longer think he was worth the million dollars in national fundraising, and wouldn't spend it again in 2010 if their were any other deserving races or incumbents to protect.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
and I like Marshall too,
Gene Taylor as well.Both are more populists.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
I don't mind Marshall
he is pretty darn good for that district, and is a pretty reliable Democratic vote on economic issues.
Taylor, also isn't that bad given his district, although I don't like his vote against EFCA.  

One conservative Democrat I don't care for is Dan Boren.  The district is ancestrally Democratic, you gotta be socially conservative, but you can be economically populist.  Unfortunately Boren is a conservative on economic issues too, voting for extending Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy and against EFCA.  He did back SCHIP, though.

[ Parent ]
Taylor's district is insanely
Republican. In close state elections state Democrats still got blown out here, they have to take most of their strength from the delta and Northern and central Mississippi. Trent Lott won election to the Senate in 1988 by scoring 70% of the vote in his old district. The whole area always gives Republicans more than 65% of the vote and Taylor is one of the last Democrats here period, even on the local level most politicians are Republican now. Its simply amazing he's managed to remain as popular as he has and win reelection as easy as he does. And the good thing is that even after nearly two decades he's still fairly young.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
That's why I like taylor
He's my favorite conservative Dem, and like you said probably the last of his kind

Male 21 Dem Ca's 1st  
[ Parent ]
the caucus used to be full of those
as we saw after 1994.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
My Personal Rule
My personal rule is if the politician is a loyal Democrat, then the party should be loyal to the politician.  Stick with the party on organization issues.  Support fellow Democrats.  Don't speak ill of fellow Democrats (primary opponents excepted, but support them when the primary is over!).  If you can't support your fellow Dem, than SYFPH.  Don't be corrupt or beholden to special interests.  Generally vote in line with your constituency, but I don't hold some deviation against you.  There should not be any single issue litmus test.
[ Parent ]
I have zero problem with blue dogs...
in districts and states where they are good fits for their constitutencies. I don't always agree with Senators like Mark Pryor, Blanche Lincoln, and Mary Landrieu on everything, but they're great fits for their states and are good quality statesmen who aren't afraid to stand up for what they think is right, even if it bucks the party or their constituencies at times.
But this isn't Louisiana, it's New York. Anything less than a progressive statewide isn't good enough.
Nonetheless, I've calmed down from being upset yesterday and trying to be cautiously optimistic that she'll move more into line with the state that she's going to represent.

22, Democrat, AZ-01
Peace. Love. Gabby.
[ Parent ]
Blue Dogs do kill us
Chris Bowers did this really exhaustive analysis of voting by blocs.  It turned out that DLC and New Democrat types basically voted with the Party as a whole on key legislation but Blue Dogs did not.  Back in the day they were more likely to vote with Bush on key legislation than vote with the rest of their party.

In many districts, even though I am not crazy about them, Blue Dogs represent the people odf their district rather well.  I don't complain about Gene Taylor or Charlie Melancon.  I actually like and respect then.  Gillibransd is kinfd of marginal for NY-20 as a Blue Dog.  And we need no Blue Dogs whatsoever sabotaging the party's agenda at the state-wode level in a state like New Yorl.

Sneer if you want abd load up with that upstate baloney but upstaters represent a third or less of registered Democrats in New York State.  An upstater who deliberately sticks it to the party as a whole should be dead meat on a kebab thank you.

[ Parent ]
In all honesty
I'm not a fan of ANY caucus within a caucus, be it Blue Dog, New Dems or the Progressive Caucus.  Democrats should be Democrats period.  All these silly little caucus do is divide parties.
[ Parent ]
Geez Louise
Does anyone realize that if we ran Nancy Pelosi in all 435 congressional districts we would not have a Dem majority?  Stop complaining that Dem reps in conservative areas aren't super-liberal, if they weren super-duper-liberal they wouldn't get elected.

If we are to be the "big tent" party, we need to be less "bitch" and moan" and more "listen and learn".  While McCarthy has a very admirable profile for her gun control stance, why are all the posters here so sour on Gillibrand.  However, the 20th is fairly storng rural areas, gun country, maybe Nascar area.  Who knows, but her gun control stance IS IN LINE WITH HER DISTRICT.  Isn't that what representation in the House is all about

I don't think Gillibrand challenged Dem leadership in the house on any major issues.  History would then project that she wouldn't do that in the Senate either.  So we traded Hillary, who was pragmatic and maybe more liberal for Gillibrand.  Its a step down, as Hillary was more experienced in politics (thought not officially), but c'mon.

The world did not end today.  Everything will be okay.  And I expect Gillibrand will pass the same votes that Hillary would about 99% of the time.  

Gillibrand vs. McCarthy
i hope that if McCarthy does challenge Gillibrand i hope that Gillibrand wrecks her in the primary. Gillibrand may be a blue dog but she can attract GOP votes and would counter balance Schumer's liberalism. I like Gillibrand. I followed her campaign in 2006 and i was very impressed with her and i hoped that she would move on to higher office. Go Kirsten....you got this!!!
so did i,
one thing though, Schumer is hardly liberal overall, and he's very favorable to wall street, beholden is more like it.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
just saw her on hardball
and mccarthy says she'll run if she can't find someone younger to run against gillibrand.  but she seems shrill and personal.  and she's getting a splash right now as the skunk at the garden party but will she be able to build energy/fundraising/legitimacy for the next 2 years?

and while i underwstand that the gun issue is personal for mccarthy, her sneering attqacks on gillibrand seem overstated.  she keeps calling her the "the poster girl for the nra."

This is very unlike her
I've never seen McCarthy like this before.

I'm running on the assumption that she's just pushing Gillibrand more to the center on guns.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

[ Parent ]
Well the issue of gun control
is very personal to her.  She lost her husband due to a gunman, and so she is speaking from her heart and not her mind.

But this primary challenge has the potential of being very damaging to the Dems.  Which was my concern with Gillibrand in the first place, but that's water under the bridge now.

[ Parent ]
Funny
What happened to all the people who wanted Paterson to put in a caretaker so we can have a primary in 2010 when I was arguing a damaging primary would be bad.

It only has the potential to be damaging if Gillibrand fails to be that popular and votes like a conservative and considering she's one of only like five Senators who support gay marriage, something tells me that's not going to happen. McCarthy isn't going to get anywhere challenging Gillibrand on one issue when Gillibrand is probably closer to the mainstream than McCarthy. Another wing of the party is going to go after Gillibrand on immigration. McCarthy is not with that wing on that issue, so you might find some Hispanic state legislator running the primary too splitting the far left vote. Tasini will probably run because he's a pompous ass who thinks Ned Lamont was too conservative. Gillibrand will end up winning with a plurality at worse.

You can't stage a succesful and credible primary fight if you're voting record is exactly the same as your opponent except on one issue that isn't even on the top of people's minds. Unless (God forbid) another LIRR massacre happens, gun control is like #5 at best.

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

[ Parent ]
oh and btw
McCarthy does not support marriage equality, thus you're going to see a block of gay rights voters in the city who may otherwise oppose Gillibrand's gun positions support her because gay rights is more important than guns for them.

Gillibrand's not stupid...she's going to position herself on the left wing of all the top issues in New York next year leaving McCarthy and whoever else to fight her on issues no one is thinking about.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

[ Parent ]
I hope she does that
and Gillibrand having moved to the left, the NY Democratic power brokers talk some sense into McCarthy (and any pro-immigrant Hispanic) to avoid the primary.  Tasini is a joke and can be ignored.  

I really do believe that this seat becomes vulnerable if there is a nasty primary.  And possibly Paterson's job as well.  

[ Parent ]
McCarthy + Pro-Immigrant Hispanic
= split progressive vote and Gillibrand's easy win with the support of the NYC LGBT community (which tends to be anti-immigrant itself btw)  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens
[ Parent ]
This is what needs to happen
Gillibrand needs to sit down with NYC metro Democrats and convince them that she will represent them on the issues, i.e. move to the left.  She apparently already has done so on gay rights.  And then people like McCarthy need to drop their primary threats.

I will say this, if McCarthy actually primaries Gillibrand, we are at risk to lose this seat as well as the Governor seat as well as McCarthy;s House seat.  Unless Gillibrand actually votes like a Blue Dog in the Senate, a primary is completely unneeded and harmful.

The NY Dems, Gillibrand, and McCarthy need to compromise and avoid a primary, whatever it takes.

Huh?
Her district is D+9.  I seriously doubt it's going anywhere.  And I assume Paterson is comfortable that Gillibrand will serve in the Senate as a solid liberal or else he wouldn't have picked her.
[ Parent ]
No compromise
The time to compromise was in selecting Clinton's replacement.  Paterson chose to divide the party instead.  Now, both he and Gillibrand should be primaried.
[ Parent ]
you're utterly ridiculous


Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
jsut priamry everybody
we don't give a shit how intelligent, talented, and effective they, lets primary them because they're not ultra-liberals. Get it through your head that's there's nothing wrong with the Blue Dog caucus, and Patterson has been a very good governor so far.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
"Ultra Liberals"
You've got the Republican slogan down pat, I see.
[ Parent ]
Which members of the Blue Dog Caucus need primaried then?
I would like to see your list if you have one sir.  I am not trying to be combative just trying to get your input Paleo.  

Please donate to amcharities.org to help build more after school centers in the Miami area.  

23, Democrat, IA-2

[ Parent ]
I'm not saying they need to be
I didn't want Gillibrand to be primaried for her House seat.  I wouldn't say call on Blanche Lincoln to be primaried.  It depends on the district and the state.  New York is a progressive state, and should be represented by one.  
[ Parent ]
Gillibrand was fairly liberal for her house seat
she's about right in the middle of Democratic caucus anyway, as far as librality. She'd probably in the upper 3rd of liberalness in the senate, because it tends to be more moderate by design. In many ways Schumer and Clinton are hardly progressives, D'Amato before them was a Republican, and Moynihan was a widely respected and very much loved moderate. Before the unpopular D'Amato New York was represented by liberal Republican Jacob Javits, a moderate in his party who helped pass the Civil Rights legislation. New York likes to be represented by moderates.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
Please don't compare her to Jacob Javits
Jacob Javits was not a moderate.  He was a liberal.  The others you mentioned weren't total progressives, but they weren't Blue Dogs either.
[ Parent ]
you don't know what you are
talking about. Here are her interest group ratings from last session:

100%-NARAL/Pro-Choice America
100%-American Civil Liberties Union
95%-Americans for Democratic Action'
100%-Children's Defense Fund
95%-League of Conservation Voters
96%-NAACP
89%-SEIU
96%-Mean Score

Look like the record of a conservative to you? You can't harp over what group she's member of and ignore her overall progressive voting record. Joining the blue dogs is more a political stunt anyway. Besides, I'm sure she'll be working very closely and loyally with President Obama's, (just take a moment to reflect over that, it feels so nice to be able to finally write those words), to forward his agenda.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

[ Parent ]
Those group ratings are meaningless
That's the same argument Lieberman supporters always dredge up.  They're based on very few votes.
[ Parent ]
there also happen
to be very, very few important votes. I say this as a former Senate page. In one month not one bill was actually passed. Most of it is procedural votes and back and forth tinkering between demands of various members in order to drum up enough support. There are actually not many up down, pass or fail votes on major issues, and that is why those surveys are based on a few issues and are good enough for me. Most votes in the senate are actually procedural votes anyway.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
But Gillibrand doesn't do such a good job when it's important

Her "Chips are down" score from Progressive Punch is atrocious (52.27). Her score was worse than both Chet Edwards's and Jim Matheson's (their districrts are R+18 and R+17 respectively and they had PP CAD scores of 60.37 and 58.75 respectively).



Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!

[ Parent ]
that's
a very flawed matrix.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
Why?
Do I really care how a member votes on issues where the outcome isn't in question?

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!

[ Parent ]
no but htat matrix morphs a
lot of liberal Democrats voting records and its not entirely accurate or representative of over all up or down votes. There are votes that fail because individual members want to change something, which they do after it is blocked and they later vote and pass it.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
Blue Dogs
I can't help but feel that the animosity towards her comes mainly, if not entirely, from her being part of the Blue Dog caucus.  Looking at her voting scores from all of these different groups, it's difficult to imagine any other reason.  I know there's a lot of netroots hate directed towards Blue Dogs, but most of us center-left Democrats don't mind a little counterweight to those who would take the party far left and cost us elections.
[ Parent ]
Moynihan was absolutely a Blue Dog
opposed universal healthcare

"There is no healthcare crisis in this country"
-Sen Moynihan

was not very pro-choice

"You women are ruining the Democratic Party with your insistence on abortion"- Sen. Moynihan

was very hawkish and strongly anti-Soviet.

If Gillibrand is a blue dog, Moynihan absolutely was too. From 1977-1981, Javitz was the more liberal Senator.


Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

[ Parent ]
Yes and no
Moynihan talked conservative and voted liberal, which would have pissed off a lot of bloggers, but kept the liberal groups pretty happy.  It also pissed the hell out of the neo-conservatives who considered him a traitor.
[ Parent ]
Gillibrand might be the same way
for all we know.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens
[ Parent ]
Probably
but words often divide parties as much as votes.  Although I suspect that Gillibrand will vote and talk as a liberal from now on.  The few conservative votes that she takes will be done quietly.

While that might not be enough to avoid a divisive primary challenge in 2010, it should pacify most NYC liberals in the long run.

[ Parent ]
Her LGBT support is building
coming out for gay marriage was politically very smart. It negates a huge block of Democratic voters a McCarthy would need to win a primary...gay voters in NYC.
She went left of McCarthy on that.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens
[ Parent ]
I've got one name
Dan Lipinski.  He is an unqualified idiot who took his seat from his daddy, representing a safe Democratic district yet voting like he is a Democrat from Alabama.
[ Parent ]
I can get on board that train.

[ Parent ]
he's more conservative on social and environmental
issues, but his district is one of those more religious, culturally conservative blue collar districts that tend to vote Dem over economic reasons, which is where Lipinksi is most liberal.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
I don't think Lipinski is reliable
on economic issues either, he supports repealing the estate tax and extending Bush's tax cuts.

But beyond that, he is unqualified for the job.  He only is there because his dad retired in late 2004 and he was appointed to be the nominee by the Chicago machine.

[ Parent ]
yeah, I have
to agree with you. My normal line is "why are they beign considered. Would they be considered if they did not have that last name." If the answer is no I usually don't support them except in certain instances.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
well there's no way else to call
You want the entire Blue Dog coalition to go fuck off basically, you said they should go join the Republicans, which would give them a majority, as there are 47 members of the blue dog caucus, many of whom I really like and respect.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
Amen, sir!
You took the words right off my fingertips. Save for 2 or 3 members, I have no problem with the blue dogs. The only Dems, or pseudo-Dems, that bug me are Lieberman (although hopefully CT voters will toss him out in 3 years) and Zell Miller.
[ Parent ]
Charlie Cook's column
Paleo is the democratic equivalent of those on the far right who have destroyed the republican party for maybe a generation.  He just wants the party to eat it's own with complete disregard for what it would actually do to the party.
[ Parent ]
Really?
Seems to me those Republicans didn't do too badly until recently.

I don't want the party to eat its own.  Gillibrand was fine where she was.  But not as a New York Democratic senator.

[ Parent ]
No?
Tell that to Congressman Andy Harris of Maryland


Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens
[ Parent ]
don't forget
Congressman Wahlburg.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
Big Tent Baby!

[ Parent ]
nice bio of New York Times on her here

Gillibrand Is a Centrist With a Tenacious Style
By MICHAEL POWELL and RAYMOND HERNANDEZ
Published: January 23, 2009
Kirsten E. Gillibrand, the two-term Democratic congresswoman chosen to fill the Senate seat vacated this week by Hillary Rodham Clinton, has married a relentless political and fund-raising style to a centrist brand of politics.

The Freshman: Frenetic Start in Congress for One Democrat, Class of '06 (February 20, 2007)
Times Topics: Kirsten GillibrandMs. Gillibrand (pronounced JILL-uh-brand), a 42-year-old lawyer and mother of two young children, had never held political office before defeating a four-term incumbent in a vastly Republican district in 2006. Her district extends from the flatlands of the Hudson Valley to the mountainous North Country.

She comes from a politically connected family; her father is a prominent state lobbyist who once had close ties to former Gov. George E. Pataki, a Republican, and her grandmother was prominent in the formidable Albany Democratic machine. Ms. Gillibrand worked as an intern for a Republican senator, Alfonse M. D'Amato, and clerked for a federal judge appointed by President Ronald Reagan.

Her politics, perhaps reflecting her conservative district, cannot be easily charted along a left-right axis. She earned a high rating from the National Rifle Association and opposed efforts to extend state drivers' licenses to illegal immigrants. At the same time, she favors abortion rights, voted to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq and to extend middle-class tax cuts, and she has opposed privatizing Social Security. She raises large sums of money from Wall Street, but voted against the first bailout bill last fall; that vote angered some Democratic leaders in Congress.

Alan Van Capelle, the executive director of the Empire State Pride Agenda, a gay rights group, said that he spoke by phone with Representative Gillibrand on Thursday night and that she spoke in favor of same-sex marriage. This would make her the first United States senator from New York to endorse gay marriage; Charles E. Schumer, the state's senior senator, opposes it.

"She spoke eloquently about the 1,324 rights that are denied to same-sex couples in New York," Mr. Van Capelle said.

An aide to Ms. Gillibrand confirmed that she supports gay marriage.

She was an outspoken supporter of Mrs. Clinton's presidential campaign and has drawn financial support from prominent women's groups in Washington, not least Emily's List.

She has insisted, to the point of annoying Congressional colleagues, on openness in government, posting a "Sunlight Report" on her Congressional Web site listing her meetings with lobbyists as well as the names of individuals seeking government grants known as earmarks.

And, much like Mr. Schumer, she has adopted a permanent campaign approach to office, crisscrossing her district, holding public meetings in malls and general stores, and tromping across fields to meet with farmers. She is mindful, she has told friends, that her two elections might be seen as aberrations and quickly undone.

As her re-election approached, Ms. Gillibrand also reinforced her reputation as a prodigious fund-raiser, taking in $4.6 million. Much of it came from corporate and other political action committees, including tobacco companies, a fact Republicans seized on in an effort to undercut her efforts to portray herself as a reformer.

In her first campaign, in 2006, Ms. Gillibrand ran aggressively against the Republican incumbent, Representative John E. Sweeney, and won with 53 percent of the vote.

After her victory, Ms. Gillibrand and her staff quickly realized there was little time for celebration. Politically, Ms. Gillibrand found herself in a tough situation: a Democrat (and onetime Manhattan lawyer) representing a heavily Republican district filled with mill workers, dairy farmers and other blue-collar workers.

Quickly, Ms. Gillibrand moved to bridge the political and cultural divide, shunning political labels and even embracing Second Amendment gun rights and other positions that placed her outside the mainstream of her party.

In the end, she wound up winning a second term with nearly 65 percent of the vote against Alexander F. Treadwell, a former state Republican Party chairman who spent about $7 million on the race, much of it his own money.

From the moment she arrived in Washington in 2007, the Democratic Party leadership in Congress has been very attentive to Ms. Gillibrand's needs, mindful of the political challenges she faces back home.

On her very first day in Congress in 2007, for example, she was allotted a few minutes to give a floor speech on Congressional ethics reform, one of the central themes of her campaign. Ms. Gillibrand was also handed a high-profile role: helping advance a package of antiterror bills that the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, introduced.

Most important, Democratic leaders gave her two committee assignments she had lobbied for - Armed Services and Agriculture - both of which allowed her to deliver aid to her district, where there are large numbers of farmers and military veterans.

Ms. Gillibrand lives near Hudson, N.Y., just outside Albany, with her husband, Jonathan Gillibrand, a financial consultant, and their sons, Theodore, who is 5, and Henry, who is 6 months old. (Ms. Gillibrand received a standing ovation on the floor of the House from her colleagues for working right up to the day she gave birth to Henry.)

Ms. Gillibrand attended Emma Willard School in Troy, N.Y., a women's high school, before going to Dartmouth College, where she majored in Asian studies. After earning a law degree from the U.C.L.A. School of Law in 1991, she served as a clerk for a federal appeals court judge. She then went on to work as special counsel for the housing and urban development secretary, Andrew M. Cuomo.

It looks like she is already rounding up support from the party establishment and the traditional news media.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

She Sounds Formidable
She sounds like she'll be a formidable primary opponent to anyone who wants to take her on.  Clinton, Schumer, Paterson, NRA, Wall Street, Emily's List, abortion and gay rights groups all already on her side, plus a record of winning as a Democrat in a Republican leaning district.  I don't see how anyone is going to beat an incumbent like that unless she screws up completely.
[ Parent ]
and that's just the point
she's not going to screw up becuase she's such a savvy politician. She'll probably be primaried by someone prominent sure, but most of these people are having a pipe dream if they think she'll get beaten. She has roots to her district, plus Albany, plus Manhattan and she has the support of Patterson and the entire establishment and many in the local black political machine will follow which gurantees that McCArthy won't be able to come close to sweeping NYC Metro like she needs to in order to beat her when Gillibrand will be getting something like 75% of upstate votes.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
I agree she is a savvy politician
and she's going to do what you hate so much, that is move significantly to the left and represent NY Democrats.
[ Parent ]
I don't hate that,
I'm very liberal myself. I hate people forcing or demanding Democrats to be liberal and attacking them to be more liberal.

And Gillibrand is not representing NY Democrats, she is representing the entire state, not just one party.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

[ Parent ]
She sounds like a cool chick.
...and dare I say it? Someone I'd like to have a beer with.
[ Parent ]
or, rather...
buy a drink for her? ;)

I stated this earlier. Maybe she will be the next POTUS in 2016?

[ Parent ]
A primary was happening either way
and it may have been quite decisive...Upstate wanted attention and they were going to get it anyway possible. They wanted this seat and if Paterson had given it to some NYC liberal, Upstate Dems (they even formed a caucus) were going to primary the downstate Senator anyway with potentially divisive results. With Democratic support solidified downstate, Democrats are trying to grow the party Upstate (that's where our State Senate majority lies...Upstate is where Democrats are holding on to Republican Senate seats).

That's the genius behind the Gillibrand pick. Now it's likely downstate Democrats are going to try to retain their control of the party in an effort to keep moderates from winning statewide...it will only seek to divide the state further.

New York State's Democratic Party needs to be a statewide mix of Downstate liberals, Downstate moderates, Upstate liberals and Upstate moderates. We have to stop this Downstate control because we're afraid upstaters are too conservative. It will only hurt us in the long run.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

Unless the upstater is
actually too conservative. Last week, KG was too conservative.

But if she shifts quickly to fit the state, there's no problem. The anti-immigrant stuff is particularly repulsive to me. I hope that changes.  

[ Parent ]
There are no really pro-immigrant prominent politician
outside of the city. Certainly not McCarthy...Israel has been bad on that issue and he's sorta backed off to not be attached to Levy.

I'm willing to bet any statewide Dem will be like Gillibrand on immigration...the state is that way I'm sorry to say. You remember how New Yorkers responded to Spitzer's driver's license plan? New Yorkers overwhelmingly opposed it...Siena had it up to 70%. Spitzer's approvals dropped like a rock.

And you want to talk scary anti-immigrant. You should hear my newly elected State Senator...sounds a lot like her and I live in Queens...immigrant central. Illegal, undocumented, whatever you call them, there is no love for them, even in Queens...and some of the harshes critics are legal immigrants from South and Central America.

I don't think it'll change...I think she'll moderate her views enough to get by, but she's not going to go Spitzer on immigration.


Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

[ Parent ]
Upstate/Downstate
I confess I don't have much patience for the upstate/downstate issue. Where is it written that only someone from upstate can adequately represent upstate, and only someone from downstate can adequately represent downstate? Shouldn't we want the best person for the job, regardless of where that person is from?

I don't believe that someone who is married or single will necessarily do a better job regarding family issues, or that people of particular races should be considered unlikely to do well concerning race issues, or that someone of a particular sex would be necessarily better or worse on gender issues.

I know that for some people, geography does matter; it makes that person seem more like "one of us." But isn't that category just as irrelevant in terms of on-the-job performance as all the others? Isn't it time we got over the sense that geography matters more than the person?

[ Parent ]
It's not about that
I would argue that the curret flock of downstate leaders adequately represent the interests of Upstate

but Upstate Democrats still want to see one of their own in there. They feel as if their candidates cannot win elections to statewide office because they're outnumbered by the downstate and aren't liberal enough and decided this was the best way to get one of their own into office since this was an appointment.


Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

[ Parent ]
That's My Point
I would argue that the curret flock of downstate leaders adequately represent the interests of Upstate

but Upstate Democrats still want to see one of their own in there.

If the present folks statewide are doing an adequate (or even a good) job representing upstate interests, then it shouldn't matter where they are from. If they're doing what upstaters want them to do, why should there be any need to have "one of your own" in the position? And similarly, why should downstaters care if an upstater happens to be a good person to represent downstate interests?

Why should geography matter? Why can't we just get over this very arbitrary way of looking at candidates?

[ Parent ]
I disagree with this
Upstate Dems don't have the numbers to primary a NYC metro Democrat.  NYC metro makes up 75-80% of the Democratic primary.  

And I doubt that some selections, Caroline Kennedy, for example, was going to be primaried in any case.

I do agree that if Gillibrand is able to paper over the differences with NYC metro and avoid a divisive primary, it will help the Dems make more inroads in Upstate NY, and end the Republican edge there, the Repub edge is already eroding, and the Gillibrand selection might put them out of business.

[ Parent ]
I never said they'd win
but they would force a primary anyway...this is the downside of the increased registration...Democrats have a lot more registered voters upstate than they did four-eight years ago, so it's possible an Upstate Democratic could mount enough of a primary challenge to hurt a City/Downstate Democrat in the General Election, especially against someone like King who is almost certain to win Long Island.

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens
[ Parent ]
I don't see McCarthy getting traction
The former Republicanism, the Iraq War vote and the generally lacklustre record won't give her much to work with on the left, whilst rural areas are likely to instinctively recoil on the gun issue.

However, I could see a more viable primary challenge to Gillibrand from NYC rather than Long Island. Not from a Representative - I couldn't see two of them independently challenging a sitting senator - but from a little lower down the scale. A councilmember who doesn't think they could dislodge their Representative might very well try to run an ultra-progressive primary campaign, basically trying to come off as some sort of hybrid of Jesse Jackson Sr. and Bernie Sanders.

I don't know that there would be a route to 50% that way, but a strong campaign in NYC and bits of West NY (where I've seen little evidence of strong Gillibrand connections and where economic populism would be a strong message) might allow it to get towards 40%, and then McCarthy tying up Long Island votes might let it sneak through.

Not that I think this is likely, just that I think that's the greatest threat to Gillibrand.

Interesting Poll Results
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/...

Favorable / Unfavorable
Sen. Kristen Gillibrand (D): 41 / 11

2010 Senate General Election
Gillibrand 49%, Peter King (R) 24%
Gillibrand 44%, George Pataki (R) 42%

Compared to your views, do you think Kirsten Gillibrand is too liberal, too conservative, or about right?

10% Too Liberal
10% Too Conservative
42% About Right

Kirsten Gillibrand has an "A" rating from the National Rifle Association. Does this make you more likely to vote for her for U.S. Senate in 2010, less likely, or does it not make a difference to your vote?

18% More Likely
25% Less Likely
54% No Difference

I think these numbers confirm what a formidable general election candidate she'll make, crushing the R's most likely candidate by a 2-1 margin.

Uggg...
Those numbers are too good for my liking.  I was hoping she'd poll much closer to King, helping to bait him into the race.
[ Parent ]
NY-Sen-B: McCarthy Vows to Challenge Gillibrand | 139 comments

Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

You're not running for second place. Is your website? See why Campaign Engine is ranked #1 in software and support among Progressive-only Internet firms. http://www.mediamezcla.com/

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

About the Site

Publisher: DavidNYC

Senior Editor: James L.

Senior Editor: Crisitunity

Contributing Editor: Jeffmd

Search the SSP archives:

Sign up to receive a daily e-mail whenever the SSP is updated:

SSP Resources

Presidential Vote by CD

SSP Document Collection

Race Tracker Wiki

Dave's Redistricting App

Blogroll

Daily Kos Elections
DemConWatch
Five Thirty Eight
Governing
Hotline On Call
Political Wire
Pollster.com
Prop*50
Public Policy Polling
The Thicket
Powered by: SoapBlox