What Both Parties Can Learn from New York

There is nothing in American politics quite like a mayoral race in New York City. The extraordinary ethnic diversity, byzantine election laws, range of necessary campaign tactics and, because it is the last place in the US where people still read newspapers, intense media climate, of New York makes politics there unlike anything else in the country. Moreover, the most exciting mayoral elections in New York are often Democratic primaries.

In recent years, 1977, 1989 and even 2001 have been intensely competitive Democratic primaries with great story lines and great characters. Ed Koch's transition from the congressman from Greenwich Village to the law and order candidate allowed him to emerge from a crowded field of seven Democratic candidates including such once and future legends of New York politics as Mario Cuomo and Bella Abzug in 1977. Koch's defeat at the hands of David Dinkins in the Democratic Primary 12 years later and the exciting four way primary in 2001 where Bronx Borough President Fernando Ferrer, on the strength of historic Latino turnout, almost won the primary in a runoff were all great theatre and great politics as well.

The mayoral election of 2009 does not look like it will be as exciting as any of those great campaigns. Instead incumbent mayor Michael Bloomberg will likely get reelected for a third term without much difficulty. While we New Yorkers can lament that we are not getting the great drama we like to see in our mayoral election, there might be a broader message in this election for both major parties. Bloomberg, while registered as an independent, has been an on and off Republican since he first ran for mayor in 2001, and will be that party's nominee again this year. New York is, of course, a heavily Democratic city, but if Bloomberg wins, for the first time in our history, we will have five consecutive terms of Republican mayors. To look at it another way, the last time the city elected a Democratic mayor was 1989 a year when Barack Obama was a law student; the Soviet Union still existed; and a blackberry was a fruit. Further, there have been not one, but two terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center since a Democrat was last elected mayor of New York.

It seems there is something instructive in this state of affairs for both parties. First, although Michael Bloomberg would currently have a hard time getting elected as a Republican in many places outside New York, he is the kind of candidate for which the Republicans should be looking. Bloomberg projects fiscal confidence and knowledge, and, while too conservative in this area for many, has economic views that are not out of synch with many Republican voters. While his economic views will not alienate Republicans, his views on social issues are much closer to those of mainstream America than, for example, the views of Bobby Jindal or Sarah Palin are. While not exactly a strong activist for abortion rights or gay marriage, to name a few hot button social issues, Bloomberg is not a belligerent opponent of these positions either. Time is on the side of the Democrats on these issues, so the best Republican strategy is to find candidates who, like Bloomberg simply do not prioritize these issues, or are weak supporters of these ideas.

Temperamentally, Bloomberg projects a maturity and a comfort with dialog that is difficult to find among much of the leadership of the Republican Party, but which almost all voters seem to want. In this respect he is not unlike the pre-2008 John McCain. Candidates with temperaments like Bloomberg's are essential if the Republican Party has any chance of growing beyond its angry base.

For the Democratic Party, the New York mayor's race is a reminder of a different kind. The party is poised to lose its fifth consecutive mayoral race in a city where they enjoy a registration advantage over Republicans of roughly six to one. One can try to excuse away this away using demographics of money, but since 1989 losing Democratic candidates for mayor have been African American, Latino and white, Jewish and Christian, male and female. Democrats have lost when severely outspent and when campaign spending has been equalized by New York's strong campaign finance laws. Democrats have lost in good economic times and in bad, with Democratic and Republican presidents in office, and when the country has been at war and at peace.

Given this, it seems like the problem might lie with the Democratic Party, and probably has relevance beyond the five boroughs of New York City. Unlike the 2006 and 2008 national campaigns, recent Democratic candidates for mayor in New York have not had the luxury of running against failed parties and failed presidents. Without this enormous advantage, the Democratic Party in New York has been unable to persuade voters that they offer meaningful solutions to a range of problems including education, public safety and fiscal management. More significantly, they have utterly failed to articulate a compelling progressive vision for urban America. The lesson for the national party is that in the few places where Republican Party candidates are not dysfunctional and on the ideological fringes, the Democrats still need to do some work on figuring out what to say to voters. Unless they do this, if the Republicans were willing and able to nominate Bloomberg type candidates in other parts of the country, the Democratic moment might dissipate pretty quickly.

Comments

[oldgeek1]

Bloomberg is likable enough but has accomplished NOTHING.

None of his major projects got off the drawing board even before the economy tanked.

His politics and manner a huge improvement over Rudi who most people were glad to see leave.

It will be interesting to see who the Dem's run against him.

[Samalabear]

If it was a sad day for NYC if Bloomberg is reelected. It was a sad day when Sheldon Silver was "re-elected." There is so much dead wood and corruption in both parties when it comes to New York. If you can break into New York Senate, Assembly, City Council -- you name it -- you have a life-time position. New York desperately needs new blood.

[harriscrl3]

The only thing to learn from NY is that we have a wealthy mayor who thinks his money can BUY him majorship of NY for LIFE

Carol

[DoesItReallyMatter]

I know this will be difficult to accept but N.Y.C. is not the center of the universe for America, and like Las Vegas, politically, what happens in New York......stays in New York. Lincoln should really travel more.

[serindipity803]

Bloomberg is not actually any party is he? He tries them all to stay in office? Isn't that more like a ploy for dictatorship in a 'democracy'?

[yogidad]

Dude - You have no understanding of New York whatsoever. NYC is a one party town that has the exact same system that supported Boss Tweed. One rarely has a choice of who to vote for in a city council race because all insurgent democrats have been knocked off the ballot. I believe NYC is all of 15% republican. There are more election law cases in NY than the entire rest of the US combined - and those cases are brought entirely by democrats knocked off the ballot.
NYC is probably more corrupt than Jersey or Phillie. The list of corruption that has surfaced is incredible. Of course this is only the tip of the iceberg as most of this corruption came to light without government investigations.
Voters in NYC will vote for any reasonable candidate who did not make it on the ballot through support of the local party bosses. This has nothing, and I mean nothing, to do with national politics. Wake up! It's suppossed to be your area of expertise and this is fifth grade foolishness.

[SteveK9]

GOP: can't and won't.

[SEQUOIABISON]

Using Mayor Bloomberg as an example of how republicans can get back on track is a poor criteria.

First of all the Mayor was once a Democrat and is quite liberal on many social issues, secondly he is a Billionaire and does not depend on any particular party to fund his race, this would be pretty tough for other republicans around the country to emulate.

[cn2004]

Yes, NYC needs a Democratic mayor like we have here in Philadelphia. After sixty years of Democratic mayors we have a one billion dollar deficit, a failed school system, and four hundred murders a year. Yes, that's the kind of leadership NYC needs.

[ProudLiberalDan]

"If the Republicans were willing and able to nominate Bloomberg type candidates in other parts of the country, the Democratic moment might dissipate pretty quickly."

----------­----------

I'm not worried. It won't happen.

The Republican heirarchy and the leaders of the conservative movement are telling themselves that if they had only been even farther to the far right (a.k.a. "we've lost our way"), that they would have somehow held onto Congress and the Presidency.

They have not admitted to themselves that the American people have rejected their policies and ideology.

The theocratic-fascist base of the party still sees anyone who allows people to make up their own mind about abortion or who refuses to engage in gay bashing as unsuitable for the Republican Party.

Politicians like Michael Bloomberg and Richard Riordian were specific to their cities. Richard Riordian could not get past the Republican Party primary to run for Governor. Giuliani is turning his back on his former social inclusiveness to run statewide in New York.

The only reason the Republican Party is welcoming back Bloomberg is the hope of patronage after he wins re-election.

The Republican Party has yet to even conceive that moving back to the center is an option, let alone the answer.

[jhNY]

Bloomberg is a non-issue candidate, running on the strength and numbers of the dollars he throws at his campaigns. The press here are mostly cowed by the money, and most reporters cannot bring themselves to do substantive stories that might dampen the money-manufactured ardor for Bloomberg that makes do for actual enthusiasm, possibly out of the hope that one day, having done no negative stories about our eternal mayor, they might be rewarded by a job with Bloomberg News.

Sadly, despite the author's declarations, there is scant coverage of candidates or issues around local elections, and many times, a voter who reads the local newspapers daily can find himself inside a voting booth with very little real knowledge of who the candidates are and or what their plans in office might be. With candidates like Bloomberg, whose first campaign, though successful, cost him around $60 a vote in self-donated election funds, most of the information people receive about him comes from campaign ads and brochures, all of which, unsurprisingly, show our mayor in a most flattering light. And from atop his big pile of money, Bloomberg threatens to spend all his rivals into the stone age should they mount a serious challenge to his quest for endless local authority.

[brooklynpsu]

I think that the comments will quickly point out that that Mayor Bloomberg is not perfect, so I don't know that I would attribute his success to platform or preformance. I think more telling is the Democrats uncanny abilitiy to eat their own. One can look at the US Democratic Primary of 2008, blue-dog vs. progressive caucuses, or the republicans undercutting Sarah Palin ,Bohner and Cantor's feuds, etc

Republicans are failing by straying from Reagan's rules of conservatism, not because they have proven effective for governing (which they are not), but because they are affective for maintaining control. We as democrats must not speak ill of any other Democrat.

I know that people will argue that this is unhealthy, but I would argue the only evidence I have seen of this principles failure is failure when party members stray from from it. Republicans can return not by reiventing themselve, but by returning to that principles of self preservation. The success Republicans enjoyed in advancing their causes was due primarily to their abiltiy to dictate the discussion and this was achieved primarily by strength in numbers and message control.

Unfortunately it seems that progressives are already undermining President Obama's reelection chances by not appreciating the tremendous progressive strides we have made already but by focusing a few short comings. Some may argue that this is the only way that we will affect change, but I fundamentally disagree. Maintaining power is the only proven way to effect change..

[indyleftist]

"More significantly, they have utterly failed to articulate a compelling progressive vision for urban America."

Yes that's what all the progressives in the democratic party are wanting...More Mike Bloombergs LOL
If the democrats can learn one thing from New York its how if you leave the bankers in charge of everything they mess it all up

[PW1206]

I can't be the only person that's pissed off at him for changing the law so that he could run for a third term...

[Nommo]

You absolutely are not. I don't know why it is not called what it is. Disenfranchisement.

[Citizen54]

You certainly are not the only one. Right there with you, pal, and it's one reason I won't vote for Prince Bloomberg.
The author of this post doesn't even mention Bloomberg getting the city council to overturn term limits, which the people of NYC approved several years ago. In fact, he makes it sound like the Mayor for Life's re-election is a done deal.

[harriscrl3]

No you are not. I wil NOT be voting for Bloomberg. I cant stand him he needs to give someone else a chance its riduclous that he wants to set up some kind of monarchy in the state. I think that no one challenges him cause he has way too much money which is bothersome but then to make it so that you can run again is down right troubling.

I hope he LOSES and since he now is going to run on the republican ticket no way in heck I would leave my home and go and vote for a republican.

Carol

[Daniel Millstone]

Prof. Mitchell; one of the striking things about this post seems to be the omission of any discussion of Mr. Bloomberg's record as mayor: jobs, affordable housing (or the lack thereof), reliance on the FIRE (finance, insurance real estate) industries and hostility to other business, racial disparities in law enforcement.

Are issues just passe?