When New York mayor Michael Bloomberg announced in February that he was not going to run for President, he said he was willing to help any candidate that "takes an independent, nonpartisan approach and embraces practical solutions that challenge party orthodoxy."
However on Tuesday, Bloomberg said neither McCain nor Obama had fully shown that nonpartisan, pragmatic tone "as much as I would like."
"I think both of them have given the public an understanding of who they are, but I don't think you can say that either has given the public concrete answers to what they would do," Bloomberg said.
Bloomberg has put his money behind a candidate every year since 1990.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Friday, October 24, 2008
New York Senate Battle
The New York Senate battle has never been so hot or so significant! Republicans are trying to hold back Democrats as Senate races are getting tighter in New York.
The Republicans plan: defend incumbents, win an open in Western New York and go after a few vulnerable Democratic lawmakers
The Democratic plan: beat some long-serving Republicans, win Western New York and keep their senators in office
While the assembly will stay Democratic, Republicans can claim the Senate-- they are hanging on to a 31-29-seat edge in the Senate, and there are more than a half dozen races in the state that will determine whether the chamber changes hands.
To read about all of the races in New York, click here.
The Republicans plan: defend incumbents, win an open in Western New York and go after a few vulnerable Democratic lawmakers
The Democratic plan: beat some long-serving Republicans, win Western New York and keep their senators in office
While the assembly will stay Democratic, Republicans can claim the Senate-- they are hanging on to a 31-29-seat edge in the Senate, and there are more than a half dozen races in the state that will determine whether the chamber changes hands.
To read about all of the races in New York, click here.
New York Times endorses Obama...suprise suprise
The New York Times endorsed Barack Obamafor president on Thursday, saying he had "met challenge after challenge, growing as a leader and putting real flesh on his early promises of hope and change."
It is interesting is to look at how the media changes their opinion to fit what is going on at the time. During the primaries, the Times endorsed Clinton and McCain.
Here are some comments from their endorsement of Clinton...
"By choosing Mrs. Clinton, we are not denying Mr. Obama's appeal or his gifts ... Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton would both help restore America's global image, to which President Bush has done so much grievous harm," the paper said in its endorsement. "The potential upside of a great Obama presidency is enticing, but this country faces huge problems, and will no doubt be facing more that we can't foresee. The next president needs to start immediately on challenges that will require concrete solutions, resolve, and the ability to make government work. Mrs. Clinton is more qualified, right now, to be president."
Here are comments from the endorsement of McCain:
Still, there is a choice to be made, and it is an easy one. Senator John McCain of Arizona is the only Republican who promises to end the George Bush style of governing from and on behalf of a small, angry fringe. With a record of working across the aisle to develop sound bipartisan legislation, he would offer a choice to a broader range of Americans than the rest of the Republican field," the endorsement said.
Funny coming from a paper that is so pro-Obama and anti-McCain.
In response to their endorsement of Clinton, the Times said, "He has drawn in legions of new voters with powerful messages of hope and possibility and calls for shared sacrifice and social responsibility," the Times said. "He has shown a cool head and sound judgment. We believe he has the will and the ability to forge the broad political consensus that is essential to finding solutions to this nation's problems."
In response to McCain? "Mr. McCain, whom we chose as the best Republican nominee in the primaries, has spent the last coins of his reputation for principle and sound judgment to placate the limitless demands and narrow vision of the far-right wing."
It is interesting is to look at how the media changes their opinion to fit what is going on at the time. During the primaries, the Times endorsed Clinton and McCain.
Here are some comments from their endorsement of Clinton...
"By choosing Mrs. Clinton, we are not denying Mr. Obama's appeal or his gifts ... Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton would both help restore America's global image, to which President Bush has done so much grievous harm," the paper said in its endorsement. "The potential upside of a great Obama presidency is enticing, but this country faces huge problems, and will no doubt be facing more that we can't foresee. The next president needs to start immediately on challenges that will require concrete solutions, resolve, and the ability to make government work. Mrs. Clinton is more qualified, right now, to be president."
Here are comments from the endorsement of McCain:
Still, there is a choice to be made, and it is an easy one. Senator John McCain of Arizona is the only Republican who promises to end the George Bush style of governing from and on behalf of a small, angry fringe. With a record of working across the aisle to develop sound bipartisan legislation, he would offer a choice to a broader range of Americans than the rest of the Republican field," the endorsement said.
Funny coming from a paper that is so pro-Obama and anti-McCain.
In response to their endorsement of Clinton, the Times said, "He has drawn in legions of new voters with powerful messages of hope and possibility and calls for shared sacrifice and social responsibility," the Times said. "He has shown a cool head and sound judgment. We believe he has the will and the ability to forge the broad political consensus that is essential to finding solutions to this nation's problems."
In response to McCain? "Mr. McCain, whom we chose as the best Republican nominee in the primaries, has spent the last coins of his reputation for principle and sound judgment to placate the limitless demands and narrow vision of the far-right wing."
10 Days to Go!
With ten days to go, it is safe to say that New York will go to Obama. There has never been any question which will New York will go. Despite a few polls post-RNC saying Obama's lead was tigthening, Obama has had a huge lead over McCain throughout the election process. According to pollster.com, right now Obama leads with 57.7 percent to McCain's 36.6 percent. New York has always been a very liberal state. In fact, it has not voted for a Republican president since 1984, when they voted in Reagan. Neither side has done much campaigning in New York, because it has been evident who will win.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Will Bloomberg Get a Third Term?
While New Yorkers voted to enfore term limits on elected city officials, the New York City Council will still vote on whether to set aside the people's vote and rid New York of the term limits law.
Mayor Michael Bloomberg is doing whatever humanly possibly in an attempt to get council members to back his bid for a third term in office.
According to a Quinnipiac University poll, 87 percent of New Yorkers say the issue should be voted on by the general population. However, the vote has been called for Thursday by the Council Speaker, Christine Quinn. It seems unlikely she would call for a vote if the Mayor didn't have enough people behind him.
Mayor Michael Bloomberg is doing whatever humanly possibly in an attempt to get council members to back his bid for a third term in office.
According to a Quinnipiac University poll, 87 percent of New Yorkers say the issue should be voted on by the general population. However, the vote has been called for Thursday by the Council Speaker, Christine Quinn. It seems unlikely she would call for a vote if the Mayor didn't have enough people behind him.
New York Times Blasts Cindy McCain
On October 18, the New York Times published a mean-spirited piece blasting Cindy McCain for her past drug use and examining her her marriage and personal challenges as the wife of Mr. McCain. This highly controversial article has been criticised by Republicans and Democrats alike. It is an intertesting question as to whether we should look into the lives of the families of candidates and whether this kind of information effects voters.
McCain spokesman Michael Goldfarb, released a statement about the article. Here is part of it:
"Today the New York Times launched yet another in a series of vicious attacks on Senator John McCain, this time targeting not the candidate, but his wife Cindy. Under the guise of a 'profile' piece, the New York Times fails to cover any new ground or provide any discernible value to the reader other than to portray Mrs. McCain in the worst possible light. Though Mrs. McCain's battle with drug addiction and even her miscarriages are again reported, the paper entirely ignores a life devoted to family and charity work in the most impoverished and violent corners of the world -- except when a detail can be quibbled with so as to imply some kind of deceit. This campaign made every effort to share personal accounts of Mrs. McCain's good works with the paper, but apparently they were deemed unfit for publication in the New York Times."
Cindy McCain was interviewed by Fow News' Greta Van Susteren. Here is a little snippet of the interview, regarding the article:
VAN SUSTEREN: Is there anything that's been a stunner to you in terms of going out and talking across the country (INAUDIBLE) you felt like, you know, you had no idea or, This is better or worse than I thought? Anything stun you?
MCCAIN: You know what has really stunned me is the -- quite honestly, is the kind of viciousness of the media on occasion. In 2000 -- there certainly's always been, you know, differences, and the -- you know, the things that occur. But this has taken on a different tenor. And I don't know why and what's caused that, and I'm sorry for it because I think it turns a lot of young people off.
VAN SUSTEREN: Well, you mentioned viciousness. Of course, you know, we've been talking for the last couple of days about the New York Times article...
MCCAIN: Yes.
VAN SUSTEREN: ... took a whack at you over the weekend. Do you pay attention to this stuff? Do you read this stuff?
MCCAIN: I did not read it, no. I did not read it, and I have no intention of reading it.
VAN SUSTEREN: But you know about it.
MCCAIN: Oh, yes, I'm aware of it. I'm aware of it. And I have -- I mean, my BlackBerry was loaded with friends the next morning saying, I cannot believe this, you know? I'm sorry for you and all this.
Look, this is politics today, unfortunately. I'm not -- it's -- I don't -- I'm not saying it's right. But it is politics today and it seems to be the nature of the beast now. All I can say is that my husband and I are doing the best we can. We are truly very proud to be here and proud to be a part of this process. And I don't really care what The New York Times thinks.
McCain spokesman Michael Goldfarb, released a statement about the article. Here is part of it:
"Today the New York Times launched yet another in a series of vicious attacks on Senator John McCain, this time targeting not the candidate, but his wife Cindy. Under the guise of a 'profile' piece, the New York Times fails to cover any new ground or provide any discernible value to the reader other than to portray Mrs. McCain in the worst possible light. Though Mrs. McCain's battle with drug addiction and even her miscarriages are again reported, the paper entirely ignores a life devoted to family and charity work in the most impoverished and violent corners of the world -- except when a detail can be quibbled with so as to imply some kind of deceit. This campaign made every effort to share personal accounts of Mrs. McCain's good works with the paper, but apparently they were deemed unfit for publication in the New York Times."
Cindy McCain was interviewed by Fow News' Greta Van Susteren. Here is a little snippet of the interview, regarding the article:
VAN SUSTEREN: Is there anything that's been a stunner to you in terms of going out and talking across the country (INAUDIBLE) you felt like, you know, you had no idea or, This is better or worse than I thought? Anything stun you?
MCCAIN: You know what has really stunned me is the -- quite honestly, is the kind of viciousness of the media on occasion. In 2000 -- there certainly's always been, you know, differences, and the -- you know, the things that occur. But this has taken on a different tenor. And I don't know why and what's caused that, and I'm sorry for it because I think it turns a lot of young people off.
VAN SUSTEREN: Well, you mentioned viciousness. Of course, you know, we've been talking for the last couple of days about the New York Times article...
MCCAIN: Yes.
VAN SUSTEREN: ... took a whack at you over the weekend. Do you pay attention to this stuff? Do you read this stuff?
MCCAIN: I did not read it, no. I did not read it, and I have no intention of reading it.
VAN SUSTEREN: But you know about it.
MCCAIN: Oh, yes, I'm aware of it. I'm aware of it. And I have -- I mean, my BlackBerry was loaded with friends the next morning saying, I cannot believe this, you know? I'm sorry for you and all this.
Look, this is politics today, unfortunately. I'm not -- it's -- I don't -- I'm not saying it's right. But it is politics today and it seems to be the nature of the beast now. All I can say is that my husband and I are doing the best we can. We are truly very proud to be here and proud to be a part of this process. And I don't really care what The New York Times thinks.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Obama's lead continues to grow
The latest poll results from pollster.com:
Obama: 57.7 percent
McCain: 36.6 percent
While Obama's lead continues to grow, McCain's numbers are continuing to dwindle.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Democrats Gaining in New York
Some longtime Republican strongholds in New York are becoming increasingly Democratic, according to the New York Times.
The cause? Demographic shifts, intense voter registration by Democrats, allied groups and sagging Republican fortunes.
According to the State Board of Elections, registered Democrats now outnumber Republicans by 5.5 million to 3.2 million, with unaffiliated voters at 2.4 million.
Republicans are even falling behing in Long island where Nassau County — once home to the most formidable Republican machine in the country — reported this week, for the first time in its history, having more registered Democrats than Republicans.
This could mean trouble in November's election, when Republicans will try keep it's one seat majority in the state senate.
The cause? Demographic shifts, intense voter registration by Democrats, allied groups and sagging Republican fortunes.
According to the State Board of Elections, registered Democrats now outnumber Republicans by 5.5 million to 3.2 million, with unaffiliated voters at 2.4 million.
Republicans are even falling behing in Long island where Nassau County — once home to the most formidable Republican machine in the country — reported this week, for the first time in its history, having more registered Democrats than Republicans.
This could mean trouble in November's election, when Republicans will try keep it's one seat majority in the state senate.
New Yorkers vote for Barack Osama?
Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama's last name is spelled "Osama" on hundreds of absentee ballots in New York State, issued in in Rensselaer County.
The "Times Union" says they were mailed to about 300 voters. The Democratic election commissioner has apologized, calling it a terrible mistake. A Republican commissioner says somehow the typo got past three editors.
One annoymous voter called the situation, "a little suspicious and at least grossly incompetent."
The Rensselaer County Legislature is putting forth an investigation into the incident.
The "Times Union" says they were mailed to about 300 voters. The Democratic election commissioner has apologized, calling it a terrible mistake. A Republican commissioner says somehow the typo got past three editors.
One annoymous voter called the situation, "a little suspicious and at least grossly incompetent."
The Rensselaer County Legislature is putting forth an investigation into the incident.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
