The rumors of my death have been greatly exaggerated

New York City has long been one of the most politically liberal cities in the country. So much so that in recent memory, one would be hard-pressed to recall the last time the city voted for a Republican president in any large numbers. However, local politics is a different animal altogether. City Republicans are more liberal with their policies than their national counterparts, sometimes skewing further left than Democrats in the south. For the past twelve years, New York City has had a Republican mayor and if current polls are to be believed, that should be the case for four more years. Unlike the New Jersey gubernatorial election which is balancing on a knife’s edge, Mayor Michael Bloomberg currently holds a commanding lead of 38 percentage points in the polls over opponent Bronx Borough President Fernando Ferrer.

The figures are surprising when one considers the ever-increasing Hispanic population in the city and Mayor Bloomberg’s lack of political experience—the mayoral race four years ago was his first foray into elected office. However, what Mr. Bloomberg lack in political savvy, he has more than made up for in results. And Mr. Ferrer’s poor performance in the polls is likely due to his inability to find a voice on an issue which he can claim to do a better job than the mayor. While he has attacked Mr. Bloomberg vigorously throughout the campaign and in the debates, none of the strikes have hit their mark. Mr. Ferrer’s message has not resonated with voters who have enjoyed property tax rebates amongst other perks and are happy with the mayor they have.

The contrast between Mr. Bloomberg and Mr. Ferrer is night and day and was displayed during the debate series in the past weeks. Mr. Ferrer came off as the career politician, using aggressive debating tactics. He moved towards Bloomberg and gesturing at him during one of the debates in a move almost reminiscent of the election of 2000 and Rick Lazio—then a Republican senatorial candidate who was also lagging in the polls while running against Senator Hillary Clinton. Ultimately, voters make their decisions on image and on facts. The image of an overly aggressive career poltician with few hard facts to support his candidacy has been a lethal combination for Mr. Ferrer.

When he first ran for mayor four years ago, it was uncertain how Mr. Bloomberg would fare. His press conferences seemed to be uneasy events, with the new mayor seemingly unaccustomed to the format. Over the years however, Mr. Bloomberg’s abrasive style has been tempered as he’s found ways to better express himself. While he hasn’t adopted the politician’s swagger and tends not to speak in the circuitous statements that mark so many others’ remarks, he now looks comfortable and commands his meetings with the press with an almost easygoing air. Following the subway bombings in London in July of this year, Mr. Bloomberg and Mr. Pataki held a joint press conference at Grand Central Station. While Mr. Pataki stepped forward only once—to read a prepared statement that sounded like the start of his 2008 presidential bid—Mr. Bloomberg answered the questions at hand efficiently and with no attempt to politicize the issue. He appeared intimately acquainted with the relevant information and one felt as though he had done his homework, whereas Mr. Pataki appeared superfluous to the scene, uncertain of the details of the situation or the specifics of a reaction.

Mr. Ferrer vainly attempted to tie Mr. Bloomberg to Mr. Bush, as both have run on the Republican party ticket. This tactic is a sign of desperation as Mr. Bloomberg is clearly not beholden to his party, funding his campaign himself and veering from the GOP’s platform. Mr. Ferrer’s attempt to portray Bloomberg as a party-line Republican could not have been more misguided as Mr. Bloomberg’s past as a Democrat and willingness to include Democrats in his administration have been evident. Additionally, Mr. Bloomberg has always been the “anti-poltician” and it was an assertion that would not fly with voters. If Mr. Ferrer wanted to score points with the voters, he would’ve been better off making a case for himself rather than trying to attack a popular mayor. New Yorkers don’t want a Democrat or a Republican for their mayor. We want the best candidate for out city and Mayor Bloomberg has proven himself to be that person.

Posted by Sam Clemens at 06:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Last night viewers tuned in to watch a debate between the two leading candidates in the race for governor. Voters in New Jersey have grown tired of the corruption charges that have plagued Democrats and Republicans alike over the last several years and were likely hoping that the final debate before Tuesday’s election would provide a chance for the dueling candidates put the negativity aside and focus on the issues. However, the tone was similar to that of final debate of the New York Mayoral race—bitter, with several barbs traded back and forth but little clarification of the candidates’ positions.

Gabe Pressman, the mediator of the debate did little to aid the voters’ cause. While acknowledging that the campaign had taken a decidedly caustic tone in recent weeks with negative ads flooding the airwaves and noting that voters have grown tired of the campaign’s tone, Mr. Pressman began the proceedings by focusing on the ads themselves. Although Mr. Corzine attempted repeatedly to redirect the questioning towards the issues—property taxes and education featuring highly on the list of real problems facing New Jerseyans—Mr. Pressman continually brought the subject back to the campaign ads being run by both candidates. He badgered the duo on the subject, even featuring the offending ads themselves and bid the candidates respond.

Mr. Pressman’s hypocritical line of questioning and ineffectual style as a mediator proved to be a missed opportunity in a closely contested election to provide the voters with some insight beyond the sniping. Apart from his primary focus being the trivial matter of the personal attacks that have unfortunately become the focus of the campaign, he was unable to control the debate, often allowing the candidates to yell over one another. As mediator, Mr. Pressman was given a chance to control and raise the level of the discussion in this race. Instead he opted for more of the same.

The debate’s failings were not limited to Mr. Pressman’s inadequacies. Providing the viewers with an independent confirmation of the numbers that were being thrown around by each side would have proved invaluable. The candidates often disagreed on fundamental statistics—both claim their proposals for property tax relief would better serve residents of the state and they differed on Mr. Corzine’s voting record in the Senate. Mr. Corzine often stated that once the debate was over, the viewers could check the transcripts and discover for themselves which was the truth. The candidates often disagreed about comments that had been made in the past and independent confirmation, if not immediate, perhaps provided by the moderator online after the debate, would have been helpful.

One of the issues that has set off some controversy during the campaign is stem cell research. Mr. Forrester’s recent change of heart on the issue has been the cause of some speculation, especially since the running of one commercial in particular by the Corzine campaign invited some objection by the opposing camp. Mr. Forrester attempted to claim that his position is the same as Mr. Corzine’s is now, and that his change of heart had to do with the vast advances in the field over the past twelve months. Mr. Corzine correctly pointed out that little research has actually been done in this country and suggested that his opponents’ switch was politically motivated. While it is true that recent advancements could potentially ease some of the moral objections some stem cell research opponents, Mr. Forrester failed to quote these studies, thus leaving open the impression that his decision to switch his position was politically motivated. Indeed, Mr. Forrester’s position on the issues of stem cell research and a woman’s right to choose have been ambiguous, with his views skewing one way and now another during the primary and the general elections.

While there were several problems with the debate, some light was shed on the candidates’ positions and the clear winner was Mr. Corzine. Mr. Forrester’s remarks were an extension of his commercials—providing little insight into his own stance while attacking Mr. Corzine and quoting questionable statistics. Mr. Corzine appeared to falter at one point when asked about the proposal to lower the drinking age to 18 from 21. Mr. Forrester replied with an emphatic “no”, while Mr. Corzine questioned whether the legal age was not already 18. When Mr. Pressman corrected him, Mr. Corzine hesitated for a moment, but then replied that if 18-year olds could be sent to war to fight and die [in Iraq], he didn’t have a problem with it. The response was a refreshing non-knee jerk response; instead than opting for a safely conservative answer, one felt that Mr. Corzine, who was clearly unprepared for the question, spoke to his true beliefs. The reference to soldiers as young as 18 dying overseas was a powerful one, and kept the minor issue suitably in perspective.

For the most part, last night’s debate served neither the candidates nor the voters. The New Jersey electorate is tired of the corruption and the personal attacks. It’s high time that the gubernatorial candidates to spell out their positions and explain the reasoning behind their proposals. As always, a fully informed electorate is the ideal scenario. While this is not always possible to achieve, the candidates and the election commissions should attempt to provide the voters with as much information as possible. Only then can our system of democracy be truly effective.

Posted by Sam Clemens at 11:17 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

On TV’s The West Wing, the source of the leak of NASA intelligence was recently revealed as being Communications Director and pre-election political strategist Toby Ziegler. Upon hearing the news, President Bartlett calls him into the Oval Office. In earlier episodes, the two are shown to have a rocky relationship; but although they are not friends, they greatly respect each other’s opinions and have had heated debates on what is best for the nation. Mr. Ziegler in fact, had been a vocal critic of the President when it was revealed that a life-threatening illness had been hidden from the public. In light of his confession, Mr. Ziegler faced the president and presented with the third draft of what was obviously a difficult letter to write – his resignation letter. President Bartlett refused to accept it; instead he fired his staffer and had him escorted from the building.

Our real President did not react with a show of integrity as did his fictional counterpart and neither did our real leak source. No, this president’s loyalties lay with his staffers. After having declared that he would find and repudiate the source of the CIA leak, he went back on his words and he and his Vice President both offered words of support for Mr. Libby. This display of allegiance to man rather than nation was a body blow to those who looked to the White House to provide some sign that it was not more indebted to its friends than to the people of this nation. Mr. Libby for his part continued to proclaim his innocence and to publicly state his fervent belief that he will be exonerated.

The denouement of the CIA leak investigation comes on the heels of the revelation that high ranking officials with no relevant experience were being handed top jobs as the White House continues to show that it values its friends above its duty to the American people. The Michael Brown/FEMA debacle and the woeful nomination of Harriet Miers for Associate Supreme Court Justice were high profile cases in which the qualifications of the candidates in question appeared to be barely more than a longstanding friendship with Mr. Bush. As the White House’s support of their cronies continues to take precedence over the jobs that need to be done, the rest of us can only gaze on in wonder as to how the administration can remain detached as their failings are bared. Mr. Bush’s initial comments on finding the source of the CIA leak have been tempered somewhat in the intervening months and now he actually offers support to the offender. Even the Boston Red Sox seemed more outraged than President Bush regarding a leak of their inner workings to the press.

Karl Rove and Scooter Libby have asserted during this investigation that they were not the originators of the information about Ms. Plame, that they merely passed on what they heard from other reporters. While Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has found that this is not case, even if it were true, such an action should not exonerate them. The identity of our CIA operatives should not be the subject of a high stakes game of Telephone, especially when the ignoble objective is to discredit a person or persons who have made comments that although politically damaging to the President, are true. Mr. Wilson's expose in the New York Times did not warrant this type of retaliation by administration officials.

The second season of the West Wing almost prophetically featured an episode in which Deputy Communications Director Sam Seaborn discovered a former government official was in fact a traitor. Though the double agent was now long dead, he felt that the crime should not go unpunished. He spoke eloquently of how anyone who compromised the safety of the country’s intelligence agents and thus the security of the nation should be held accountable, that this country is mostly an idea and to act against those who would make the ultimate sacrifice for that idea is nothing short of treasonous. In a speech in 1999, George H.W. Bush, a former CIA director, echoed those sentiments. If the White House cannot live up to the standards of a TV show, the very least it can do is respect the opinions of the president’s father.

Posted by Sam Clemens at 10:19 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)