NY-Sen: McCarthy Won't Run; Could Be A Sign That Maloney Is In

Maloney, at 61, is only (4.00 / 2)

marginally younger than McCarthy.

And Gillibrand, at 42, will have a couple three decades to gain Senate seniority.

Just one more reason to support Gillibrand in a primary, if there is one, and in future general elections.  

---

by: devtob @ Fri Jun 05, 2009 at 00:51:53 AM UTC

This (4.00 / 2)

is actually a solid argument.

---

by: Amherst Guy @ Fri Jun 05, 2009 at 01:00:59 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

It is a solid argument (4.00 / 1)

both for changing the way the Senate does business, and for changing the way elections are determined.

Right now, elections go to those anointed by a political party, or those who can raise a boatload of money. We need to change that.

There is no reason why two-term Senator Chuck Schumer should sail into another term -- no matter how good anyone thinks he is.  He should be challenged strongly enough to be forced to go to voters and defend his record and his ideas for the next six years.  But it won't happen.

Enough of my soapbox for tonight ... more to come later.

---

by: Dan Jacoby @ Fri Jun 05, 2009 at 02:10:53 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

In the real world, (0.00 / 0)

what plausible Democratic candidate would challenge a two-term Senator who got 70 percent in his last general election?

The policy differences among Schumer, Gillibrand and Maloney are few and relatively unimportant.

Schumer's record of supporting whatever Wall Street wanted, which clearly led to the Great Recession we're in now, should have inspired a progressive Democratic primary opponent.

But Maloney has evidently decided to go against the appointed Gillibrand, rather than the twice-elected Schumer.

Because that's obviously an easier race that's worth giving up her safe House seat.

---

by: devtob @ Fri Jun 05, 2009 at 03:03:05 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

You know (4.00 / 1)

I think parties do a lot of good in their screening of candidates.

When was the last time you remember a true narcissist, sociopath, or supremacist as a candidate from a major party for major political office?

The last one I can remember is David Duke nearly 20 years ago, and that was only because of Louisiana's bizarre double runoff rules (remember those "vote for the crook: it's important" stickers?) - and the Republican party had already literally expelled him by then.

Do you think Barack Obama from Hawaii/Kansas/Indonesia had enough connections in Chicago to get selected to run when he first moved there? No. He wanted to run for office, so he made the necessary connections. Mayor Byron Brown in Buffalo is from Brooklyn, but he made sure he met some people so that he could run for mayor.

It's really not that hard to get in favor with the party. Carry petitions for a few cycles and then ask to run for a low level office that you'll probably lose, and then work your ass off and impress them so they pick you for something that they want to win. Then don't lose. Bada bing, bada boom.

---

by: Amherst Guy @ Fri Jun 05, 2009 at 04:57:16 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Actually, I personally think it's the worst argument. (4.00 / 1)

And I agree with Dan that it's a sign the system is broken.

The cost, the division, and the wasted time are much better reasons. At the Democratic Rural Conference they had some people come in from Democracy for America to give everyone pointers on running campaigns. One of the core points they made is that while you can get more money, or more people, you can never get more time, and every ounce of time and effort sucked into Democratic infighting is time not spent against the opposition.  

---

by: Adama @ Fri Jun 05, 2009 at 02:24:40 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

No reason for a primary (0.00 / 0)

With each passing day, there is less reason for either of these women to run against Gillibrand, and less chance that they would be successful.  Gillibrand stated at the outset of her appointment that she wanted to work cooperatively with Carolyn McCarthy on gun control.  This is not inconsistent:  she's worked to keep guns off the streets and out of the hands of criminals while in the House.  She supports guns for sports hunting, consistent with her upbringing and her Upstate origins.  She's working closely with NYers Against Gun Violence on new legislation that will seek to halt the flow of illegal guns into NY from out of state.  Carolyn Maloney would be foolish to give up her new-found power and influence in the House of Representatives where she's gained seniority and recently been given Chair of the Joint Economic Conference.  Simultaneously, Gillibrand has been traveling the state, meeting with and learning the concerns of her new constituents, and working hard to represent them in Washington.  She's on her way to becoming a first-rate US Senator for New York.  The Congressional Members from New York ought to get behind her and help her succeed.

---

by: pencequince @ Fri Jun 05, 2009 at 21:16:09 PM UTC