| The new challenger is Gail Goode, an African-American lawyer who works as a trial supervisor in the city's Corporation Counsel office.
She has a website already, and a spokesman, possibly this Jonathan Cohen, who would not appear to come cheap, or have any reason to work for free for an unknown, no-hope candidate.
Unless the richest and most politically powerful person in NYC had asked for a favor.
The lede of the Post story again emphasizes the paper's bias wrt Gillibrand:
The paranoia meter is about to swing wildly over at Kirsten Gillibrand's campaign since an African-American city lawyer is getting ready to announce that she's entering the Democratic primary to unseat New York's junior US senator.
After Gillibrand survived the intense Ford campaign quite nicely, the idea that she and/or her staff would be "paranoid" about a thoroughly obscure Bloomberg-backed challenger is just absurd.
Cohen does all the leaking in the Post story, including the incredible denial that Bloomberg has anything to do with this fool's errand:
(Cohen) insists that Gail Goode, a veteran trial supervisor in the city's Corporation Counsel, made the decision on her own and without consulting Mayor Bloomberg.
snip
Goode never talked to the mayor or any of his aides, said her spokesman, Jonathan Cohen.
He said Goode, 51, decided to become a first-time candidate a couple of weeks ago because she was "offended" by the constant reports that Gillibrand's challengers were being muscled out of the race.
Cohen said she'll have the organization and the money required to round up 15,000 petition signatures by mid-July to get on the ballot.
While some may differ, it's pretty obvious that no potential Gillibarnd challengers were "muscled out of the race." They may well have been advised that President Obama, Sen. Chuck Schumer, and the vast majority of NY Democratic politicians, party leaders, unions, women's groups, etc., will be supporting Gillibrand, making any primary challenge difficult-to-impossible.
Joe Sestak received that same advice in PA, but went ahead anyway and won.
Potential Gillibrand challengers could have done so also, but chose not to, wisely IMO.
The adjective "constant" is more Murdochian spin -- there were stories about that last year and during the Ford campaign three months ago, but few if any since.
In any event, taking offense about that is a very thin reed on which to base a statewide campaign for U.S. Senate, even if Goode were known outside her friends and family.
So, why is Bloomberg still promoting Gillibrand challengers, even this completely hopeless one?
I wrote a diary about that in March, and the two reasons remain the same -- Bloomberg is pissed that his candidate Carolyn Kennedy did not get the Senate appointment, and he wants a U.S. Senator who will be beholden to him.
Well, he better get used to it, because Gillibrand will be elected in November.
And she will work assiduously to represent and help the city, despite Bloomberg's animosity.
Because that is what excellent Senators do.
But when Bloomberg says, "Jump," Sen. Gillibrand will not say, "How high"? |
