|
This belongs to you. Take it back...
Weprin
Fri Sep 16, 2011 at 14:02:06 PM EDT
|
|
There's an obvious and a less obvious lesson to be learned from NY-9 about independent, non-partisan redistrict. And it's worth learning.
Of course the obvious lesson is that the politics of legislature controlled redistricting leads to stupid gamesmanship. I still don't think Weprin was a bad candidate on paper, but I also tend to agree that Rory Lancman would have been a better candidate. Lancman never had a chance though, because Joe Crowley and New York Democrats in general needed a sacrifical lamb who could compete in the district and then ride into the night as NY-9 was dismantled by the map makers. Weprin fit the bill.
This is only a problem when politicians draw the districts. Independent, non-partisan redistricting doesn't take into account factors like seniority or which district is easier to cut. Independent redistricting would draw 27 districts on the basis of geography, continguity, compactness, VRA concerns, and a host of other factors other than cushiness for incumbents. And so if we had independent redistricting in the first place, the entire paradigm would have been different.
The less obvious lesson is just as, if not more important. I couldn't help but notice a lot of bloggers commenting on the string of special election losses by members of the Assembly. Weprin, Corwin, Scozzafava, and Tedisco. This led some to conclude that people who go to Albany and work in the Assembly can't win Congressional races. Let's forget that a whole heck of a lot of current and former Congressional members are former members of the Assembly. The fact that these four recent losers were all members of the Assembly isn't causation but it is correlation.
The better response about these four is that none of them had ever won a competitive campaign before. Their experience at real campaigning necessary to win tough special elections was non-existent. Weprin may have run for City Comptroller, but he did so poorly and unsuccessfully. All four of them simply weren't equipped for the rigors of a time-crunch competitive campaign.
And part of the reason is because their districts are gerrymandered to be uncompetitive, like almost every district in the state.
If we had real competitive districts, which we're more likely to get from independent redistricting, then candidates would actually earn their victories from the voters. That would give us politicians who understand how to talk to voters and better represent themselves and their constituents. And for our purposes, it would give us better candidates equipped to run for higher office, as opposed to people like David Weprin (i.e. nice guys and decent legislators but ill-equipped to run and win a serious, competitive campaign).
Mark down another notch in the belt of independent redistricting; better candidates, better legislators, heck, it's just better democracy.
|
|
Discuss
:: (4
Comments)
|
|
Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 22:41:50 PM EDT
|
|
I've always tried to be honest and direct with my blogging. That usually encompasses writing down what I believe and explaining why I believe it. But I also think that honest blogging means admitting when you're wrong, and at this point it's fair to say that I was wrong. Some time back I posted on TAP that I wasn't concerned about David Weprin and I was sick of the lefty bashing from Gatemouth on the subject of the Weprin race. After all, I figured that Weprin was a credible, solid candidate running against a loony teabagger who only pulled 40% against a flaming liberal in the wave of all wave years. Where was Bob Turner's margin for victory? I didn't see it.
But as Gatemouth rightly called me on today, I've been proven wrong. Weprin's campaign is floundering, Bob Turner has surged, and we're all holding our breath at this point to hold on to this seat. And I also agree with Gatemouth's albeit rude assertion about the results of this race. Anyone who thinks that a Turner win will push Obama to the left isn't paying attention. This is a lose-lose situation for us. President Obama's advisors will interpret a Turner victory as a clarion call for more moving to the middle. So there's nothing to be gained from a Turner victory.
My point at the time clearly assumed a Weprin victory. And in light of a Weprin victory and the likely demise of the district, it absolutely makes more sense to focus on other races. I used judges and district leaders as a somewhat facetious example of other things to do. The top priority was Jesus Gonzalez, which is still a worthy race. I think Dan Quart is a worthy race as well, though I doubt Gatemouth much cares about the idea of a Republican being elected in the Upper East Side after a few years of shutting them out in the center of bourgeois America. And Cheryl Gonzalez is certainly more noteworthy than Gatey give her credit for (and I'm sure I'll be hearing why she's as bad as everyone else soon enough from the constant curmudgeon).
But in the end Gatemouth is right; winning an Assembly seat is not as important as preventing a massive right wing PR victory in our own backyard. Even though I despise the idea of Vito Lopez winning another one. I'm not in Queens so I can't say if it was always going to be this way or if Weprin has run a poor campaign (although I'm not going to adopt the Martha Coakley theory like I've seen others do).
We have arrived at the point where all hands must be on deck. If you have time, calls must be made and doors must be knocked. We simply can't abide a lose of a Congressional seat in this environment in our state. Go on Facebook, go to the campaign website, or talk to your friends. There are canvasses and phonebanks all over the place. If you can swing the time, please help.
P.S.: Gatemouth's analysis of the Manhattan District Leader race skips over Paul Newell's running mate for co-leader, Jenifer Rajkumar. I've met Jenifer on several occasions and she is incredibly bright, articulate, thoughtful, and committed. Her heart is in the right place and she would be a great community leader in the Lower East Side. Check her out if you live down there in Part C of the 64th.
|
|
Discuss
:: (1
Comments)
|
|
Tue Jul 12, 2011 at 23:33:51 PM EDT
|
|
So our friend, the immutable Gatemouth over at Room 8, apparently takes issue with the lack of progressive support for David Weprin's campaign for Congress. In fact he specifically noted the lack of a post here at TAP. I'm flattered as a TAP community member that he took the lack of interest here as a sign of the larger progressive community. But I think Gatemouth is wrong about the lack of interest by the progressive community about David Weprin.
I don't speak for everyone in the New York netroots or the NYC progressive community, but I'll say that I like David Weprin. I think he's a decent guy who knows his policy and has been a relatively good force for progressive legislation in his time in politics. And unlike some other folks, I don't mind that he's part of a political dynasty, considering that the Weprin family is a fairly mild dynasty (and I'd give a lot to get a Saul Weprin as Speaker compared to Shelly Silver at this point).
But don't expect me to get excited about a guy handpicked by Crowley, with advice and consent from Vito, to fill a seat for one year until we chop up the district into little bitty pieces to protect everyone else. That's not a race that commands much of my time, especially when the guy picked was picked because he has enough control of the politics to land right back into the Assembly after a short stint in Congress (a point first articulated by none other than Gatemouth).
Now I get it. If Bob Turner beat Weprin, that would be a terrible media victory for the GOP. That's a fair point. But Bob Turner is a guy who got 39% against a flamboyant liberal coming off of a media frenzy over his support for single payer health care in the year of all year for Republicans. I really can't see any path to victory for Bob Turner against a a guy like Weprin on primary day, 2011. And if Weprin, a professional politician, can't handle Bob Turner without the support of us cheetos eating progressive blogger types in NY-9, then we probably have a much bigger problem than progressive apathy.
There's a lot of work to be done. Progressives in Brooklyn have a chance to send shockwaves in the Jesus Gonzalez race. Judges and District Leaders are being elected in Manhattan. All of us are starting to gear up for 2012 (and even 2013). I want David Weprin to win the seat, but asking me to care or to spend an ounce of my time supporting him is a big ask. If things are looking really precarious in August, then I'll probably do it. If necessary. Otherwise, sorry Gatemouth, but we've got bigger fish to fry than Bob Turner.
|
|
Discuss
:: (5
Comments)
|
|
Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 18:25:13 PM EST
|
Liz has the story that David Weprin is considering running for the senate seat currently held by Frank Padavan.
Obviously, Jim [Gennaro] has the right of first refusal in the race," said Mark Weprin [David's brother]. "But if Jim doesn't do it, whoever the Democrats' candidate might be, I think Frank is vulnerable.
What in the world gives Mr. Gennaro, or anyone else, the "right of first first refusal" to public office?
This is the sort of arrogance that we need to remove from the public discourse.
|
|
Discuss
:: (19
Comments)
|
|
|
|
|
|