Carolyn Maloney for U.S. Senate
Rep. Carolyn Maloney camp confirms Daily News report: She’s running against Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand
The absurdity of the situation in this contest is obvious. There is no way that President Obama can credibly range himself against Carolyn Maloney. Carolyn Maloney would be a winner as a Senator. a winner in a statewide election and a winner in Washington in the compromised environment of the Senate.
2010 will not be so tight that a spirited primary among two women with differing qualities and records would not be something that a partisan of democracy with a small d would welcome. Those who think differently will be faced down by the independent-minded voters of New York State.
If there is any sustained effort to cold-shoulder Maloney, then President Obama and the machine led by the questionable Senior Senator from New York will become the issue in the primary. And New Yorkers will have the chance to vote overwhelmingly for an outsider and, by so doing, to show the whole farce up.
Why is Schumer questionable? In my view, because of the way he deals with and attacks his opponents. including witnesses in Senate hearings. I have concluded that badgering is the least of his sins. I do not like a person who behaves that way. I wish it was he that Maloney was opposing in the primary.
Well, if I were consulting Carolyn, I would advise her to say exactly how she is a better Obama Supporter than her opponent. And never to mention her opponent by name.
I would also advise her to challenge the Obama-Schumer camp on the basis of their lack of confidence … in themselves … in the people … in the process.
In other words, if they believe that a primary would be bad because they think 2010 will be close, they are not reading things that well.
We want to win in 2010 and our opponents will be anyone who messed with the Obama agenda. We are going to advance, not retreat.
Carolyn Maloney will win the primary the same way Barack Obama won Iowa, not as the faux sure thing but as the outsider who stands for hope and change. These are not things the current Junior Senator has ever really embraced.
I think this is a challenge that the President should accept and approve of. He is about to discover the limits of bipartisanship and the discovery can only make him willing to support true allies and not those with Blue Dog leanings.
just the facts said,
July 7, 2009 at 7:38 pm
You conveniently forgot to mention how maloney rubber stamped the iraq war. Wonderful judgement on her part. Presidents have almost always supported incumbent senators of their own party. If you think that Maloney is the one who has been cold shouldered you obviously aren’t aware of the hysterical and at times completely slanderous reaction to gillibrand from much of the msm.
Numerous papers claimed gillibrand voted against repealing don’t ask don’t tell; which never came up to a vote while she was a member of congress. And then there were the false claims she is an nra member. As well as the claims she had opposed same sex marriage (again not true).
Sean Hannitiy when announcing that she had been picked said she has the nickname “Tracy Flick” and proceeded to show a clip of Tracy Flick without showing a clip of gillibrand. Maureen Dowd in her unquestionable eloquence furthered the tracy flick comparisons. In a stunning repudiation of journalistic ethics, the New York Daily News severely criticised her vote against the Wall Street bailout without acknowledging how the paper’s owner financially benefited from the paper (He rents office space to TARP recipient Citibank). The Village Voice launched vicious attacks on her family. The New York Times criticised her for opposing spitzer’s illegal immigrant driver license plan without noting 3/4 of new yorkers opposed it. Alan Chartock stated with absolute certainty (but cited no poll data) that Kennedy and iraq war and bush tax cut supporting steven israel would defeat gillibrand if either one of them ran. He also gave a fawning radio interview of maloney. Larry O’donnel said her support for a blaanced budget amendment would prohibit her from supporting the stimulus (but failed to note it could be waived by a 3/5 majority or during times of war or military conflict and would not take effect any earlier than 2011.)
Keith Olbermann questioned how someone from saratoga springs was qualified while Margaret Carlson ridiculed her for being on the house agriculture committee. Chris Matthews called her unNew Yorky.
Ah I get the message. We upstate hicks are completely unqualified to represent NYS in the US Senate!
stephencrose said,
July 7, 2009 at 8:36 pm
I am not attacking the incumbent. I am advocating an open primary. Hillary also supported Iraq initially and I am sure that that would not be a persuasive argument today. While Maloney has great potential downstate, I have no idea whether she would beat the incumbent upstate. It would be an interesting primary and a much better stance for Obama to take than to work to quash a contest. We shall see.