He is our parties candidate for Mayor. What if anything did the five Republicans County offices do to encourage their constituents to attend the Mayor's re-election primary night party in Manhattan on Pier 52. Did anyone receive an telephone call or email from their County office advising them of this event? I can't speak about the other boroughs, but the Queens Booth was void of any representation from County, couldn't one of the many listed persons on their board of directors been present to show support for their mayoral candidate.
Our district leader Jane Deacy who is running Mayor Bloomberg's (a first time ever in Rockaway) campaign office, filled a Bloomberg supplied bus with Thirty plus folks to attend what turned out to be a great night out, supporting our parties choice for Mayor.
Why am I bringing this up? If the County leadership can't take the time, to in the least deliver an email to it's data base of district leaders and supporters on upcoming events and functions then we stifle our rebuilding...
In a perfect world, district leaders would reach their county committee members who would get the word out to their neighbors. We are a long way from being at that perfect place, we all know that just filling some positions with a name is hard enough. But the road to rebuilding has to start at the top. So please in the future can County and for that matter Urban Elephants and other blogs and posts help in getting the word out. Tom Lynch
Set as favorite
Bookmark
Email This
Hits: 1499
Trackback(0)
TrackBack URI for this entryComments (28)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Viktor Aleksevich Zubkov , September 17, 2009
Tom, what planet are you living on?
Most NYC Republicans will not vote for this mayor again. Most are disgusted with him.
There is ZERO 0 enthasium for his candidacy on the GOP line.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +3
written by Jay Golub , September 17, 2009
"...but the Queens Booth was void of any representation from County, couldn't one of the many listed persons on their board of directors been present to show support for their mayoral."
That's cute, Tom. Maybe if they weren't so busy defending themselves against the challenge being made against "County" by the party's host, there would have been dozens of County people there.
Actually, if your local candidate wasn't in the 28th pulling for votes against me, maybe I would have been there myself.
"...then we stifle our rebuilding."
Truly hilarious.
"So please in the future can County and for that matter Urban Elephants and other blogs and posts help in getting the word out."
as Viktor said above, there is...
"ZERO 0 enthasium for his candidacy on the GOP line."
...so our liberal Mayor's Primary night party was of no interest to anyone who would read a Republican blog - except for those who have sold-out, of course...
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
written by Daniel Peterson , September 17, 2009
I was out on the streets Tuesday night with campaign posters pushing a republican primary and of course most passers by were Democrats on their way to vote. Republicans aren't usually "on their way to vote" on Primary night because Republicans don't often primary (hence why our voter reg numbers are far lower than they should be). But on Tuesday, there was a primary to push.
Three Republicans stopped and started chatting with me during the the 5:30 to 9 PM period and expressed disappointment in allowing the mayor to be on the Republican line. "I won't vote for him" or something like that was said by ALL THREE.
I proceeded to say that their choice would either be Thompson or the Conservative Party guy, then.
It is amazing that many Republicans on the street oppose the decision made by their county organization. One person even threw in that the mayor could've run as an independent and we could've had a three way race. I asked if she had read some of the things I've been publishing online.
A lot of people were at the Mayor's event and it appears he does have some strong support. But I believe the core voters of the Republican Party will either stay home or vote against him.
Oh also,
One couple heard me say, "Republican Primary Today, Please vote for Ashok Chandra, City Council Candidate"
They walked by and then it registered what i said. They walked back.
"There's no Republican Primary today, it's only the Democrats."
That's common thought. Republicans in NY believe Primaries are for Democrats only.
I had to explain that -
"Primary Day is for all parties and you're right generally Republicans don't primary. But that is not to say we CAN'T hold a primary. Selected districts DO HAVE Republican Primaries today and the 4th council district is one of them. If you can, please vote." and I proceeded to hand a Chandra palm card.
I think the five county organizations should consider, as a way of building interest in the party, should be open to primaries in key local districts. I think we'd get an increase in registration.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Quickjustice , September 17, 2009
Tom, I've received e-mails from the Bloomberg campaign inviting me to the opening of their Queens headquarters, as well as follow-up phone calls. I have no idea how they got my e-mail address or phone number.
I did NOT receive any invitation to this event. I suggest that you ask the Bloomberg campaign, rather than the Queens County GOP organization, why you and I were excluded. I suspect it's because we're not classy enough for this Mayor.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by CitizenK , September 17, 2009
¶1
our parties = our party's.
...on Pier 52. = ...on Pier 52?
an telephone = a telephone
directors been = directors have been
The final sentence is a run-on, and needs a question mark.
¶2
Bad placement of parenthetical phrase.
"thirty" is not a proper noun
our parties = our party's
¶3
in the least = at least
it's data base = its database
¶4
Second sentence is a run-on.
Paragraph should end in a question mark.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Tom Lynch , September 17, 2009
Thanks Citizen K for reminding me of the things I should of paid attention to in school.
Quickjustice, The point I was making is that if the local Bloomberg campaign managers failed to reach the folks who are active through local clubs or county organizations. It would be nice if other resources would been there to fill in the gaps. An email or posting would have helped inform those who are not on some master list.
This communication should be following and available to any and all events / fundraisers about all candidates. Leave it up to the individual, if they want /or not to attend. Without communication we will never be all we can be. Tom Lynch
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Jay Golub , September 17, 2009
"It would be nice if other resources would been there to fill in the gaps."
So you understand now, QJ? The guy who's spent about $70 million before primary day (when he didn't have a primary) needs "other resources" to "fill in the gaps."
Tom, you and Koch should take your collective act on the road...the Mayor would probably appreciate it...
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Daniel Peterson , September 18, 2009
should of = should've
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
written by Frank Ammendolea , September 18, 2009
The absence of Republicans can probably be attributed to the fact that Mike Bloomberg could care less about the County organizations or their members. Mike has gotten what he needed from them - their party line - and they are free to go sit in the corner until election day, where they will then become important again for a total of 15 hours.
I don't live in NYC anymore, though I grew up in Queens and was active in Republican politics with Frank Padavan and Doug Prescott in the 1990s. If I still did live in NY, I would have spent primary night with real Republican reformers like Ashok Chandra in Manhattan or Dan Halloran in Queens. They are REAL Republicans who deserve support.
Tom, with all due respect, you're getting exercised about nothing. "Our party's candidate for mayor" knows where you are, and he'd rather call you when he needs you rather than have you cluttering up his election night primary and drinking his booze. Besides, the presence of too many real Republicans might have embarrassed him and potentially cost him the votes of "independent" and "moderate" (i.e. liberal) voters. So it's better that we all stayed home.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by swmirsky , September 18, 2009
I'm inclined to agree with Frank Ammendolea, Tom. I'm sorry to say but I really don't think we count for anything with Bloomberg. While I continue to think he has been a good city manager, on balance, it's clear he is not a Republican, doesn't care for Republicans, and would just as soon toss us on the garbage heap once he doesn't need us any longer. However, I don't think he feels much different about Democrats except for the fact that he is more in sync with their thinking than ours.
If one thinks this mayoral race, such as it is, is about managerial competence alone, then Bloomberg is, I suppose, a good choice. But if it's about the kinds of principles we stand for or even respecting the will of voters (as in not violating referenda imposing term limits) then he isn't. It's really that simple.
I spent yesterday with our newly elected City Councilman Eric Ulrich trailing him about so I could do an article about a day in the working life of a new (and the city's youngest) Councilman. In some ways it was quite interesting and in some quite surprising. But one of the things that struck me was when Bloomberg showed up. Like a pot of honey all the political bees were drawn at once to him, their antennae up and quavering as he entered the City Hall area.
Tanned, relaxed and smiling he made himself available for a little politicking, got in some photos with the different Council persons swarming the steps and even stopped to speak with my own Councilman, Eric. I immediately went to get a shot of them with my camera and, wouldn't you know it, my camera's battery failed just as I was trying to snap the photo. He called the fact that my lense had closed to my attention and, as I looked at it and began to fiddle with the camera, I caught a disdainful look in his face as he started to walk away.
Eric still had to talk with him so he held him there a moment while I got my camera working again and was able to get the shot after all, just before my battery went permanently dead. But I cannot forget that look of contempt I briefly saw in his face.
Now to put this in perspective, I was dressed rather shlumpily (didn't see a need to get dressed up like a politician to spend a few hours with politicians) and so I probably wasn't very impressive to look at. Just another hanger-on I'm sure he thought, a low level staffer at best. But, in fact, I'm a retired Assistant Commissioner from the Health Department (when I did routinely suit up in ties and jackets!) and served briefly in his administration as I did for the duration of the Giuliani administration before his.
But to him, as I could see in that look he gave me, I was just a bothersome member of the hoi poloi, seeking his attention and, once he'd convinced himself I wasn't especially important, he let the mask-like smile on his face, which I had seen at so many of his mayoral rallies (I attended many in support of him) drop for a moment and his real contempt came through.
It was an eye opening moment, to realize that I was really a nothing in his eyes. Now he couldn't know of my former role or former support for him or my activism in the GOP. Perhaps, if he had, he'd have kept the mask on. But for that one moment I was just a guy in torn jeans, uncombed hair (what's left of it) and a gray beard. He didn't need to be nice to me. That he had no desire to be could not have been more clear.
SWM
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Jay Golub , September 18, 2009
"...once he'd convinced himself I wasn't especially important, he let the mask-like smile on his face, which I had seen at so many of his mayoral rallies (I attended many in support of him) drop for a moment and his real contempt came through."
That "contempt" is especially aimed at conservatives and Republicans who hold those values dear.
Bloomberg is Boss Tweed - no more, no less.
If you don't kiss his ring, he'll punish you. If you vote against him, he'll attack you. If you question his judgement, you're shut out of the process for good.
Not the ideals of a man of quality.
Bloomberg, the supposed non-political politician, has learned the political ropes very, very well after just 8 years in office.
He'll win at all costs and stab anyone in the back if he can get away with it.
Good luck to all those who sell their soul to work with this guy. I'd rather be on the outside looking in and I think there are a growing number of people who agree...
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Robert Hornak , September 18, 2009
Tom, you are a good guy, but I read your post and all I can say is:
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
because you must be kidding. If you want to sell your soul to the devil in the hopes of getting your ultra-machiavellian councilman reelected, that is your business. But do not expect the rest of us to follow suit and especially do not try to hold that up as some standard of leadership for the Queens GOP.
Endorsing Bloomberg was a deal that had nothing to do with actually supporting Bloomberg. In return, the Queens GOP got a check and broken promises.
As far as I am concerned, the Queens GOP has more than fulfilled any responsibility they had with that endorsement, and now that Bloomberg has clearly sided with the forces of darkness in Queens, there is no reason to support him any further, and every reason to oppose him.
I, for one, will NOT be voting for him.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Behold a Pale Horse , September 18, 2009
I recall Martin Sheen's line from "Wall Street" (1987): "He's using you, kid!"
If Bloomberg wins, he'll probably move further to the left and push more of his nanny-state BS.
Does $50,000 even cover commercial rent for one year for the party HQ in any borough?
None of it will ever be used for party-building or help local candidates.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by chancehaywood , September 18, 2009
Don't be shocked to see some, if not all, of the county organizations move into offices the Bloomberg campaign exits from in November.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Robert Hornak , September 19, 2009
I can't speak for the other County orgs, but trust me Chance that will not be the case in Queens. Few people I know really want anything to do with Bloomberg or his ego-stroking campaign.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Jay Golub , September 19, 2009
"Don't be shocked to see some, if not all, of the county organizations move into offices the Bloomberg campaign exits from in November."
That's only if Mr. Bloomberg keeps paying the rent. Otherwise, the County orgs will not be able to afford it...
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by osher g. , September 20, 2009
Bloomberg is not our party's choice for mayor, he the choice of a few county chiefs. Why wouldn't they even let a primary? If my district leaders would have tried to get me to come to a Bloomberg party and join the campaign they'd get a mouth full from me. My vote is going to Bill Thompson.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Steven , September 20, 2009
The (once Democrat-turned-Republican-turned Independent-turned Republican again) Mayor Bloomberg is not known for his fidelity to the Republican Party or for promoting Republican oriented ideas and principles.
Note: based on Hizzoner's arrogance and disdain for the Republican Party, I encourage all voters, especially disgusted GOPers, not to vote for Bloomberg again. Not this time. Maintain a clear conscience and continue to have self-respect. Honor your GOP principles.
Leave it "blank" for mayor if you don't want to vote for Democrat Bill Thompson. We need to send a strong message. Political upset or backlash coming?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by osher g. , September 20, 2009
It would be a real shame if Bloomberg is re-elected with less than 50% of the vote. Although the majority of NYers have had enough of Bloomberg, he might just win election because they could not unite in opposition. Therefore, I would suggest the best thing to do is to hold your nose and vote Thompson, and let Bloomberg know that when we said 2 terms we meant 2 terms.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Steven , September 21, 2009
Osher, I'm re-thinking this issue. I think you you are right - that a anti-Bloomberg, strategic vote for Bill Thompson, will send a strong message to both Bloomberg and the whole elite, arrogant political establishment - such as Christine Quinn and other insiders who have No respect for their constituents.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by evannyny , September 21, 2009
From Mike's speech, Primary 9/15/09
"I don't care what the special interests want. I don't take a dime of their money. I work for a dollar a year, and I work for you and you alone. I don't care what the party bosses want; I didn't come from a political machine. I look for the best ideas, from any and all parties. And I don't care what the polls say - that's not real leadership. I care about doing what's right and getting the job done. That's how we've made all our progress: independent leadership."
I work for a dollar a year.
I'd say he is overpaid at that!
I look for the best ideas, from any and all parties.
Except when it comes to major Administration appointments. Then he looks almost EXCLUSIVELY for NON-Republicans!
I don't care what the bosses want!
Who is he kidding? When it suits his needs he'll work with ANY City boss of any party, including the WFP. I would imagine he is still tight with Fulani and Newman of the Independence Party.
He stands for nothing, Mike Bloomberg. He is hardly non-partisan nor independent, he is MULTI-partisan. Whatever party will accept his bucks!
A true independent would NOT run on ANY established party. He would collect ONLY independent petitions and form his own independent party and if that makes it harder for the voters to find his name on the voting machine, so be it. Principle often comes with a price!
If he is such a financial whiz kid, and Bloomberg, Inc. certainly has prospered during his 8 years as mayor, how come the City has not been spared the economic downturn the whole nation has faced?
He says he is beholden to NONE, but he uses his unlimited wealth to make others beholden to HIM.
I guess you gathered by now, whom evannyny, former Manhattan district leader will NOT be voting for this November. Not really a Thompson fan either, so at least check the following, follks:
www.Christopher09.com
This is the website of Conservative candidate for MAYOR Stephen Christopher.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Tom Lynch , September 21, 2009
As most of the comments on Urban Elephants are from the anti-Bloomberg crowd.
I have but one question, who a year or two prior to this election was your candidate.
Did he or she start raising monies and campaigning. So face the fact their was no one and any bones thrown our way is better than nothing this time around.
First rebuild a bench that can produce a candidate then you can cherry pick your candidate. The Republican Thompson voters, appear to me to be the same as the moderate democrats that gave us Obama.
Please read our Clubs ,Why Bloomberg,
posted on our web site rockawayrepublicans.com
Tom Lynch
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Steven , September 21, 2009
Tom, I respectfully disagree with you. You have a right to express your opinions. We will have to “agree to disagree.”
NYC Republicans were not expecting Bloomberg to run for a third term. The whole term limits fiasco by the NYC Council, and not by electorate referendum, blindsided GOPers.
All politicians – Donkeys and Elephants – who acquiesced to Bloomberg’s disgraceful term limits debacle do not deserve to be re-elected. It was undemocratic and arrogant. It was a total “slimy” power grab backed by his enormous sums of disposable cash.
He was listed as the eighth-richest American, with a net worth of US $16 billion.
Without his personal wealth he would not have been elected mayor back in 2001.
If Michael R. Bloomberg agreed to a voter referendum and if it passed in his favor democratically, I would have respected that outcome.
Lastly, he has just been using the Republican Party all these years as his harlot, metaphorically speaking.
This Republican says No! No to Bloomberg!
The Mayor has behaved like a little Napolean. The voters should exile him to the political never-land called “Elba.”
The voters should democratically overthrow this little, angry despot at the polls on Election Day. Let’s send him back to Bloomberg L.P.
www.youreadisgrace.com
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
written by Daniel Peterson , September 21, 2009
"who a year or two prior to this election was your candidate."
Tom, both John Catsimatidis and Bill Blakely expressed interest in running for NYC mayor prior to Mike Bloomberg changing the rules.
We could have had a completely different race this year if we had one of the aforementioned running for citywide office.
It is possible that a mayoral candidate that actually exudes conservative principles on some issues would generate interest in an Urban Republican Platform. Such a candidate would GOTV for local conservative council candidates.
We don't know what a Bloomberg candidate will bring for Republicans this year, but if its anything like 2005 when some conservative voters stayed home, our party won't muster better than 35%. Ergo, bye-bye Republicans in non-traditional Republican council districcts.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Jay Golub , September 21, 2009
"So face the fact their was no one and any bones thrown our way is better than nothing this time around."
So Tom, if there was a "better" candidate out there, would you have supported him or her?
Also, what would you have considered a "better" candidate? From what I've read, you like what the liberal Mayor has done to date.
What issues would have made you support a different candidate, or is it just the fact that the Mayor has the money to win?
Lastly, are you being intentionally naive when you say "we didn't have anyone" or do you really mean it? Bloomberg's bully tactics forced anyone who might run, like Johnny Catsimatidis, out of the race. If Bloomberg wasn't running, I'm sure we in the Republican Party would have had a number of good candidates - even ones with money like Johnny C. - running this year.
The argument that Bloomberg was the only candidate was only the case because Bloomberg made sure he was the "only" candidate.
"Please read our Clubs ,Why Bloomberg, posted on our web site."
I'll do one better...let's put it up here for everyone to discuss...
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Jay Golub , September 21, 2009
http://rockawayrepublicans.com/b.html
here's Tom's take on the Bloomberg endorsement...
"We also face an election for Mayor this Fall . . . a mayor of whom many opinions have been expressed in the Republican rank and file. There's no question that Bloomberg has used us and tossed us aside but he needs a party line to run again and we can offer that. On election day, fellow readers, what Conservative Republican or even middle-of-the-road Republican are you gonna cast your ballot for to run our beleaguered city if the choice is between Bloomberg and one of the professional pol Democrats?
The mayoral choice - I'm sorry to say - is between a competent manager who's, granted, a flamin' liberal or two incompetent
managers, who just also happen to be flamin' liberals, too. Unfortunately, and regrettably, our five County Chairs, and our State chair, offer us no alternative as of now. In all of NYC ... the financial capital, the media capital, the book-publishing capital, the arts capital, the corporate headquarters capital, the money nexus of America ... our GOP can't induce a single capable, articulate Republican to campaign to run our fair city.
So, for whom will you cast your ballot on that fateful day???
When Ulrich gets to City Hall, it may be that his sole partner in attempting to get a little something done might just be 'Mayor Mike' (as much as I'm sure you detest the sound of those two words).
"So, to make a long answer longer ... we're supportin' - reluctantly - Bloomberg; and, please believe me, there's much gnashing of
teeth over this amongst us. Maybe it's a dumb thing to do, maybe it's wrong to bend principles so much, but our commitment to
Councilman-elect Ulrich. We want to be flexible enough to help him make a name for himself as the best City Councilman Queens and this city ever had."
The one thing I do think is noteworthy in Tom's comment is this part...
"Maybe it's a dumb thing to do, maybe it's wrong to bend principles so much, but our commitment to Councilman-elect Ulrich. We want to be flexible enough to help him make a name for himself as the best City Councilman Queens and this city ever had."
It was "dumb," especially if your justification is that Bloomberg's approbation and support somehow is going to be a PLUS for Eric - it will not.
NO ONE that Bloomberg endorses or supports wins on Election Day. He's got the anti-Midas Touch.
Eric was always better served running on the same issues with the same flexibility he had when he ran in the Special Election. Running as a member of the "Democrat-lite" Party along with Mayor Mike will not work - and will both turn down his base and not bring in new voters as most of the independent Democrats and Blanks will not vote Republican down the line just because they vote for Bloomberg on the same line.
As well, this isn't about having a "choice" of candidates on Election Day, Tom. As I said before, and you know this to be true, there were a number of candidates out there gearing up to run this year as a Republican for Mayor, and at least one of them was a Billionaire with the resources to run a competent race as you pointed out.
All of them were forced out of the race by the guy you keep trying to say was the only one willing to "throw his hat in the ring."
Lastly, with a victory by Bloomberg or not, the GOP in NYC is in dire straits. I would argue that the GOP is even worse off by electing Bloomberg because he will never hire any Republicans (even the Qualified ones) and because he will be able to silence our side and the issues we tend to support. Like you said, the GOP isn't full of "flamin' liberals."
If there was a "flamin' liberal" Democrat in office, there would be something for Republicans to rally around - similar to what happened while Dinkins was Mayor. I've always said that without Dinkins, there probably would never have been the rise of Rudy Giuliani to Republican fame.
This is true for Eric as well as for growing the GOP in the Rockaways. Without Real Republicans running on and supporting Real Republican issues, there is no way to grow the GOP.
Bloomberg's election will guarantee Republican failure for the next 4 years at least...
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Tom Lynch , September 21, 2009
I don't have the writing skills to compete with most of the bloggers on this site. After Bloomberg won out on the term limits issue, there was no one with any political stature that was willing to run. Bringing up John Catsimatidis, another rich recently turned Republican as one who could go head to head with the democratic nominee is like saying that Tom Ogonbene had a chance last time around even though the party couldn’t even get him on the ballot, let alone win in an general election and Tom Ogonbene presents a better political profile than Mr. Catsimatidis.
Mr. Catsimatidis is not stupid, he saw the light and backed off.
Our club backed Tom O to offer a choice last election but both he and we new there was little chance of his winning even if he had gotten on the ballot. Again it would have been great to have a solid candidate against Bloomberg, but no body with even a small chance stepped up so as Jay stated the county chairs endorsed the Mayor for the same reason.
On the plus side the Mayor endorsed our Republican candidate for city council, Eric Ulrich and is HELPING in his re-election bid, but some of the same anti B folks are also hoping that Eric loses. The Dem machine in our district is focus in taking Eric out, deals were cut so there was no primary and from Congressman Weiner on down the big guns are aligning, so the embarrassment of a Republican kid unseating their candidate in the past special election in an 3 to 1 district doesn’t happen again.
So blog all you want, everyone is entitled to their options.
But voting for the democratic party players over our candidates, sorry I just don’t understand the logic.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Jay Golub , September 21, 2009
"Our club backed Tom O to offer a choice last election but both he and we new there was little chance of his winning even if he had gotten on the ballot."
I'm sorry that you feel that "winning" is all that matters now. You had it right four years ago…I wonder what is different now?...
I will not overwhelm you with writing here, but if "winning" is all that matters then you should just become a Democrat - you definitely will "win" more often under that banner.
But if you want to grow the Republican Party, there is no benefit in supporting elected officials that legislate and campaign like Liberal Democrats. Voting for them is really no different than voting for a Democrat and, as I've pointed out, in many ways it's much, much worse.
There is a point to being a “Republican,” Tom. And although Republicans may differ on a few issues here and there, there is a core that makes up “what we believe in” beyond your threshold which is that you are a living, breathing human being with a big wallet.
I would further argue that for the Republican Party to be effective, it MUST stand for SOMETHING different than the Democrat Party and their candidates, besides the name of the party itself.
Tom, you could reasonably make the argument that voting for Bloomberg as the "best choice" available for Mayor makes sense – ALMOST make the argument. But you can't make the argument that it was a good idea for the GOP to endorse him for the Republican line, especially when he refused to register with the GOP and he’s spent the last 8 years running AWAY from the Party, instead of trying to help us build it.
Giving the Republican line to a "flamin' liberal," as you called him, Tom, only brands the GOP as the same, disaffecting our core voters tremendously and making it nearly impossible for local Republicans to rebuild and for local candidates to get attention or support – and this is true even we had no one else to run in his place…
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Write comment
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
