Coming Back
A Strategy for the 2010 Governor's Race
The 2010 election of New York State's next Governor may be decided by the Liberal Party.
In the hard-ball world of 'third party' politics in NY State, the Liberal Party's endorsement of a Rudolph Giuliani candidacy for Governor in 2010, would provide a ballot line for all those moderate voters who admire his executive leadership abilities (if not necessarily some of his policies) but would never vote for him on the Republican line. It was just such a classic 'third party' strategy that made his election as Mayor of New York City possible and it could work again providing a winning margin in a close race against Andrew Cuomo, the Democratic candidate.
Early polls show Mr. Giuliani with a comfortable and growing lead over Governor David Patterson, indicating voter doubt about Mr. Patterson's abilities to govern. Knowing-pols recognize that his selection as Eliot Spitzer's running mate had to do with Spitzer's need to keep the internal leadership of Dinkins, Rangel, Sutton et.al at bay and had absolutely nothing to do with his ability to be Governor. But who knew? And Governor he is. Today most see him as well-meaning perhaps but clearly struggling.
As for Andrew Cuomo and the Liberal Party there is a history. It was the Liberal Party who launched his father's career when it endorsed Mario Cuomo as Governor before his primary contest with Ed Koch. The endorsement clearly helped Mario win that primary.
In 2002 the Liberal Party again used that 'third party' strategy to influence the Democratic Party's selection of a candidate by endorsing Andrew Cuomo for Governor before his primary race with Carl McCall. But this time, the strategy backfired. As primary day neared, Cuomo suddenly dropped out of the race - pressured by the above-named internal leadership's demands that it was "time for an African-American candidate for Governor" and that Cuomo would have their support 'down the road'. His quitting the race left the Liberal Party without a viable candidate; with no chance of securing the 50,000 votes a Cuomo candidacy 'guaranteed. New York State's Election Law rules that a third party must secure 50,000 votes on its line every four years during the election of a Governor. When those votes are not secured, the party loses its automatic ballot line in every election in the State for the next four years and its enrollees are dropped from the election rolls throughout the State.
Left without a candidate in 2002, the Liberal Party ended its 62 year run as the longest continuously functioning 'third party' in American political history.
For years the uniqueness of the existence of many 'third parties' made New York State very special. The idea that differing opinions, programs and policies could exist beyond the two-party mold, not only made for diversity, but for genuine voter involvement. New Yorkers were all-but-alone in being able to vote their consciences as well as their ideals and beliefs. But with time, all systems become institutionalized and change. The two major parties came to fear the growth and influence of political organizations to the right and left of them and instituted the 50,000 vote law.
For years now that rule has changed the nature of the political game into one of "survival of the fittest" ...not one of substance and policies. Ideally a 'third party' would prefer to support a candidate of its own choice if neither of the two major party candidates fill the bill. Now the first priority as a Governor's race approaches is to seek a candidate with the means to insure those 50,000 votes - far too often a candidate of one of the two major parties.
When it works, as it did 1998 for the Liberal Party when it supported the independent candidacy of former Lt. Gov Betsy McCaughey Ross, running against her former boss George Pataki and NYC Council President Peter Vallone, it works well. We liked her strong views on early childhood education, health care and on a woman's right to choose. The voters liked them too and she received 80,000 votes on the Liberal Party line. While those votes didn't win her election as Governor, they helped defeat another of her "mentors," Alphonse D'Amato in his reelection bid against Charles Schumer for the US Senate.
Would working with either Giuliani or Cuomo bring a similar vote on a Liberal Party line? And would that vote prove to be a balance of power in a very close election between the two of them?. We believe 'absolutely' in both instances.
Despite the hard feelings engendered at the time of the Cuomo action seven years ago, Liberal Party leadership recognizes his essential talents, vigorous liberal philosophy and strong record as the State's Attorney-General . At the same time, the Liberal Party has no delusions about Governor David Patterson ever accepting the Liberal Party's support given David Dinkins' role in establishing the Working Families Party initially to get rid of the Liberal Party. Dinkins was enraged by the Liberal Party's continued support of Rudolph Giuliani for Mayor and acknowledged that it was that support that resulted in the loss of his Mayoralty to Giuliani the second time around.
The fundamental question today is not whether the Liberal Party can support Andrew Cuomo, but whether recognizing the obvious weaknesses in Mr. Patterson's ability to govern, Mr.Cuomo will have the courage this time to enter a primary against Patterson and make a run against the same old-line leadership's wishes.
On the Republican side, the Liberal Party has a history of supporting selected Republican candidates as far back as the 1950's. Over the years, Liberal Party votes provided winning margins for Senator Jack Javits, Mayor John Lindsay and in recent times, Rudolph Giuliani. Today the speculation is that Giuliani will rise again from the debacle of his presidential race, as he did so dramatically to resurrect his image after the terror attack of 9/11. He's clearly the leading Republican candidate for Governor in 2010.
And with that possibility comes the obvious question: will the Liberal Party again view its old friend Rudy as the best in the field?
Who will the Liberal Party choose?
Stay tuned.
Martin Hassner,
Executive Director
Web Site Editor
| 
