Alarming News

October 31, 2005

Choo Choo

I am so annoyed at the Democratic party in NY. For the second mayoral election in a row, I was planning to go into the voting booth and vote third party. And, for the second mayoral election in a row (scroll down for details and also to see me say that Bloomberg, who at the time had a 30 or so percent approval rating, should not be counted out in ‘05), the Democrat is forcing me to go vote for Mike Bloomberg. Just when I thought I’d reached a decision to vote the Libertarian candidate Audrey Silk, I discover this ad by Freddy Ferrer trying to tie Bloomberg to Bush. Now, anyone with any honesty knows that Bloomberg has near zero in common with Bush. But the reminder that Bloomberg has been good to Republicans makes me want to reward him with my vote. Damn you, Freddy, damn you.

Update: Whoa, dude. Via Politicker.

Posted by Karol at 07:46 PM |
Technorati Tags:

I LOVE THAT SLOGAN!! OMG!!!! Why isn’t that plastered *everywhere*?????

Posted by: Not Dawn Summers at October 31, 2005 at 8:27 pm

You actually made me laugh out loud :)

Posted by: EiNY at October 31, 2005 at 8:55 pm

The mayoral race is not even close. You might as well vote for a third party.

Posted by: Dan at October 31, 2005 at 9:36 pm

Well, that’s what I was thinking too, Dan. But now I don’t know. I’ve been back and forth this whole election cycle.

Posted by: Karol at October 31, 2005 at 9:46 pm

True NY fiscal conservatives should stick with their intention in voting for Tom Ognibene (and don’t hold back voting for Audrey if you’re still upset over the smoking ban). I don’t care if Freddy attacks bloomberg until he’s blue in the face. Though I do prefer Bloomberg over Ferrer, he did raise taxes, imposed policies that hurt businesses all for his own pleasure. I don’t feel sorry for him if he gets attacked by Freddy in a ruthless way. Tom will still get my vote. Nothing will change my decision on my mayoral vote.

Posted by: Daniel at October 31, 2005 at 9:54 pm

I understand your anger at the Ferrer ad.
The only thing that makes me more annoyed than the omnipresent liberal Bloomberg ads is the crude Ferrer spots.
However, Ferrer is not going to win.
There is no reason for conservatives or real Republicans to vote for the moderate Democrat, who pretends to be a Republican, over the leftist Democrat, who pretends to care about all New Yorkers.
A vote for Bloomberg is a vote for the liberal hijaaking of the post-Rudy party, which was never that conservative, anyway.
Bloomberg will probably spend more than $70,000,000.00 on his re-election campaign. (I believe that this is more than PResident Clinton spent to be re-elected in 1996.)
He is not lifting a finger to help Republicans in winnable City Council races.
Tom Ognibene is the only actual Republican and Conservative running.
He certainly has my vote.

Posted by: Ron Lewenberg at November 1, 2005 at 4:46 am

Silk is not a libertarian.

Posted by: Dave at November 1, 2005 at 7:19 am

The problem here is that Rudi can’t run for another term.
Bloomberg is clearly no Rudi. Bloomberg is really irritating me by running TV ads that imply that he is responsible for the policy changes that were in fact initiated by Rudi.
NYC is beginning the long slide back into what it was before Rudi.

Posted by: Shouting Thomas at November 1, 2005 at 8:42 am

She’s not?

Posted by: Karol at November 1, 2005 at 8:42 am

I sent you an email explaining my point about Silk, above.
Nominally a libertarian. But that’s like saying Bloomberg is nominally a Republican….

Posted by: Dave at November 1, 2005 at 8:51 am

Throwing up. In. Own. Mouth.

Posted by: Ari at November 1, 2005 at 9:37 am

Hahaha. Which part? Me potentially voting for Bloomberg?

Posted by: Karol at November 1, 2005 at 9:45 am

God yes!!!

Posted by: Ari at November 1, 2005 at 10:12 am

If the race was close, maybe. But to vote for Bloomberg due to an ad linking him with Bush, even though you admit that Bloomberg has nothing in common with Bush, strikes me as a little odd. Vote your principles, not your party.

Posted by: Von Bek at November 1, 2005 at 11:21 am

I’m not voting the party. If that was the case I wouldn’t even be considering voting against Bloomberg. It’s just that Ferrer has a point. Bloomberg was very good to Bush and the Republicans, in terms of the convention and in terms of cold hard cash. Dawn Summers actually credited the convention being in NY with why she thought Bush won in her post-election bitterness round-up. Shouldn’t he be rewarded for that?

Posted by: Karol at November 1, 2005 at 2:17 pm

I’ve never quite seen anything quite like the Al Sharpton ad you link at the bottom. (”Whoa, dude”.) Simply astonishing.

Posted by: bobm at November 1, 2005 at 2:59 pm

The prospect of Bloomberg trouncing Ferrer in a landslide is all the reason I need to vote for him. A vote for one of the other candidates will be symbolic sure, but noticed by no one. Bloomber devastating Ferrer however will be symbolism with an impact. It will be the Democratic establishment of NYC being handed a loss almost as big as they deserve. For me, this election is a chance to vote AGAINST that Democratic establishment much more than it is a chance to vote FOR Bloomberg. We can all work on supporting candidates better than Bloomberg the next go around, but in ‘05 I think it’s a best to just pile on as much as possible on the utter Democratic collapse.

Posted by: J.Kende at November 1, 2005 at 5:44 pm

Funny you say that JKende – that is precisely how I felt about Bush just demolishing the Dems last election but for some reason when it comes to Bloomberg… well, I wouldn’t spit on him if he were on fire.

Posted by: Ari at November 1, 2005 at 10:54 pm

I guess the NYC Dems just bother me all that much more. Not to mention that I really don’t see Bloomberg being terrible, but rather just feel lukewarm towards him. We could have, and have often had, much worse. As Karol points out, at least he is giving large sums of money to the Republican Party.

Posted by: J.Kende at November 2, 2005 at 5:25 am
Post a comment