Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:23 AM
DonViejo (8,555 posts)
Liberals Slam Andrew Cuomo’s Deals With New York GOP
by David Freedlander Dec 9, 2012 4:45 AM EST
The ambitious governor’s drawing heat for his role in giving Republicans a majority in Albany. Will this matter to Democrats with long memories in Iowa in 2016?
Last month, Chris Hayes, the wonky host of his own morning television show on the liberal MSNBC looked straight at the camera and announced “Democrats cannot count on New York’s supposedly Democratic governor Andrew Cuomo as an ally and every Democratic primary voter in the entire country should know that, too.”
“One would have thought that a Democratic governor would have worked hard to reverse the Tea Party’s 2010 gains in his state,” added Katrina Vanden Heuvel, editor of The Nation. “You would hope that a governor with his eyes on the White House would prefer to cooperate with the diverse progressive legislators of the Democratic/Working Families Party majority rather than the all-white, nearly all-male moderate-to-conservative GOP minority.”
The Daily Kos went even further, with head man Markos Moulitsas accusing the governor of New York of acting in way telling the netroots, that “If you’re looking for a successor to Obama who will be a strong Democrat who will fight for Democratic ideals and his or her party, don’t be looking at Cuomo … Cuomo is a worthy successor to the legacy of Joe Lieberman … It should make him persona non grata in a Democratic presidential primary.”
The outrage was sparked after Democrats appeared to have won a majority of seats in the New York State Senate, only to watch, through some backroom deal-making that Cuomo either spearheaded or tacitly supported, as the Republicans persuaded a handful of Democrats to caucus with them, keeping the GOP in the majority.
3 replies, 789 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Liberals Slam Andrew Cuomo’s Deals With New York GOP (Original post)
|One of the 99||Dec 2012||#1|
Response to One of the 99 (Reply #1)
Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:08 AM
Squinch (7,677 posts)
2. Absolutely right. He's a conservative in sheep's clothing. He's terrible for the unions,
terrible for education, terrible for early childhood and elderly services. He's dismantling the safety net from the edges in and no one seems to notice.
I can't believe his popularity numbers.
Response to DonViejo (Original post)
Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:28 AM
union_maid (3,502 posts)
3. He's effective
I agree that he's been way too conservative on a lot of issues. But the reason he's popular is that we were a mess and things are more functional now. Even before Spitzer's little prostitute problem he was proving not get along with anyone. He had plenty of us worried that we'd wind up with Rudy Guiliani as governor down the road because Spitzer, almost elected by acclaim the first time around, was proving to be not good at politics and might just lose us the governorship next time. Then came Patterson. Many happy people when he became governor. He understood the legislature. He was well liked there. He should be able to govern well. Turn out the legislative branch is where his talents lay and as an executive - not so much. Cuomo has just been much more effective than either of his predecessors. And while I don't even entirely understand the ins and outs of Albany, even this odd decision seems to have been part of the whole.
From the Daily Beast article linked in the OP:
This approach has made the notoriously dysfunctional New York legislature into something resembling a working lawmaking body, and allowed the governor to move his agenda forward, which included progressive wish-list items like a same-sex marriage law, ethics reform, and stronger rent control. But the perception that Cuomo is a centrist could boomerang on him if the governor goes through with the widespread expectation that he will run for president in 2016. The last thing any would-be presidential candidate wants to explain to the hardened Democratic partisans of Iowa and New Hampshire is, “Despite what you may have heard, I am no Joe Lieberman.”
I don't know about how his presidential ambitions will play out but if he runs again I'd be way surprised if any primary challenge to him had much effect. However, this kind of pushback might move him to rethink some of his positions. Maybe.