Bloomberg gave the NYS GOP 500,000 $ to hang on to its slim majority.

[Smarmie Doofus]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2949658

Thankfully, he failed.

1. Yesterday, he attended GOV Paterson's news conference announcing the introduction of the marriage equality bill. He voiced "support" for the bill. He was pictured prominently by NYT standing next to the GOV. ( Actually he was pictured MORE prominently... Bloomie's in the *foreground*... than the GOV who was at the mic and is introducing the bill.) Hint: the NYT is suporting Bloomberg in his run for a third term; already the ads are running ( he has no announced opponent) and the $$$ is flowing.

2. The success or failure of the bill seems to hinge on whether or not it can gain the support of four or more GOP state senators, the very people Bloomerg helped to return to office. ( Had four or more gone down, the bill would pass and be signed with much fanfare but little drama.)

3. Seems to me Bloomberg is in a unique position to get this bill passed.


My question: Will he *DO* anything? My prediction is "no" since he's done nothing on this issue in NYC except to order city attorneys to argue against marriage equality in the courts. Some thing about "it has to be resolved at the legislative level..... blah, blah, blah."

So....?????

[Renew Deal]

1. I would be surprised if it passed the State Senate.

It will probably pass the Assembly easily. But the Dems control the senate by 2 seats, and I doubt all those Dems will support it.

[Smarmie Doofus]

2. 4 are on record as NOs.

Which means we need four GOPers. Far as I know.. they're ALL on record as NOs. DEMS have a one seat majority.

Which brings us back to Bloomberg.... self proclaimed supporter of marriage equality.

It could concievably pass without GOP support; say, if the GOV makes the renegade DEMS an offer they can't refuse. I have no idea what that would be.

But Bloomberg would seem to have more.... ummmm, *influence* with pragmatic GOPers.

[Renew Deal]

3. I think Dems are putting themselves in trouble in NY state.

Paterson's reelection prospects are getting worse by the day. The Dems just took control of the Senate in November. If Paterson gets his tax hikes, Dems won't control the Senate again for another 60 years. Paterson wants to tax the shit out of everything. And I think the same-sex marriage issue is going to harden republican support and soften Democratic support. I know it's the right thing to do for people, but I don't know if it will be positive for Democrats in the Senate.

[Smarmie Doofus]

4. Put tax hikes aside. Support of marriage equality will *enhance*...

... his chances of winning a DEM primary fight... which had been widely expected up til now. GLBTs in NYS make up an inordinately large porportion of primary voters, $$$ contributors, and campaign foot soldiers and are often fought-over in contested primaries. If he pushes this through... or even if he TRIES to push it through he's going to be *extremely* popular with this demographic.

How it stands for the general is anyone's guess. The anitgay RW is miobilizing... newly-energized by the arrival of the latest NYC RC archbishop.... one Timothy Dolan... an ideological cookie-cutter clone of his predecessors, Spellman, Cooke, O'Connor, Eagan. ( He even *looks* like Spellman.) He's better spoken, it's said, than all of the above., so anticipate new heights of demagoguery on this issue.

I think though that they can safely be ignored . No significant fallout so far ( that I know of ) for DEMS in Mass. CT. VT. or Iowa. I think most people don't really care. And, if they're not GLBT, they really shouldn't.

Except insofar as all progressives should want to see justice done.

[mitchtv]

5. Would you prefer that they dump on Gays

just to save their majority? If they do that then why vote for them at all? ever? Might as well have Pukes in there if the Dems won't do what's right.