Friday, February 8th, 2013
14

This Week's Winners and Losers of New York City's 2013 Mayoral Election

Go caw yourselfLet's look at the winners and losers of this week in the reality show that is New York City Mayoral Election 2013!

Christine Quinn: Man. Christine Quinn started out the week with a bang. The New York magazine cover story was great, it really cast her in a terrific light, and it made Mike Bloomberg look kinda like a pig. She went saucy on Giuliani, which was fun, though she trashed Jodi Foster at the same time, which was weird. AND THEN. She threw it all away by being a complete terrible despicable idiot, by signing on to the campaign to suppress academic freedom. She and a small gang asked Brooklyn College president Karen Gould to officially distance herself from two speakers on a panel, Omar Barghouti, of the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel, and U.C. Berkeley's Judith Butler, because of their support for Palestine. JUDITH. BUTLER. This was such a dumb, dumb, stupid amateur move, as well as being incredibly offensive. THEN she tried to backpedal. Really gross, really spineless, really sad. Verdict: Was a winner… quickly became a LOSER.

Mike Bloomberg: Mayor Mike had the quote of the week, on the subject of the Brooklyn College contretemps: "If you want to go to a university where the government decides what kind of subjects are fit for discussion, I suggest you apply to a school in North Korea." THANK YOU. This is one of those areas in which the Mayor has always shone brightest. His brash sauciness, when employed on the subject of free speech and free movement and association, has almost always just been stellar. (Except, you know, for stop and frisk, since the Mayor has been pretty totally devoted to a campaign of terror on black communities. But you know, see also: 9/11 Terror Mosque.) Elsewhere in the Week Of Mike, it was pretty crazy when he showed up in that Quinn profile talking about some woman's rump (and then he was a jerk about it) and then…. today's Times piece on how Mayor Mike Lusts After London was kind of a kick in the face, right? Seriously, you're gonna do three terms as Boston's best mayor of New York then fuck right off to London? You're rebuilding the Serpentine gallery, of all places? (I mean it needs it, it's basically a toilet in the middle of a park right now, God bless.) He has more involvement in the cultural life of London than he does in New York City! This is rough stuff. It's also EXTREMELY disruptive to the post-Bloomberg dreams and schemes of City Hall's workers. All that aside… somehow I'd almost rather have a FOURTH BLOOMBERG TERM than the rest of these yahoos. Verdict: Somehow, despite himself, Our Wacky Mayor Mike keeps being a Winner. Enjoy London for us, see you sometime, I guess, whatever.

John Catsimatidis: LOL. You wacky supermarket mogul. Verdict: Who cares, this is just entertainment.

Bill de Blasio: Does he exist???? Apparently he does, because he's using his 2013 donations to pay off his 2009 debt. Gosh. Verdict: LOSER.

Joe Lhota: "Former MTA Chairman Joseph Lhota quietly green-lighted retroactive pay raises—and lump-sum payments totaling $253,000—to the three top agency presidents and a former top executive…. the MTA, meanwhile, hasn’t given a raise to clerical and managerial staffers since 2008." Verdict: You make me want to hop some turnstiles, LOSER.

Everyone Else: Sure seems like someone could run against this weak and sad little field, am I right?

14 Comments / Post A Comment

jfruh (#713)

OK generally I consider myself PRETTY PRO-PALESTINIAN when it comes to "which team are you rooting for in this conflict" BUT can someone who is actively campaigning for an academic boycott of everyone from a particular country really complain when people decided to boycott him, academically?

C_Webb (#855)

This was a lot more than a boycott. This was threatening to defund the college for giving a platform to people with whom they disagreed politically. That's a direct assault on academic freedom.

jfruh (#713)

@C_Webb well, sure, and I against it! I do kind of wonder if Barghouti would be OK with colleges that give platforms to Israeli academics being defunded by their various government funding sources, though.

C_Webb (#855)

Yeah, I'm pro-academic freedom on both sides. I only read the text of Judith Butler's talk, not Barghouti's. I honestly don't know enough to respond to her reading of the conflict itself, but I agree with her on academic freedom, the need for argument, and the problems of equating jewishness with Israel and throwing the term "Nazi" around.

Lockheed Ventura (#5,536)

@jfruh Were you also clutching your pearls over the academic boycott of South Africa?

jfruh (#713)

@Lockheed Ventura well it ended before my 16th birthday, so … no? but I suppose I probably would have been! I guess I just see ACADEMICS, of all people, as people you'd want as allies in these scnearios?

SidAndFinancy (#4,328)

The people of New York City in this whole fiasco? LOSERS.

Bryan Keller (#3,804)
shallowpate (#6,726)

@Bryan Keller Ah, but he's also suing the city's campaign finance board and arguing that the $5k contribution limit is unconstitutional.

catalina (#222,924)

I've already made my decision. He doesn't have a snowflake's chance in hell, but I vote with my gut.

http://gawker.com/5980549/how-to-solve-homelessness-the-mundane-miracles-of-the-doe-fund

sigerson (#179)

Why not Ray Kelly? Seriously. Why the fuck not Ray Kelly?

brianvan (#149)

@sigerson Because Ray Kelly has managed the NYPD to become complacent with depriving people of life, liberty and common justice while they play with their anti-aircraft rockets? Having a general stop-and-frisk policy that's a bit contentious among various liberals is one thing; making it a commonplace habit to have people arrested and detained without probable cause, and then the city taking it a step further by depriving people of their right to have a hearing before a judge within 24 hours (people routinely rot in central booking for hours or days longer), is beyond politics and extends to state-sanctioned terrorism illegal by both state AND federal law, and also exposes the city to massive numbers of civil rights claims (which come dollar-for-dollar out of the services you receive as a taxpayer). As far as I'm concerned he's among the worst of the current crop of potentials strictly from an administrative point of view – incompetent at best, inhumanly arrogant at worst.

That's why not Ray Kelly.

I'm not thrilled with the other candidates but if pandering is their worst sin, then the city can ride it out until 2017 when we can put Stringer back in the race. No one's going to get shit done in four years with the way they're going about things. They talk a good game, but if this is how they think they're going to get elected, they're going to find out the day after getting sworn in that they have no mandate at all.

ericdeamer (#945)

Is the McKay Coppins boomlet already over?

Max RN (#205,900)

John Liu! Ya gotta believe!

Post a Comment