De Blasio Announces Run For Borough Prez

I live in Carroll Gardens. Unless another viable candidate steps up I'm voting for Charles Barron. During the last city council election I crossed party lines for the first time in 20 plus years and others did likewise because they didn't want their vote going to De Blasio.

Posted by: guest at October 29, 2007 9:20 AM

Well, Pete, let's put it another way. The position exists and since the last charter revision, yes, it doesn't have a lot of power, at least as set forth in the City Charter. But having power prescribed is only one way to obtain power. In the current era, borough presidents need to carve out their own power, focus and legacy. Markowitz, Carrion, Marshall and Molinaro (and Fields before them) are the first set to operate under the current constraints, without any precedent to follow or revise. Markowitz defined his administration primarily as a cheerleader, a role that does result in a lot of press coverage. Another borough president, with a different skill set, can redefine the position quite differently (although boosterism is inherent to the job.) For years, I thought that de Blasio would make a great borough president. He has charisma and has a stronger head for policy than the current "beep." But in two terms in the City Council, I didn't hear as much from de Blasio on as wide a range of topics for him to live up to my expectations. Then again, I cannot think of anyone that seized the opportunity that de Blasio may have ignored. Barron does seem big enough for the job, but in a way that I bet is unappealing to almost all whites and very many blacks too. I am actually looking forward to the campaign.

Posted by: guest at October 29, 2007 10:03 AM

Borough president is often a stepping stone for the mayor's office, and that is certainly a powerful position. Marty is a canny politician, and has used the ceremonial and boosterism elements of his office quite well, and for the vast amount of people who cast votes mostly on name and face recognition, this could translate into mayorial votes.

As a black person in Brooklyn, I don't know too many other black people who support Barron, he is just too devisive, and frankly embarrassing in his media hogging. We are fractured enough here in this city, and we need a borough president who can unite us. The real divider of us all is an economic class divide, and for me, the true test of anyone running will be their commitment to bringing real jobs (not just service jobs), affordable housing, and working to improve schools and infrastructure.

If de Blasio can do that, cool. His pursuit of Scarano is great street theatre, but is not really all that important in the greater scheme of things. A rousing crusade to improve building practices and standards all across the board would impress me much more. We need quality and safety in our buildings, no one else need die building or lose their shirt buying crap. We also need much more affordable housing. The two goals should be parallel, not opposing points.

Posted by: guest at October 29, 2007 11:03 AM

Did you see the video of a home tour with Marty chatting up Mr. B about maintaining the scale of residential neighborhoods- yada yada yada. He's a flying monkey.

Posted by: guest at October 29, 2007 11:30 AM

I agree that Barron would make a lousy borough president. Any man who admires Robert Mugabe has questionable morals.

What was De Blasio's real name? I know that he changed it in order to appear more "ethnic" (as did Vito Lopez).

Posted by: guest at October 29, 2007 12:48 PM

On the subject of undeclared, potential candidates: I hope that Markowitz is using the next 14 months to help Deputy Borough President Yvonne Graham land her next job, cause she isn't going to be the next borough president.

Posted by: guest at October 29, 2007 1:26 PM

Tool.

Posted by: guest at October 29, 2007 3:09 PM

11:03 -- Well said. Too bad you are nto running for something.

11:24 -- All the city council members are putting their names on the trash bins - we have Yasskey!

Posted by: guest at October 29, 2007 4:11 PM

"the socialist tendancies of NYC"

Uhhhh, you're kidding, right?

Posted by: guest at October 29, 2007 9:15 PM

""the socialist tendancies of NYC"

Uhhhh, you're kidding, right?"

Hell, i'm a fairly liberal democrat and even i think NYC gov't has too much socialism. Talk about a nanny State...from curbing property rights w/ a smoking ban to outlawing cell phones and ipods when crossing the street. that's not liberalism (freedom and liberty), that's socialism (you're not smart enough to make your own decision about what's best for you so we will).
Its sickening.

Posted by: guest at November 5, 2007 12:17 PM