Democratic Primary Results
The Democratic primary, held yesterday, was, in many ways, about Democratic Party leader Vito Lopez—whether his hand-picked candidates would get pushed through to run for City Council on the party ticket. Steve Levin, from team Lopez, won in the 33rd District with 33.7 percent of the vote (Jo Anne Simon was his closest competitor, with…
The Democratic primary, held yesterday, was, in many ways, about Democratic Party leader Vito Lopez—whether his hand-picked candidates would get pushed through to run for City Council on the party ticket. Steve Levin, from team Lopez, won in the 33rd District with 33.7 percent of the vote (Jo Anne Simon was his closest competitor, with 20.2 percent); Maritza Davila, endorsed by Lopez, lost in the 34th District to Diana Reyna, a former Lopez staffer who fell out with the party boss. Incumbent Letitia James won in the 35th District with 81.2 percent of the vote, and Brad Lander took the 39th District with 41.1 percent due to, he told The Brooklyn Paper, his stances on “affordable housing, livable communities, jobs, and good schools.” In the race for comptroller, Councilman John Liu of Queens came out 8 points ahead of Brooklyn Councilman David Yassky, but with 38 percent of the vote, did not have the 40 percent required to win outright. Thus there will be a runoff election held September 29. For more primary results, check out the Eagle’s coverage of the State Senate race.
33rd District: Levin Wins Handily [Brooklyn Paper]
35th District: James Steamrolls Yards-loving Foe [Brooklyn Paper]
39th District: Lander Crushes Four Rivals [Brooklyn Paper]
Liu and Yassky Headed for Runoff [NY Times]
State Senate Primary Results [Brooklyn Eagle]
Here’s a link with the preliminary numbers.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/19807685/2009-Primary-Results
Once they are verified, they will be posted on the City’s Board of Elections website.
Petebklyn, try the NYC Board of Elections site.
so is there any website or place to see how voting went for comptroller, pubadvocate, etc by district or area?
You’d think the NYTimes would have it…but they seem less and less interested in new york city.
“This is PATHETIC! Bloomburg and his fiefdom took our votes and shat upon them by repealling what we New Yorkers decided. TERM LIMITS! This is a direct attack on the foundation of our Democracy! We shouldn’t be talking about anything else.”
Exactly. I think Bloomberg has done (on whole) a commendable job as mayor. And I absolutely will not vote for him, or anyone else seeking a third time. The utter contempt shown toward the voters by these careerists is galling.
The track record on third terms is not good – there seems to be burnout that affects mayors and their top staff. LaGuardia, Wagner, and Koch all had very disappointing third terms.
fsrg- I was talking about the closings several years ago so we were speaking at cross purposes. But my argument remains pretty much the same. 4 man fire crews are dangerous for everyone. It cuts manpower too much. Attrition? 2 things about attrition. Loss of necessary manpower and the loss of experienced men. Since 9-11 the Fire Dept. has lost thousands of its most experienced firefighters. Experienced firefighters pass that knowledge along to rookies- knowledge that saves lives and property.
Bloomberg’s thing is to treat the City as a business. That’s both good and bad. When it comes to fire safety or Meals on Wheels (another program he wanted to cut, although I am not sure his stance at the present) its very very bad. And I don’t like his high handed style of personal involvement. I am happy with the non-smoking rules in restaurants and workplaces. But it is ridiculous to tell people they can’t smoke outdoors. That is intrusive and we need a mayor- not a daddy.
I’m a lot less than thrilled with his idea of public transportation and his congestion pricing is an awful plan that lets Manhattanites off the hook while imposing hardship on the outer boroughs. Perhaps we would need cars so much (no- I don’t have one) if we had more public transportation. Perhaps if they weren’t spending all that money for the new train line on the upper east side?
Less crime? I attribute that more to Kelly and NYPD than to Bloomberg.
Thanks for that post, aysataba. It’s quite enlightening!
Hi folks;
It’s late here in Milan, and I’ve got to catch a bus at FOUR AM tomorrow to the airport, so I can only throw in a few points. In addition to what FSRG stated above, let me add three other points in favor of Bloomberg:
a) data-driven accountability. This concept, so basic in business, was never really implemented in NYC to a large degree. It is refreshing to have a leader who thinks in these terms.
This firehouse issue is a perfect example. Folks get all emotional when it comes to trying to allocate resources to these services, and the unions exploit this (he’s cutting on vital services!!! He’s cutting education for THE CHILDREN). The fact of the matter is that there are far fewer fires these days AND the city’s houding stock has been made more fire-proof. Why not allocate precious resources wisely?
b) infrastructure investment. The amount of investment in basic infrastructure has been heartening. This investment has been in all areas: subways, roads, school buildings and others. For the first time in over 60 years, we are actually EXPANDING the subway system. The extension of the 42nd St line was actually financed by the city itself, which is as it should be.
c) revision of the building code. This was a herculean task that many said couldn’t be done. The simplification of this code, and making it more in line with the national standard, will help in reducing the cost of housing in the city.
People often talk about how because he is self-financing his campaign he does not owe any one anything. The problem I see here is that, instead of fundraising, he is giving his throwing his money around in exchange for lack of opposition/support. He has hired every top campaign staffer, many whom behind closed doors admit that they aren’t even voting for him but he’s not that bad and the money is great so they don’t work for Thompson. But, when I talk about buying support, I am not just talking about the however many millions he is spending on his campaign. How many nonprofits doing great work but struggling to meet their budgets have active community leaders that would be active on behalf of Thompson but are staying quiet because of the funding Bloomberg either does provide or they hope might someday provide their organization? I know of more than I care to even think about. His money, or the promise of it, buys loyalty and support. Example – Patty Harris, one of his deputies that had the courage to disagree with him on the term limits extension, was hesitant to leave his administration to go to his campaign. What does Bloomberg do? Donate an exorbitant amount of money to her alma mater and have them name a building after her. Guess what she does? Goes to his campaign. I’m not saying all of his supporters have been bought. But, I am saying that the immeasurable value of donations that he provides (and regularly references his willingness to provide to worthy organizations in the future)undoubtedly taint and skew the perspective of any person or nonprofit that might ever be doing any sort of fundraising, basically anyone that does any government or nonprofit or community advocacy work.
I find that really troubling, almost frightening (a bit too melodramatic of a word but heading that direction). This and his term limits decision show an utter lack of respect for basic principles of democracy. How can we put out trust and elect a leader with such disregard for democracy?
CG_ups – I agree thats why I support term limits for legislatures….it is too difficult to determine what, if anything a legislature is doing and the incumbency offers so much power, people can make their own decisions on executive positions because the job is much more defined.