U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: ...
Yes 31 33.70%
No 61 66.30%
Voters: 92. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-04-2009, 07:37 AM
 
Location: Bronx, NY
9,845 posts, read 22,555,264 times
Reputation: 3561

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by crescent22 View Post
Wow this thing was close. 50-47% with 80 pct reporting. Wow. Thompson could have won if he ran anything but an incompetent campaign.
I think the low turnout had a lot to do with how close this ended up also. A lot of people that would vote for Bloomberg thought he was going to win easy so they didn't bother voting. There are about 4.5 million to 5 million eligible voters in NYC and only about 1 million voted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-04-2009, 08:46 AM
 
Location: Now in Houston!
922 posts, read 3,540,184 times
Reputation: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by NooYowkur81 View Post
I think the low turnout had a lot to do with how close this ended up also. A lot of people that would vote for Bloomberg thought he was going to win easy so they didn't bother voting. There are about 4.5 million to 5 million eligible voters in NYC and only about 1 million voted.
Bloomberg got 557,000 votes and spent $100MM. That's about $180 per vote.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2009, 09:06 AM
 
Location: Bronx, NY
9,845 posts, read 22,555,264 times
Reputation: 3561
The crazy thing is Bloomberg could have lost had the Dems had a more formidable candidate. Bloomberg was very susceptible. The Dems might have under-played their hand. Had they really backed Thompson hardcore they might have won this. Instead of making Thompson seem like the best we can do at the moment or the "it's his turn candidate", had they made him seem like the best thing since sliced bread, they might have pulled it off. I'm sure there are some in the Dem circles kicking themselves today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2009, 09:27 AM
 
8,750 posts, read 16,332,256 times
Reputation: 4168
Agred NYer. Judging from the results, Bloomberg, despite his money/name, could have easily been beaten had ANY rival candidate had the right message. Unfortunately, Thompson was simply playing the usual Democratic game which is usually black vs white, but in this case he tailored it to rich vs everyone else.

And Upstater, I could not agree with you more about your comment regarding Pedro Espada and how telling it truly was. When asked during the debated whether Pedro Espada was good, or whatever the question was, Bloomberg laughed and stated an emphatic NO (which is what any reasonable person would say), while Thompson gave a begrudging yes, because he is enslaved to the party, and the PARTY comes first, not the city, not the voters. And that was my main problem with Thompson..who wants to go back to the incompetence, corruption, and political games of the Democratic nonsense that always brings the city to its knees? He had no message, platform, or vision for NYC other than "Bloomberg is bad", and he was guaranteed to simply usher in politics as usual.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2009, 09:52 AM
 
Location: Bronx, NY
9,845 posts, read 22,555,264 times
Reputation: 3561
Quote:
Originally Posted by SobroGuy View Post
Agred NYer. Judging from the results, Bloomberg, despite his money/name, could have easily been beaten had ANY rival candidate had the right message. Unfortunately, Thompson was simply playing the usual Democratic game which is usually black vs white, but in this case he tailored it to rich vs everyone else.

And Upstater, I could not agree with you more about your comment regarding Pedro Espada and how telling it truly was. When asked during the debated whether Pedro Espada was good, or whatever the question was, Bloomberg laughed and stated an emphatic NO (which is what any reasonable person would say), while Thompson gave a begrudging yes, because he is enslaved to the party, and the PARTY comes first, not the city, not the voters. And that was my main problem with Thompson..who wants to go back to the incompetence, corruption, and political games of the Democratic nonsense that always brings the city to its knees? He had no message, platform, or vision for NYC other than "Bloomberg is bad", and he was guaranteed to simply usher in politics as usual.
SoBro I have been very pro-Bloomberg in the past but I think unfortunately he became just another politician along the way (probably at some point in his second term). The Bloomberg of his 1st term is not the same as 2009 Bloomberg.

I just could not get over what he did to overturn term limits. It was the lowest of the low...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2009, 10:04 AM
 
8,750 posts, read 16,332,256 times
Reputation: 4168
Yeah I was not happy about that either. However, I am a realist also, and not about to cut off my nose to spite my face. I really wanted to like Thompson, but with no platform or agenda, what was there to vote for? I would simply be voting against Bloomberg, regardless of who was running, and there was no way I was going to do that. Furthermore, Thompson showed that a vote for him is simply a vote for the Thompson/Ferrer/Sharpton/Dinkins/Espada usual politics of pitting one group versus another/polarization, stagnation, corruption, and pandering to the party at the expense of the city. No thanks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2009, 10:19 AM
 
Location: Bronx, NY
9,845 posts, read 22,555,264 times
Reputation: 3561
Quote:
Originally Posted by SobroGuy View Post
Yeah I was not happy about that either. However, I am a realist also, and not about to cut off my nose to spite my face. I really wanted to like Thompson, but with no platform or agenda, what was there to vote for? I would simply be voting against Bloomberg, regardless of who was running, and there was no way I was going to do that. Furthermore, Thompson showed that a vote for him is simply a vote for the Thompson/Ferrer/Sharpton/Dinkins/Espada usual politics of pitting one group versus another/polarization, stagnation, corruption, and pandering to the party at the expense of the city. No thanks.
I don't like Thompson either. I voted for a third party candidate. Which I know in a way was like voting for Thompson, but I just couldn't bring myself to vote for Bloomberg this time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2009, 11:50 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn
40,054 posts, read 30,997,502 times
Reputation: 10500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NooYowkur81 View Post
I think the low turnout had a lot to do with how close this ended up also. A lot of people that would vote for Bloomberg thought he was going to win easy so they didn't bother voting. There are about 4.5 million to 5 million eligible voters in NYC and only about 1 million voted.
Indeed. But watch how many people complain about Bloomberg. It will be a higher percentage than the number of people who actually got up off their backsides and voted. A very strange phenomenon!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2009, 12:23 PM
 
8,750 posts, read 16,332,256 times
Reputation: 4168
Hehe...good point Freddie
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2009, 01:07 PM
 
Location: Long Island/NYC
11,336 posts, read 17,509,563 times
Reputation: 6094
Quote:
Originally Posted by NooYowkur81 View Post
SoBro I have been very pro-Bloomberg in the past but I think unfortunately he became just another politician along the way (probably at some point in his second term). The Bloomberg of his 1st term is not the same as 2009 Bloomberg.

I just could not get over what he did to overturn term limits. It was the lowest of the low...
That's exactly how I feel. I don't want this city to end up like Chicago, I can't believe that corrupt Daley is still in office after 20 years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City
View detailed profiles of:
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top