Kirsten Gillibrand’s appointment to the Senate was met with such outrage among ambitious state politicians, liberal Democrats and Hispanic groups that it would have been unfathomable that she would be mostly unchallenged as 2009 drew to a close.
A combination of factors (Gillibrand’s move leftward, which quite literally occurred overnight and gradually helped her win over some progressive critics, for instance Jerrold Nadler; the White House and Chuck Schumer’s intervention on her behalf; Democratic congressmen’s reluctance to leave safe House seats for a tough statewide race) made her look like a less compelling target, and one by one her would-be challengers dropped out: Reps. Steve Israel, Carolyn Maloney, Carolyn McCarthy, Jose Serrano and Manhattan Borough President Scott Stinger.
Yet, there is now a new wave of politicians looking at challenging Gillibrand. If those I mentioned above justified their interest by arguing that New York should have a liberal senator, what might now be driving others to take a look at the race is simply the realization that Gillibrand is vulnerable.
11 months after her appointment, and despite arguments that her media savvy would help her build a strong standing as she introduces herself to voters, polls are finding that Gillibrand is growing unpopular. Marist has found her approval rating declining month by month, with their latest survey finding her at a dismal 25-51; Siena and SUSA find her rating to be stronger but negative (33-45 and 41-42, respectively). This has some Democrats arguing that it would be risky to send Gillibrand to the general election, especially if Rudy Giuliani does jump in the Senate race (most people remain as skeptic that he will as they were before The Daily News reported he was set on running); and even if the general election isn’t competitive, at least Gillibrand no longer looks like as formidable a candidate as she was presented to be earlier this year.
Exhibit A of this shift is the jaw-dropping news that former Rep. Harold Ford Jr. (who ran for Senate in 2006… in Tennessee) is considering running in the Democratic primary. I think most people thought this was a joke when they first heard about it earlier this week, but Politico sourced some associates willing to confirm that Ford was at least mulling the possibility and Crain’s secured some evidence that someone has been running a poll testing Ford’s viability.
Why this development is so surprising: Not only is it rare for a politician to run for Congress in two different states - especially at a small interval - but it would mean that Gillibrand would receive a primary challenge from the right! (Who would have predicted that in January 2009?) Ford was a member of the Blue Dog Coalition while in the House; so was Gillibrand, of course, but Ford’s senatorial ambitions only led him further to the right since he was running in a Southern state. Since he left Congress, he has presided over the centrist Democratic Leadership Council, which is certainly not dear to progressives’ hearts. Might Ford be hoping to win the African-American vote, which would remedy some of the harm he’d suffer from his ideological positioning?
I have trouble seeing how Ford could find a path at victory - NYC’s black leaders would be unlikely to rally around his candidacy, he’d end up rallying liberals around Gillibrand and upstate counties are where Gillibrand was expected to be strongest in a primary - but it would certainly be a race worth watching.
Perhaps more worrisome for Gillibrand is the possibility that New York City Comptroller William Thompson might set his sights on the Senate after his unexpectedly narrow defeat in this month’s mayoral race. It all started with Rep. Jose Serrano (one of Gillibrand’s last House critics left since Nadler endorsed her and since McCarthy started working with her on gun control) circulating Thompson’s name as a potential candidate. “He is a progressive voice that hasn’t moved one way or the other over the years, and people would respect that,” Serrano said. This led The Daily News’s Liz Benjamin and The New York Times to confirm that he was indeed mulling the race - among other 2010 options - and Thompson himself was coy about the possibility when asked about it this week.
Due to his limited resources in this year’s race, Thompson did not have the opportunity to build the strongest campaign infrastructure but he did receive 46% of the general election vote (506,717 votes) after coasting to victory in the Democratic primary. Sure, Thompson has only ran in NYC elections, but don’t forget the vast majority of votes in 2006’s state primary came from the city: This is where many of the state’s Democratic voters are, and most just cast a ballot for Thompson. The comptroller could seek to mobilize African-Americans and progressives - if he can convince them that Gillibrand’s leftward turn should not be trust. Furthermore, the coverage he has received in the aftermath of the finish has arguably more helpful to his image than what he had able to secure before the election, and many of the city’s Democratic leaders will at the very least be weary of underestimating him.
In particular, Thompson is a rare Democrat who could be immune to pressure from the Democratic establishment: Given the extent to which the White House and the state’s party leaders ignored him throughout 2009. Much has been made of Obama’s remaining as distant as was possible, of Christin Quinn’s late endorsement, of the congresspeople who endorsed Bloomberg; given the result, it’s very plausible that Thompson would have prevailed had just some of these Democrats rallied by his side, helped him gain media coverage and raise money. As such, why would Thompson be as receptive as Israel and Maloney were to a phone-call from Obama or Schumer. (The Times remarks that Obama’s recent intervention against Paterson could make it harder for the White House to openly block Thompson.)
Gillibrand’s weak numbers and these primary rumors are continuing to drive GOP interest. Pataki was long the only name mentioned, which is why the news that Giuliani was leaning towards the Senate race took even Republicans by surprise. Another name that is now circulating: Larchmont Mayor Liz Feld is in the process of deciding whether she’ll jump in. She is far from the Republicans’ dream candidate (Larchmont is a small town, and she recently lost a state Senate race) but the GOP would be guilty of political malpractice if it did not field some credible candidate.
It’s starting to become very apparent that 2010 will definitely be a Republican year in regards to pickups in Congress. PA,IL, DE, CO, NV, AR, NY-B, and CT have a lot of Democrats worried. If Hoeven runs in ND, you can make the number 9.
I’m waiting to see how long it will take some of these Incumbent Democrats to start distancing themselves from Obama. Lincoln will be one of the first. Dorgan may pick up that MO soon too.
Thompson might have a chance at beating Gillibrand. I don’t see any of the others doing so, nor having the guts to pull the trigger. But Thompson, now out of office (come January) has little to lose and a lot to gain. Even if he lost the primary, I don’t think it would destroy his ambition to be Mayor in ‘13. Running against someone the left doesn’t like is hardly something that will brand you later in NYC.
“I have trouble seeing how Ford could find a path at victory.”
I totally agree. They were discussing this rumor last week on “Morning Joe” and didn’t give it much credence. He has no base, little money and even less name recognition than Gillibrand. Unless her numbers totally tank there is no chance he will get in the race especially if Thompson enters.
I can’t see him winning in Tennessee either so maybe this was just a finger in the wind or he may also be hoping to be bought off by the Obama administration or the DNC with a high profile political appointment.
he may also be hoping to be bought off by the Obama administration or the DNC with a high profile political appointment.
That’s sort of what I was thinking. I’ve actually been a bit surprised that Ford hasn’t been plucked up by Obama already. Obama is clearly more liberal then Ford, but they had similar personal styles and media savvy. It seems to me he’d be useful to the Administration in some capacity or another.
Let’s examine soon to be former NYC Controller Bill Thompson’s options, assuming he wants to run for office again. Given his very big come from behind close 2nd place finish in the recent mayoral race, he would be wise to run again sooner rather than later. Strike while you are hot! (I realize part of his votes came from those who were upset with Mayor Bloomberg’s success in pushing aside term limits, but, Thompson is a hot commodity now!) Thus, why only wait 4 years to run for mayor again, when he can pursue another office, and still see how the mayoral race shakes out in 2013. Running for New York State Controller, against the incumbent, DiNapoli, could be difficult, although not undoable. His other statewide options include NYS Attorney General, which Andrew Cuomo will most likely be leaving in order to run in a primary against Gov. David Paterson. With Thompson’s background as NYC Controller, this might not be his first choice. He could hope to be selected as Cuomo’s lieutenant governor choice, but even if he was selected, he’d be out of the limelight. This actually wouldn’t be a bad choice, but, it seems that running against Sen. Gillibrand would be an even better choice. He would more likely than not win the primary, and he’d be unstoppable in the fall 2010 election, with him, Cuomo at the top of the ticket, and Sen. Chuck Schumer running for another full term. (Both of New York’s Senate seats are on the ballot because Gillibrand and etc. are running for the last 2 years of Hillary Clinton’s term.) Obviously, if Thompson wins, he’d have to get ready to run for a full term in 2012, but, with Obama at the top of the ticket that year, Thompson would do fine. Thompson comes from a political family, and his own background as an Assistant Brooklyn Borough President (sort of an assistant county executive), head of NYC Board of Education, and some private sector experience in the banking industry, all gives him a broad background and years of experience working and bringing people together, a great background for a US Senator. New York State has 29 US Congressional seats. Gillibrand represented one district in the far eastern edge of upstate New York. Thus she is very unknown not only downstate, but is also unknown across the rest of the upstate region. Congressional districts 19-29 are the predominant upstate districts, with small parts of districts 17 and 18. (I am putting anything above NYC suburban Westchester County as being upstate.) Thus, there are millions of people upstate who don’t know Gillibrand. The bulk of Democrat primary voters come from NYC and its suburbs. She has changed her views dramatically, from being a conservative Democrat to being more liberal. This doesn’t always impress people.
As far a Harold Ford goes, he’d have an uphill fight. NY has voted for out of staters before, but it isn’t always that simple. Robert Kennedy spent many years in the state. Hillary Clinton won in 2000, but she garnered 55% of the vote against a little-known downstate congressman, Rick Lazio, while Al Gore took 60% of the vote at the top of the ticket. If it wasn’t a presidential election year, it would have been closer. (She earned 67% of the vote in 2006, with NY AG Eliot Spitzer taking 69% of the vote in his first gubernatorial race. She also worked very hard her first 6 years in office.)
There must be something in the water in Tennessee. Bill Brock was a one-term Tennessee Senator in the 1970s. He later tried to run for Senate in Maryland, but was defeated by Paul Sarbanes.
Gerard, were you being serious when you basically said Thompson will be a shoe-in if he wins the Dem senate primary? If I were Giuliani or Pataki, I would still rather run against him than Gillibrand. Remember, although it was closer than expected, he is still a Democrat that lost in NYC. If you can’t win a general election race in NYC, then its not at all likely that you will win a general election in NYS.
Yes, Preston, Thompson would be a shoo-in if he won the primary. Barely losing to a billionaire without any outside support is something to boast of. And if I were Thompson, I’d be glad to face Giuliani, who’s way too conservative for NYS. I would expect something like 60-40.
With Cuomo and Schumer at the head of the ticket, Thompson would be in great shape. Mayor Bloomberg spent about $102,000,000 (102 million dollars!), outspending Thompson 14 to 1. Bloomberg is competent and has done a good job. He took office right after 9/11, and after 8 years of Giuliani’s racial divisiveness. Bloomberg has worked very hard for the city, bringing people of all backgrounds together. If you lived in the city in the 1990’s under Giuliani, you would know what I mean. Giuliani wouldn’t even let local officials he didn’t care for to even go to ground zero after 9/11, that is how petty he gets. I am not trying to minimize the very very significant contributions of Mayor Giuliani, but he is a complicated and difficult person. Bloomberg has been calm, steady, and reasonable, he had plenty of newspaper and union support. Most union leaders probably figured he’d win and they’d be dealing with him for another 4 years. Thompson really didn’t have much support, not so much because of who he was, but because Bloomberg has been one of NYC’s better mayors. Having labor union support in NYC is significant because the unions will set up phone banks, calling people to come out and vote. Television advertisements are ridiculously expensive in NYC. Thompson could barely afford the 15 second commercials he put out. Bloomberg’s big bucks scared off a lot of potential campaign contributors, and, again, BLoomberg has, by most all accounts, done a good job. Even the White House stayed far away from Thompson. So, the fact that Bloomberg only won by less than 5 percentage points makes Thompson look really good. If Thompson won a primary against Gillibrand, he’d be running for an open seat that November, not running against an incumbent as was the case this year. Would Giuliani be a tough opponent, sure. But, don’t forget, he had the opportunity to run for the open US Senate seat in 2000, against Clinton, and he stayed away. There are still plenty of people around who would never want Giuliani in the US Senate. The firefighter’s union has no love for him nor do the teachers or most of the other unions. Would Giuliani be for or against healthcare reform? What would his other positions be? I not saying I’d bet my entire life savings on Thompson over Giuliani, but he’s in a great spot. And, again, 27 of 29 US Congressional seats in New York State are now held by Democrats. It has never been like this before, in New York State. (btw, I lived in NYC and its suburbs from 1964, when I was born, until 2005, and am now in Southern California, so I know a good deal about NYC and NY state politics.)
(I am really enjoying this prelude to next November’s election. I usually vote Democrat for US federal office holders, US Senate, Congress, and President, but I hope lots of incumbents of both parties get dumped, something isn’t getting through to the people at the top, Dems or GOP’s, but we have plenty of time to discuss that over the next year.)
I think some people are overestimating Thompson’s performance against Bloomberg. It’s my impression that the closeness of the race was due more to an anti-Bloomberg sentiment, a fair amount having to do with term limits, than a pro-Thompson movement. Polls consistently showed Bloomberg hovering around the 50% mark, indicating that a lot of voters had just had enough for whatever reason, not that they thought Thompson was a “hot” commodity. And many people (including myself) think Thompson ran a terrible campaign: he never really made the case as to why he would be a better mayor than Bloomberg. If that’s an indication of how he would handle a potential primary run, he’s not going to have an easy time against Gillibrand much less against a moderate Republican in the general (should one choose to run).
I agree with Preston: if I were Giuliani, I’d rather run against Thompson than against Gillibrand. Thompson’s more liberal stances would put more centrist votes up for grabs. (Though I still fail to see why Giuliani would want to be a Senator in the first place; he’d be one out of 100 with the least seniority, and he’d actually have to get along with other people to get anything done.)