With Republican and Democratic candidates scrambling for position in the special election in New York’s 20th District, 2008 GOP nominee Sandy Treadwell is not jumping into the race, according to GOP sources.
Treadwell, who spent almost $6 million of his own money last cycle in his 61%-38% loss to Cong. Kirsten Gillibrand (D), expressed interest early on, and even released public statements saying as much, but will not ultimately throw his name into consideration. According to GOP insiders, he is currently out of the Empire State and is not making immediate moves toward another run.
I guess blowing through another $6 mil wasn’t such an appealing thought for Sandy in this economy. Then again, maybe this is the guy we would have wanted, given his abysmal 38% showing. Hell, Kieran Lalor did better in the 19th!
Nathan also tells us about who is in the running:
Meanwhile state Sen. Betty Little (R) who has already announced her candidacy. And according to the Albany Times-Union, the Saratoga County GOP has decided to back Assembly Minority Leader Jim Tedisco and the Greene County GOP is with 2006 gubernatorial nominee John Faso.
With ten different counties covered by the district, this could get very interesting:
There will not be a primary for the special election, instead the party nominees will be chosen by a weighted vote among the county committees. Saratoga carries the most weight in the 10-county district.
Note that this applies to both sides – the Dems won’t have a primary, either (one of the worst aspects of New York’s often-cruddy election laws). So, apart from those of us on the ground in the 20th, we’re mostly gonna just have to hang tight here.
Republicans seriously disgruntled. I mean some whole counties could feel like the race was stolen from them in a smoky backroom deal. If Tredisco is the nominee the other candidates supporters won’t all support him. Meanwhile Democrats are going to have nowhere near as much division. This is good news.
If it’s by the percentage of regged Dems in that county (in the district).. then the breakdown is
Dems: 11%, 6%, 16%, 2%, 6%, 2%, 9%, 31%, 9%, 8%
Reps: 7%, 6%, 12%, 2%, 7%, 2%, 8%, 35%, 11%, 9%
County order: Columbia, Delaware, Dutchess, Essex, Greene, Otsego, Rensselaer, Saratoga, Warren, and Washington.
So the count is..
Tedisco – 35%
Faso – 7%
Little represents 22% of registered Republicans (in Essex, Warren, and Washington Counties).
Tedisco would need Rensselaer and Columbia Counties to get a majority (or close to it). Tedisco and Little holding a majority combined would make it hard for Faso or another candidate south of Albany.
Also, The Conservative Party actually has more registrants in Rensselaer County than in Saratoga County.
Given his status as an Assemblyman with at least some exposure to the constituency in the 20th, he would seem on the face of it to be our most obvious candidate – and I, for one, could sleep soundly with a Dem-caucusing independent in this seat.
Not knowing much about the GOPers running I have been reading about them. While at first I was leaning towards hoping for Little to be the nominee, researching Tedisco shows some great things hes done including work on missing children and taking the lead for the fight against illegals having drivers licenses. He would probably have my vote if I had any say.
remember.. they actually have special elections.
I think the New York method is similar to what is done for special elections in Missouri (Missouri probably brings in the precinct committee members to vote too).
But in quite a few states, the precinct committeemen vote for the next person to hold a state house or state senate seat. The Governor appoints members in Alaska. The committeemen meet in Arizona and recommend three names and a Board of Supervisors picks one.
The method used in Texas, Georgia, Mississippi, and Louisiana is a pretty good approach. (As opposed to California which isn’t top-two, but will give us a meaningful primary and a meaningless general election). DC puts all the candidates on a ballot and the person with a plurality wins the seat.
How about an even worse New York idea. Put all the candidates on one ballot with their party registrations, then the results for the big 5 would determine the nominee. As for people who are not in one of the qualified parties, they could get a ballot with an extra question of “Which party do you wish to affiliate with for this primary”. The method probably shows a giant flaw since people might just skip that question.
An example of the even worse method.
Your mayoral candidates are Bloomberg (Blank), Thompson (D), Weiner (D), Avella (D), and Catsimatidis (R). Weiner wins amongst Democratic voters, Catsimatidis wins amongst Republicans and Conservatives, Thompson wins with Working Families voters, and Bloomberg wins amongst Independence party voters. Then the entire field splits the vote, Bloomberg wins, and Manhattan is completely converted into an island for rich people.
Ok, the method could use some work. It’s the evil son of New York fusion before Marcantonio and California cross-filing.
And totally unnecessary.
This is the same district that sent the right-leaning Gerald Solomon (“my wife has a right to defend herself”)to Congress for many years. However, it sounds like the district is moving towards Democrats.
This one will be a tough climb.
Gillibrand ran an excellent 2006 campaign, and benefitted from former Rep. John Sweeney’s personal “troubles” (drunkenness, wife issues that included potential domestic disturbance/abuse, generally being a slimeball, etc.). She was a moderate on things like guns and a populist on economic issues, which appealed to mostly rural/suburban voters. But one of the biggest things that got her re-elected was constituent service. She ran town hall meetings across this (large, disconnected-feeling) district, made her office a hub for grants and generally got in good with voters for her actions.
But be sure, this is NOT a blue district. Purple, yes. Moving in the right direction for two elections, yes. But there are a LOT of Republicans, a lot of people who will expect moderate talk like Gillibrand’s. Not to be pessimistic, but it will take the “right” Dem to make it happen. The process won’t necessarily reward that, though.
I know that, until around the early 90s, the Upper East Side use to be competitive in congressional elections. As they had a Republican congressman for a while (who was eventually defeated by Maloney). But, like how many places in the Deep South has changed for the Dems, places like the Upper East Side has changed for the Republicans. And wont be changing back anytime soon, if ever.