Perdido 03

Perdido 03

Wednesday, August 5, 2015

De Blasio Hits New Low In Quinnipiac Poll

Not good numbers in Q poll out today:

44% approval, 44% disapproval for de Blasio.

47%-44% say De Blasio should NOT be re-elected mayor.

Make no mistake, the NY Post's anti-de Blasio campaign is helping to do some real damage to him, as are some of the errors in judgment he has shown (the Uber fight, for example.)

Two years out before the next election, but if these numbers stay like this, you can be certain a pro-Eva Moskowitz challenger will jump into the race to challenge de Blasio, probably somebody of color to take away the strongest support de Blasio has - with black voters.

You see names like Hakeem Jeffries and Harold Ford Jr. bandied about.

Ford is a Beltway carpetbagger who famously said he's never been to Staten Island but he flew over it in a helicopter, so I'm skeptical about Ford's chances to win anything in NYC other than a slot on Morning Joe.

But maybe Jeffries or some other candidate of color could.

De Blasio's far from perfect as a mayor and a steward of the NYC school system, but the forces that are marshaling against him these days are looking to bring back the Bloomberg Years with a candidate who will have the backing of the NYC oligarchy.

You can bet Eva's licking her lips at the thought of that.

As a side note, Cuomo has higher approval than de Blasio in NYC in this Q poll.

Maybe de Blasio should stop jetting around spreading the Gospel of Progressivism and, you know, govern NYC?


  1. Sounds like the future holds:
    Reduced Pensions for existing members/Shorter Summer Vacations/More rigorous evaluations/Diminished Health Benefits & more....

  2. Hakeem Jeffries? Harold Ford Jr.? Come on, you know better than that.

    BDB isn't vulnerable to an unknown candidate who outer borough whites would never vote for in a billion years.

    He's vulnerable to someone who could follow the Giuliani path to victory: win Staten Island in a rout (today's poll indicates that's very low-hanging fruit), win 80% of outer borough whites, win 60% of Asians and Manhattan south of 96th St., hang on to 30% of the Latino vote and hope to limit the margin of your loss of the black vote to 80 points.

    Someone, like Giuliani or Bloomberg, who is an "ethnic" white. Jewish, preferably, as there aren't Italian or Irish voting blocs anymore. Getting greedy: the candidate should have extensive political experience. And a connection to a small but fiercely loyal and very influential segment of the African American community. And the candidate should be a woman: it's 2017, how has New York City not had a female mayor in 350+ years?

    You think the Post is battering around BDB on behalf of Hakeem Jeffries and Harold Freaking Ford, Jr.?

    You are right about one thing: Eva is definitely licking her lips.


    2. You (and I guess Hank Sheinkopf) have it wrong: barring something wildly unforeseen, and I'm talking "dead girl/live boy" type stuff, there is no way a sitting Democratic mayor of New York City is losing a primary--look at the poll today, that's not where his problem is. The threat is absolutely from the center or right (and the same is true for the governor, btw). Moskowitz can run as an independent or even a Republican and comfortably follow the path established by Giuliani and Bloomberg.

    3. You think Moskowitz can get elected Mayor?

      She couldn't get elected Manhattan Borough President back in the day and now she's got a whole host of things to defend regarding her business dealings and treatment of children at Success.

      I agree there is a real threat from center/right, but it surely isn't Moskowitz and don't kid yourself that the oligarchs won't look for a primary challenge from the left for BdB to soften him up (and drive him left) for that center/right challenge in the general.

    4. I do indeed think she could be elected mayor. What happened in the Manhattan BP primary is almost irrelevant--she lost a nine-person, no-run-off-provision election by 26-17.

      She will have deeper pockets than BDB, with a national funding base. There is absolutely no "there" there with respect to her business dealings and the issue of alleged maltreatment of children will be easily brushed aside -- look at the 20,000+ (by 2017) kids in her schools, the waitlists, the applications, etc.

      I absolutely see her as having a clear path to 50.1-55% of the vote. Even if de Blasio quits his road show and starts getting up earlier than 8:00.

  3. If there's no "there" there with regard to her business dealings, surely she'll drop the lawsuit over the financial audit.

    As for her not being polarizing for her treatment (abuse?) of children, the NY Times article and the comment threads that accompanied it suggest differently. She complained about the scrutiny she got from the Kate Taylor piece - wait to see what kind of scrutiny she gets if she runs for mayor.

    One final point: if the waitlists are so long at Success, surely they can backfill all the empty slots. I have a colleague who sends her kid to one and she says a good third of the kids her kid started with are gone.

    1. This is all small-bore stuff that won't interest 95% of the electorate, who will be blitzed with ads featuring happy families. And if there IS some "there" there, surely Scott Stringer's audit would have uncovered it by now (10 months and counting).

      Let's make it interesting: if she runs and loses, I'll give you $100 to use for "Teacher's Choice". If she runs and wins, I get to pick your blog's banner image for 100 days (nothing offensive/obscene). Deal?

    2. Interesting thread on this here: