Perdido 03

Perdido 03

Friday, August 21, 2015

Hakeem Jeffries, Eva Moskowitz Weigh Odds Of Challenging Bill de Blasio

This isn't a surprise.

Criminal justice reform hypocrite Hakeem Jeffries (it seems prison abuse only bothers him at Rikers, not in the state system) is said to be "reconsidering" a run for mayor against Bill de Blasio.

Oh, and guess who's pushing for him?

The Education Reform community, or more broadly the “donor community.” This is a group of people who have taken an “I told you so” attitude when it comes to de Blasio lately. They feel as though his tone deafness on education reform (mostly opposing charter school expansion) is emblematic of a problem on other issues – whether it’s the perceived explosion of the homeless population, or basic concerns about competency.

Some have even questioned the mayor’s interest in actually governing, which includes running the day-to-day operations of the city and ensuring that all is well. More importantly, many of these donors have always been “big fans of Hakeem.”

It's been a rough summer for de Blasio and if he doesn't turn the media narrative around soon, he will face a primary challenge or challenges in 2017.

State of Politics blog goes on to say that some leaders in the black community, once supporters of de Blasio, are now off the bandwagon and ready for a jump onto Hakeem's.

Also some in the "tech" world, which is pissed at De Blasio over his attempts to regulate Uber (how dare he regulate a tech company!)

In addition, Eva Moskowitz announced she's interested in running for mayor:

Success Academy founder and C.E.O. said Friday that she is interested in running for mayor, and that she will "let everyone know" when she decides whether to run against Mayor Bill de Blasio in 2017.
"It's an interest," Moskowitz told the New York Post's Fred Dicker on his radio show, after Dicker asked Moskowitz about her oft-rumored mayoral ambitions.

"I'm not being coy, I just honestly haven't decided yet," said, adding, "my husband doesn't know, my children don't know."

"It's a ways away, so I don't feel the need to decide immediately," Moskowitz said.

I'm not that worried about Moskowitz as a candidate.

She couldn't win in a Democratic primary in this city, not with the animosity she engenders among many rank-and-file Dems, not against an incumbent mayor.

She would have to run as a Republican in the general election where she would still be a longshot to win, given her personality, temperament and track record at Success Academies (she has fought to keep from getting audited more than once, which suggests she's got stuff she wants to, you know, hide.)

Nonetheless, the sharks are circling Big Bill this summer.

De Blasio's got, realistically, about a year before the primary challenge train leaves the station.

It seems second years are often tough on NYC mayors - Rudy and Bloomberg also fell in the polling in their second year in office.

Still, I'm not that confident de Blasio's going to be able to pull out of this and that worries me.

If you're a teacher out there, you should be watching very, very closely what happens.

You could be looking at an education reformer-backed mayor in two years, one who will look to "bust" up the system, shed it of unionized teachers and pay back education reformers by pushing their agenda.

In a worst case scenario, it could be Moskowitz.

I wouldn't worry too much about her getting elected (or even running - it's a significant pay cut to be mayor), but I would watch Jeffries very closely.

Jeffries gave an award to Cuomo last week, and you know how Cuomo feels about de Blasio.

Don't be surprised if Cuomo doesn't push behind the scenes for a Jeffries run against de Blasio - they've got mutual friends and mutual interests.

De Blasio's got plenty of issues and God knows, there is much about the system that has not changed since he took over from Bloomberg.

But practically speaking, I would worry about an education reformer-supported candidate like Jeffries mounting a challenge and then getting elected.

He'd have a lot of payback to hand out, if you know what I mean.

And if the longshot comes in and Eva actually becomes mayor, well, I'm sure you can imagine how that would go for public school teachers.


  1. Unless deblasio makes more effort for the working class black and latino population the black latino middle class will throw the election to a race bating demagogue

  2. Quality of life issues in the city - if trends continue - may result in a turn to a competent Republican. Education may not be particularly important to the electorate.

    1. And yet, how is QOL different than under Bloomberg? Was city cleaner under Bloomberg? Safer? Less homeless? Emergency response times faster?

      Juan Gonzalez wrote this week that a lot of the QOL storyline is coming from elites who miss Bloomberg. I agree with that.

      Would also question the "competent" Republican angle.

      Was CityTime an example of "competence"? How about the Boxer Day Blizzard response? How about Bloomberg's saying Hurricane Sandy was going to be a "regular workday"? or the 911 system mess (which still isn't fixed.)

      The idea that Bloomberg was "competent," well, it depends upon who's telling that story, you know?

    2. I was thinking Guliani as a competent Republican following the Dinkins quality of life issues. Even the looniest of libs don't think those were ginned up faux concerns. I was there. DiBlasio and Dinkins share some core beliefs and lack of competence.

    3. I was there too. There is no comparison between 1991 and now. It's not even close.

      But you didn't respond to my point about Bloomberg and his so-called competence. He had rep for being "competent," yet there was much "incompetence" during his tenure (and I could add more to the list I put in the comment above - the NYCHA computer system mess, mass cheating in the DOE w/ credit recovery, NYPD ticket-fixing, NYPD data fixing, etc.)

      How is it that de Blasio has rep for "incompetence" but Bloomberg has rep for "competence" given the realities of the stewardships?

    4. I made and make no representations concerning Bloomberg's competence or lack thereof.
      Again, Guliani the competent Republican replaced the awful Dinkins in an overwhelmingly Democratic NYC because of the QOL realities and trends. I don't see a Democrat unseating this Democrat (no Democrat unseated Dinkins, he was that party's nominee that year). It will now take a Republican whose strengths aligns with DeBlasio's ideological and QOL weaknesses.
      (This is not to say conditions are exactly the same and this is keeping in mind the overwhelmingly Democratic NYC party affiliation and the strength of incumbency for Democrats. It did take many years of awful QOL trends for a competent Republican to win over a particularly awful Democrat.)

  3. all of these disaster scenarios sound appealing to me, actually. Because, at the need of the day, we would hopefully finally do what we should have done when offered this lousy contract: GO ON STRIKE! Jesus, I've seen many districts strike for way less.

    Given what you have described, we need to start setting up a structure within our union by which we could authorize a strike. We know leadership is into capitulation, so the push to strike won't come from them. It must come from is.

    1. Won't happen. Do you see a R&F ready to strike? Even in the darkest of days under MB, did you see a R&F ready to strike? Would have to get much, much worse before that would happen. Though I suppose Eva could take it there...

    2. Anon:
      You're right, the R&F are not ready. We need to start building consciousness. We've been losing benefits and the like for almost two decades. Our leadership's subtle lobbying approach is not working; it's just a structured retreat. It will never bring gains given what we are up against.

      As far as I can tell, we have never made gains except immediately following the strikes in the 60's and following Sandra Feldman's authorization to strike in the 90s.

      The R&F needs to be educated about what we once had and how we got it. It's not far to get us there, in terms of our mentality. I've known very moderate teachers in the suburbs who were convinced to strike.

      Once the Frederichs v. CTA ruling happens, our pushover union is going to come crashing down. I think strikes will be more frequent as they will be the only option.

  4. Isnt it illegal for uft officials to use the word strike...they have to be careful when they go bowling...

  5. From the day she announced she was creating a chain of charter schools and seeing up close how she operated, it was clear that one of the major goals of her charter movement was to build a political machine capable of putting her in as mayor. Each school in a strategic location is a political base with long tentacles and money. She may back off for that slimebag Hakeem but I think the ed deform community has more confidence in her because she won't be subject to political pressures while Hakeem will be. She can win with the right campaign, money and absolute press support.

    1. I maintain that her temperament and personality is a huge impediment to her winning citywide office. You're right that a compliant press would help her, but I wonder how compliant they will be when she treats them like the dirt she thinks they are? Success has rep now for really being a problem w/ the press - can't imagine her mayoral campaign will be any better.

      That said, Cuomo has the same rep and complaint press seem to lapdog for him, so maybe your;e right, Norm. But she has to run as a Republican in the November - she cannot win in Dem primary against a sitting mayor. Especially not with her anti-union bias. Unions will make sure she doesn't win the primary. I don't have much confidence in the UFT, but I am confident they will see her as a threat and act accordingly.

    2. I couldn't agree more. Running as either an independent or Republican she has a completely plausible Giuliani/Bloomberg path to victory--arguably stronger given the fact that she's a woman and the network of schools will give her much broader and deeper black and Latino support than those two (especially Giuliani) had.

      De Blasio isn't losing a primary to anyone--even right now he is still polling decently with Dems, and he has two years to spread around the graft and lock in the key players. Jeffries can't run as an independent or Republican, at least not without alienating a lot of the people who brought him to the dance.

      RBE, you are putting too much stock in the long-ago Manhattan BP race. Stringer won with 26% of the vote, she had 17% and BP races don't have run-offs. It was also pre-Success. Her ability to grow and manage the network -- with a strength in organization and details and a vision and getting to work at 6:00 am -- is likely to be viewed differently by the general voting public than public school teachers (many of whom can't vote in this election anyway).

      As for the audit issue, Stringer has had a gloved hand rooting around deep in the ass of a Success school for nearly a year now. If he'd found anything, we'd have heard about it by now.

      I think it is now officially a no-brainer that she is running. Still happy to make a bet with you--some teacher's choice money vs my getting to pick your banner image (nothing offensive or personal) for 100 days!