De Blasio To Be Questioned Today By Federal Prosecutors In Corruption Probe

Today's the day:

Reporters outside loading dock of Manhattan building where federal corruption probers are reportedly set to question @NYCMayor @BilldeBlasio pic.twitter.com/uka0RfRGwG

— Matthew Chayes (@chayesmatthew) February 24, 2017

the tabloids appear to be relishing Mayor de Blasio's reported plan to meet with federal prosecutors today pic.twitter.com/fIY0tYr9Ek

— Colin Campbell (@colincampbell) February 24, 2017

The NY Times sets the stage:

Ending months of anticipation and speculation, Mayor Bill de Blasio will meet on Friday with federal prosecutors and F.B.I. agents who have been investigating the mayor’s campaign fund-raising for nearly a year, according to people with knowledge of the matter.

A grand jury has heard evidence in the case, some of the people have said, but it remains unclear whether the investigation, focused on whether the mayor or others in his administration traded beneficial city action for donations to his 2013 election campaign or to his now-defunct nonprofit political group — or both — will result in charges. Either way, the interview is an indication that the expansive criminal inquiry is most likely in its final stages.

...

The mayor is expected to be questioned on Friday morning in a conference room at Kramer Levin’s offices in Midtown Manhattan, according to the people with knowledge of the planned session, which they said is expected to last about four hours. The prosecutors and agents want to question the mayor about more than a dozen topics.

In addition to investigating whether the city took any action on behalf of Mr. Indig as a result of his support for the mayor, the prosecutors and agents are also likely to focus on a number of other donors who have come under scrutiny, including two who have been of intense interest to prosecutors. They are Harendra Singh and Gina Argento.

The Times also has a bit a "new" news:

In recent weeks, investigators appear to have focused on a relatively new area in the inquiry, looking into the mayor’s relationship with a Brooklyn businessman who hosted a fund-raiser for him in October 2013, after the Democratic primary but before the general election, according to two of the people. Like others interviewed for this article, they declined to comment because they were not authorized to discuss the continuing investigation.

In recent weeks, investigators appear to have focused on a relatively new area in the inquiry, looking into the mayor’s relationship with a Brooklyn businessman who hosted a fund-raiser for him in October 2013, after the Democratic primary but before the general election, according to two of the people. Like others interviewed for this article, they declined to comment because they were not authorized to discuss the continuing investigation.

 Louis Flores on what may be going on here:

Friday’s tête-à-tête btwn de Blasio and Preet's prosecutors is "a proffer session" https://t.co/K2RAyPUBrV

— Louis Flores (@maslowsneeds) February 24, 2017

Proffer or "queen for a day" letters are written agreements between federal prosecutors and individuals under criminal investigation.... pic.twitter.com/VWsXYzndHn

— Louis Flores (@maslowsneeds) February 24, 2017

de Blasio’s aides fear he will ‘sacrifice’ them to the Feds #profferagreement #nonprosecutionagreement https://t.co/DtF49LcJmN #Preet

— Louis Flores (@maslowsneeds) February 24, 2017

You can bet Hakeem Jeffries, Scott Stringer, Ruben Diaz Jr and other potential challengers are watching what happens today and ensuing days closely.

So far, no serious challenger to the embattled de Blasio has emerged but clearly an indictment of de Blasio on corruption charges will set off a free-for-all in the Dem primary.

It's difficult to say what indictments of current and/or former aides do to de Blasio's 2017 re-election chances - it all depends on how much residual damage is done to de Blasio if/when that happens.

De Blasio has led a bit of a charmed life these past few months, having much of the news around the corruption investigations buried under an avalanche of Trump news while de Blasio attempted to become the local face of opposition to Trump's policies on immigration, health care, etc.

Other pols - including Governor Cuomo - have attempted similar anti-Trump PR efforts recently (see here and here, for example.)

Both Cuomo and de Blasio are using the Trump election for their own ends of course (Cuomo as rationale for 2020 White House run, de Blasio as rallying cry and distraction from his corruption woes), but in another way the Trump election has helped de Blasio out - it's given Cuomo something else to shoot for instead of de Blasio himself.

For the last few years Cuomo has spent much of his free time looking for ways to torture de Blasio, including looking for potential challengers to the mayor for 2017, but with the Trump administration ensconced in Washington, Cuomo appears to have lost his relish for de Blasio combat and begun setting his sights on a 2020 run instead.

As a result, de Blasio appears to have a pretty easy time of it in his re-election bid - barring criminal charges and/or residual damage some to him by criminal charges on people around him that is.

But that could all change today.

We'll know soon enough. 

As the Times reported, the questioning of de Blasio today means the investigation is about to come to a close.

Barring Indictment, De Blasio Looks Like He'll Get A Fairly Easy Run At Re-Election

Two pieces of New York City mayoral race news today.

First, as expected, Hakeem Jeffries declined to run against de Blasio:

Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, a Brooklyn Democrat, said Tuesday he will not run for mayor of New York City — leaving one less potential challenger for Mayor Bill de Blasio as he faces re-election later this year.

"The stakes are so high in Washington D.C. right now, and I want to be part of the effort to turn the situation around," Jeffries said in an interview. "It would be a dereliction of duty to abandon ship at the moment when times are tough."

...

Jeffries said de Blasio has benefited from the election of President Donald Trump, and the palpable anger and fear in New York City toward the president. More than 80 percent of the city's voters voted against Trump, and de Blasio has positioned himself in the city as standing up to Trump on immigration and other issues.

"The phenomenon has benefited the mayor because it's taken a lot of attention off of City Hall," Jeffries said.

Jeffries said "top-tier candidates" are still looking to the investigations to see if they "potentially change the dynamic."

"It's not clear to me that there's a meaningful candidate prepared to step forward at the moment," he said.

Next up, GOP hopeful/real estate developer Paul Massey had a press conference today that, well, let's just say didn't go so well.  Here's a play-by-play in tweets:

Republican mayoral candidate Paul Massey holds press conference at City Hall, criticizing Mayor de Blasio for "unprecedented" corruption pic.twitter.com/A7Pt14m5AZ

— Samar Khurshid (@samarkhurshid) February 21, 2017

New York GOP mayoral candidate Paul Massey declines to offer policy specifics in first campaign event. Hello 2017 https://t.co/JvTAzUmfqG

— Mara Gay (@MaraGay) February 21, 2017

"We'll make it different almost immediately," Massey says when @chayesmatthew presses him for details on his homelessness plan

— Mara Gay (@MaraGay) February 21, 2017

"I haven't established an answer," Paul Massey says when Bloomberg's @hgoldman77 asks if he supports expanding stop and frisk like Trump

— Mara Gay (@MaraGay) February 21, 2017

Less than 9 months to Election Day, it's surprising that @MasseyForMayor hasn't identified a position on this core criminal justice issue. https://t.co/GjSmbIljIF

— Dean Chang (@dchangnyt) February 21, 2017

@HyersBill Was on life support anyway since GOP real estate developer not great candidate for Trump Era. But yikes!

— rbe (@perdidostschool) February 21, 2017

And so, we appear to have two potential challengers to de Blasio taken out of the equation in one day.

It's been rumored for a while now that Jeffries, who has been elevated into the Democratic leadership in the House, was going to decline to run for mayor, so that announcement wasn't much of a surprise.

But the Massey presser, well, that was a bit of a surprise to me.

Given that we're now in the Trump Era, it was going to be a heavy lift for Massey, a Republican real estate developer, to win post November 2016, but to be honest, I always assumed he was a bit more serious as a candidate than what showed up today.  How could he not have an answer for the stop-and-frisk issue?

You can see the whole Massey presser here at his Facebook page - assuming they don't take it down to try and undo some of the damage.

Go on and watch it and you tell me if he's somebody who can win a mayor's race in NYC during the Trump Era - from what I see so far, it's unlikely.

As for other potential opponents, Scott Stringer has apparently all but ruled out a run (barring something extraordinary coming from the Southern District of New York on de Blasio) and the air around Ruben Diaz Jr. has grown awfully quiet on that front as well.

That leaves this guy who raised $750 last quarter and left the mainstream Democratic conference in the state Senate to join the breakaway, Republican-allied Independent Democratic Conference, a group of faux Dems growing increasingly unpopular in the Trump Era:

And maybe this guy:

Councilman Dan Garodnick, a Manhattan Democrat who lost his bid to become the City Council Speaker in 2014, has talked with donors, consultants and others about running for mayor. Garodnick has told these people he would want a one-on-one race with de Blasio and would be interested if he saw a path, but isn't sure if there is one.

Asked about the conversations, Garodnick declined to comment. "I am exploring my options as I am term-limited," he said. Garodnick had previously denied he was considering a mayoral run.

Oh, and an ex-Jet with about as much chance of winning City Hall as the Jets had of winning the Super Bowl last year.

And there was that rumor about Hillary Clinton maybe running for mayor, but that's pretty much bullshit.

None of this is going to matter in a race against de Blasio where he has managed to make labor peace with the cops, other unions (including the UFT) have endorsed him, and he continues to enjoy popular support in the black community.

So from what I can see, the biggest opponent de Blasio appears to have for re-election right now is U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara.

No wonder the UFT jumped aboard the de Blasio Express when they did. 

Barring something coming from Bharara, it looks like de Blasio is going to waltz to November relatively unscathed.

Somewhere Bradley Tusk weeps.

UFT Would Be Foolish To Announce Endorsement Of De Blasio Right Now

James Eterno wrote back in early December that UFT President Michael Mulgrew has hinted a UFT endorsement of New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio is coming soon.

Mulgrew's reasoning?

Other unions have already announced early endorsements of de Blasio, there will be a corporate-funded general election candidate who will look to run against public education and the teachers union, and de Blasio settled all the outstanding contracts with the municipal unions that Bloomberg refused to settle in his third term.

Since that Mulgrew hint, we also learned that AFT President Randi Weingarten will hold a fundraiser for de Blasio in January:

Randi Weingarten, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, will hold a fundraiser for Mayor Bill de Blasio’s re-election campaign in January, according to a copy of the invitation obtained by POLITICO New York.

The fundraiser will be held at AFT headquarters in Washington on January 5. Guest tickets are $1,000 a head, “supporter” tickets are $2,500, and “host” tickets are $4,950.

The event will be co-hosted by the lobbyist Harold Ickes, a friend and mentor to de Blasio who has enjoyed lobbying successes under de Blasio’s tenure. Ickes’ lobbying partner, Janice Enright, will also co-host the fundraiser. John Stocks, the director of the National Education Association, the nation’s other most prominent teachers union, is on the host committee for the event.

The event comes as de Blasio begins to gather endorsements from the city’s most prominent unions — both the Uniformed Sanitationmen’s Association and the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store union have given the mayor their early endorsements. But de Blasio has not yet won the endorsement of the United Federation of Teachers, the largest and most powerful branch of the AFT, representing teachers in New York City.

Weingarten’s upcoming fundraiser could add to pressure for UFT president Michael Mulgrew to give the mayor his union’s endorsement soon.

Now those of you who are close Randi/Mulgrew watchers know there is no daylight between either, so it's doubtful that the Weingarten fundraiser is "pressure" coming from Randi onto Mulgrew to endorse de Blasio early as opposed to another part of a multi-pronged strategy to get on board the de Blasio express early and prove loyalty to the mayor (especially necessary since the UFT worked against de Blasio in the primary last time around.)

That strategy might make some sense if de Blasio was a powerful incumbent with a proven track record of helping teachers and public schools, but as James wrote in his piece on the likely UFT endorsement, the case for that is slim:

In the school system I work in, teachers and other UFT members feel almost like they are under siege on a daily basis in multiple schools. Many of us fear drive by Danielson observations by abusive administrators, being rated based on student test scores in schools where the students are not exactly well prepared, overburdened paperwork demands made by those abusive principals and their assistants, the war on seniority with (un)fair student funding which makes senior teachers a burden on school budgets and much, much more.

Our job has been turned into a nightmare in many school buildings. In spite of the working conditions deteriorating to the point where a large number of teachers cannot physically or emotionally take it much longer, our Union President's response is hinting that we want more of the same.

Add in the de Blasio contract that holds back pay to 2020 (but only if you're still in the system!) and gives yearly increase averages of just over 1% and gee, what's not to like about endorsing de Blasio early, given all that wonderful stuff?

Well, how about the news that de Blasio is the subject of two grand jury investigations and criminal charges are likely to come against some of his cronies (and perhaps even de Blasio himself)?

Two separate grand juries in Manhattan have begun hearing testimony in connection with federal and state criminal investigations into Mayor Bill de Blasio’s campaign fund-raising, according to several people with knowledge of the matters.

It was unclear whether either inquiry would result in criminal charges against the mayor, but the grand jury activity appeared to be the strongest indication since the investigations came to light in April that prosecutors may be moving closer to one or more indictments, possibly against some of Mr. de Blasio’s closest aides.

The inquiries have centered on Mr. de Blasio, a Democrat, and several of his senior aides, according to the people with knowledge of the matter, all of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity because grand jury proceedings are secret.

The state investigation has focused on whether the mayor, or those acting with him or on his behalf, violated state election law by raising hundreds of thousands of dollars through three upstate county committees and funneling it to Democratic candidates during the party’s unsuccessful 2014 bid to gain control of the State Senate.

The questions asked by state prosecutors in their grand jury presentations suggest their inquiry is in some measure centered on Emma Wolfe, Mr. de Blasio’s top political aide, Ross A. Offinger, who was then his campaign finance director, and Josh Gold, a union political operative who worked on the 2014 Senate effort, the people with knowledge of the inquiry said.

The federal investigation has examined whether Mr. de Blasio or his aides took beneficial action on behalf of donors in exchange for contributions they had made to his 2013 mayoral campaign, his political nonprofit or both in roughly a half-dozen instances, according to people with knowledge of that inquiry.

As I wrote Thursday, this leak came straight out of publicity-happy US Attorney Preet Bharara's office and Preet doesn't leak this kind of stuff without criminal charges following soon.

That's how it played out with Shelly Silver, Dean and Adam Skelos and Cuomo's cronies Joe Percoco and Alain Kaloyeros - there's no reason to think it won't play out the same way here.

With criminal charges all but certain against somebody linked to de Blasio and with the NYC media already having an adversarial relationship with the churlish de Blasio, you can bet he's going to get hammered day after day after day in the newspapers and on TV, further weakening an already weak incumbent (polls consistently show de Blasio is underwater on the "Deserves Re-Election" question.)

Now I can understand why the UFT would look to finagle an early endorsement of de Blasio despite his administration showing itself to be anti-teacher in its treatment of teachers in the evaluation process (superintendents are instructing school administrators to ratchet up "ineffective" and "developing" ratings against teachers, especially veteran teachers), the budgeting process (which rewards schools that shed veteran teachers) and contractually (back pay all the way to 2020) - that's because the UFT leadership only cares about the access de Blasio and Chancellor Farina have granted them, not how they have treated their members so badly.

But why would the UFT want to announce an endorsement of de Blasio now with Preet bearing down on him and charges coming for one or more de Blasio cronies?

That Thursday night leak to the NY Times about the state and federal grand juries looking into de Blasio didn't come out of nowhere - that's a clear indication that Preet intends some charges against someone and wants to give a heads up that they're coming.

There's no indication yet that the charges will reach de Blasio himself, but even if they don't, weakened unpopular incumbent that he is, de Blasio may not be able to withstand major figures in his political circle getting taken down on criminal charges.

I think the UFT would be smart to wait for Preet to make a move and see what the political and practical fallout is before they endorse.

But the words "smart" and "UFT leadership" do not sit well together, so they just may continue with the AFT/UFT pro-de Blasio strategy despite new information that suggests that strategy may be politically and practically short-sighted and ill-conceived.

Odds On De Blasio's Re-Election

Telling statement from Hakeem Jeffries, charter school shill and oft-rumored Cuomo fave for running against de Blasio in a Democratic primary for mayor, in this Wall Street Journal piece on de Blasio's chances for re-election:

“Short of the investigations showing anything happening to Bill de Blasio, it’s not clear to me that he has anything to be concerned about with respect to his re-election,” said U.S. Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, a Democrat who represents portions of Brooklyn and Queens. “It’s always difficult to unseat an incumbent when the economy and public safety numbers are not subject to heavy criticism.”

Sounds like Jeffries is going to stay in Congress, doesn't it?

Unless those investigations into de Blasio turn up something, of course - but no one seems to know what's going on with any of this:

Here's how the WSJ reports on potential challengers to de Blasio:

City Comptroller Scott Stringer, a Democrat, has privately told consultants and others that whether anyone is indicted has significant sway over whether he runs, people familiar with those discussions said. Mr. Stringer has said he wants to be ready to announce by the end of the year, but isn’t committed and is less likely to run if no one is charged, they said.

Bronx Borough President Ruben Diaz Jr., another Democrat, also has expressed an interest in running but remains unsure if Mr. de Blasio is beatable, a person familiar with the matter said, and believes his chance at being competitive hinges in part on the investigations.

Mr. Jeffries said he is unlikely to run but would make a decision after November. Real-estate executive Paul Massey has said he would seek the Republican mayoral nomination, but it is unclear how formidable a GOP contender would be next year.

Diaz Jr has been investigated in the past by the feds and comes from a family with a history of corruption, so I remain skeptical that's the guy who gets to run successfully against de Blasio on the morals/ethics issue.

As for Massey, a real estate exec running for mayor of NYC? 

Good luck with that.

My thinking on that is, you want to be from a different industry with real estate money backing you to win (you know, like de Blasio...) 

If Jeffries doesn't run (and it sure sounds like he isn't), then only with Stringer do you have a realistic challenger to de Blasio, but until/unless we get more on the investigations in the next few months, Stringer's going to have to sit on his ambition and wait.

Post Cuomo administration indictments, I'm not convinced indictments of de Blasio staff and/or donors will be a fatal shiv for his re-election.

An indictment of the mayor himself would be.

Like everyone else, we'll just have to wait and see.

As a little tea leaf reading, a couple of weeks ago Preet made a de Blasio joke at a public function:

It seems that U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara’s recent slapping of federal charges on Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s closest associates in an alleged bid-rigging scheme has emboldened him to take jabs at just about everyone—right up to Mayor Bill de Blasio and his infamous affinity for traveling all the way to his old neighborhood of Park Slope to exercise at the YMCA during working hours.

Bharara was honored as “Newsmaker of the Decade” by City & State and served as keynote speaker at its 10th anniversary gala tonight at Vermilion Restaurant in Midtown Manhattan.

...
 

The federal prosecutor didn’t reference the case against Cuomo’s top lieutenants, but instead poked fun at another target of his recent investigations: de Blasio, who faces federal probes into his police department and defunct political nonprofits.

Bharara tweaked the mayor’s fondness for traveling 12 miles from his Gracie Mansion home to the Park Slope YMCA—a subject he hates to talk about—and his preference for eating pizza with utensils—known jokingly as “Forkgate.” He praised City & State for choosing Vermilion Restaurant as a venue, saying that he understood it to be “Indian fusion” which resonated well with him because “I’m kind of Indian fusion myself”—but he said de Blasio would prefer the gym if it were an event for him.

“If it had been Mayor de Blasio, we’d all be eating at the Park Slope YMCA,” Bharara said, as attendees shouted “Ooh!” and laughed raucously, “and we’d eat pizza with a knife and fork. It’s just jokes.”

Would Bharara be making Park Slope and pizza jokes about de Blasio if he were going to arrest him on corruption charges in the near future?

Seems weird, but maybe I'm overthinking it.

Gaming Out A Post-De Blasio City Hall

After weeks of getting hammered by news that there are multiple federal investigations into his fundraising, Mayor Bill de Blasio's poll support has fallen to its lowest levels ever in the latest Quinnipiac poll.

That's not a surprise, given the coverage of those stories, coupled with the tabloid headlines.

The Q poll has de Blasio down to 41% approval, 52% disapproval.

Against potential challengers, de Blasio fares poorly:

The poll also tests him against potential Democratic challengers running as independents. Mr. de Blasio wins 37% to 36% against Comptroller Scott Stringer, 35% to 34% over Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams and 37% to 32% over Bronx Borough President Ruben Diaz Jr. None of the men has declared as candidates for 2017.

They didn't test the Eva Moskowitz shill, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, but I would imagine Jeffries would fare somewhere between Diaz' and Stringer 's numbers.

Ken Sherrill says there's still time for de Blasio to turn things around:

Kenneth Sherrill, a professor emeritus of political science at Hunter College, said the numbers are “a warning signal” that the mayor needs to make changes.

“He’s lost control of the debate. He’s not setting the agenda. In some ways he might seem to be acting as someone with something to hide,” Mr. Sherrill said.

“But people might be for the most part paying attention to the presidential race. He has a lot of time to make some changes. I don’t think this is fatal.”

I am less convinced about that.

Given the number of investigations, given the press coverage he's garnering, given the "Agents of the City" nonsense he offered to keep some correspondence secret, I think we can conclude in the immortal words of Michael Ray Richardson that "This ship be sinking."

Leaving aside who might run as a Republican for now, the Dems appear to be Stringer, Diaz, perhaps Jeffries and perhaps Adams (though Adams continues to say he is not interested in running until 2021 - when de Blasio's second term would be over, assuming he's not in prison by then.)

Whether there are tweaks to mayoral control or not, the next mayor will have great power and influence over the school system.

De Blasio has been Bloomberg Lite on schools, saying some of the right things about testing, teachers, school closures, et al., but really changing little from the Bloomberg Years.

The morale in the school system is lower now than even during the Bloomberg Years, as the UFT has become essentially a company union that works in concert with Chancellor Farina and Mayor de Blasio.

These days I feel "Meh" about a de Blasio loss (or arrest), though I am concerned about what comes next.

An Eva shill like Jeffries or Diaz is particularly concerning, though that kind of ascension to City Hall could theoretically get the UFT out of its company union status and force them to stand up to out-of-control administrators and other abuses.

Couple of things to think about regarding this - there are more health care plan "savings" benchmarks to be hit in the next couple of years (i.e., we pay more, city saves more) and the contract expires in 2018 but the "retro" goes through 2020.

There's lots of damage a pro-charter, pro-reformer mayor can do.

Given that, I suppose if I had to back a horse in a primary race, I'd take Stringer, though I don't trust him much.

Given his hostile relationship with Moskowitz and past support from the UFT, I suppose he would be the least bad choice.

I have a difficult time seeing Diaz run citywide, especially given the corruption he and his family have been involved in.

But that doesn't mean he won't run, though I suppose what Jeffries does could influence what Diaz does because Eva and the charter shills are going to want just one horse in a primary race against de Blasio.

Cuomo's no doubt pulling strings to try and get challengers to run against de Blasio, but he's got his own scandal trouble with the federal investigations into his economic development programs and campaign donors, so I'm not sure how much juice he'll really have here.

In any case, all of this really depends on how these investigations into de Blasio turn out.

If there are indictments of his top people, he's got serious political trouble, but if he's indicted himself, well, that's game over.

It's difficult to take out an incumbent mayor in New York City, but it's not impossible, and looking at how may headwinds de Blasio's got blowing against him, that near impossibility appears to get more possible by the day.

Thoughts?

Scott Stringer Would Primary De Blasio Now If He Knew He Could Win

Ross Barkan in the Village Voice:

De Blasio is trapped in a singular no-man's-land. Bloomberg had the elites and the upper middle class; Giuliani had his white outer-borough ethnics. To all of these people, de Blasio is a feckless socialist. And to many of his old allies — and the leftists who never trusted him in the first place — he is a Hillary Clinton in Elizabeth Warren's clothing.

Emblematic of this struggle, and maybe of de Blasio's entire mayoralty, was his belated decision to back Clinton for president. She announced her campaign in April 2015; he hemmed and hawed until October. No one really believed that de Blasio, the campaign manager for her 2000 Senate bid, would endorse Bernie Sanders, and his delayed choice was widely mocked — even by Clinton, during their excruciating "CP time" skit at the annual Inner Circle dinner. But according to City Hall sources, de Blasio actually did come genuinely close to endorsing Sanders, only to have top aides, including Emma Wolfe, talk him out of it. As the presidential primary descended on New York this April, de Blasio, frozen out of Clintonland for insufficient loyalty and bereft of the adulation progressives showered on Sanders, had nowhere left to go.

Now his potential 2017 rivals salivate. Comptroller Scott Stringer would primary him now if he knew he could win. Bronx Borough President Ruben Diaz Jr. and U.S. Representative Hakeem Jeffries have Cuomo cooing in their ears. De Blasio can't buy support or deference like Bloomberg could, and he's never been overwhelmingly popular since he took office. Had he embraced his progressive conscience fully and endorsed Sanders, he could at least have tapped into a whole new universe of donors, a wave of millennials thrilled to have their own Bernie acolyte in stodgy City Hall. Imagine if Sanders deigned to email a fundraising appeal on behalf of his besieged Brooklyn buddy?

Read the whole piece by Barkan - it's quite fair to de Blasio and pretty instructive of why he's in the mess he's in.

As for Stringer, I say he should throw his hat in the ring if he's so eager to run against de Blasio.

Show some guts, have at it while the mayor's down (and maybe almost out) and the governor's actively looking for primary challengers against de Blasio.

Reading The Tea Leaves On The Cuomo-De Blasio Dinner

The NY Post reports on two political pow-wows that took place in restaurants.

The first was between Governor Andrew Cuomo and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio:

Bitter rivals Mayor de Blasio and Gov. Cuomo broke bread during a secret sit-down at a Midtown restaurant in an attempt to mend their fractured relationship, The Post has learned.

Hizzoner and Cuomo held the peace summit Tuesday evening in a curtained-off private room in the back of Casa Lever on Park Avenue at East 53rd Street, sources said.

“It looked like a serious business meeting,” a restaurant staffer told The Post, saying there were no outward signs of acrimony but no laughs either during the tête-à-tête.

...

“Governor Cuomo has a nice setup near the back of the restaurant. He’s sort of hidden away so he can have his privacy with his guests. You can always tell he’s here because his ‘secret service’ guys are crawling all over the place,” one restaurant staffer said.

Cuomo and de Blasio were accompanied by Emma Wolfe, the mayor’s legislative director, who handles Albany matters, and Melissa DeRosa, the governor’s director of communications.

In the second tier came a meeting between wanna-be mayor Scott Stringer and real estate developer (and maybe wanna-be mayor) Don Peebles:

Real estate developer Don Peebles and city Comptroller Scott Stringer had a power breakfast at the Regency on Monday, which piqued the interest of fellow diner the Rev. Al Sharpton at a nearby table.

When he spotted the pair, who are both considered potential challengers to Mayor de Blasio in his re-election bid, “Sharpton walked over to their table to say hello, and joked that some might view their ‘secret meeting’ as a plot to take down de Blasio,” a spy said.

ADVERTISING

Peebles, who’s reportedly worth $700 million, told The Post in August he’s giving serious thought to a run, saying, “I was a political supporter of [de Blasio] . . . I’ve lost confidence in him. It would be irresponsible of me to do nothing.”

Peebles doesn't actually spend much time in NYC and might have trouble meeting the residency requirements, so I wouldn't spend too much time worrying about him as a potential challenger if I were Bill de Blasio.

And Stringer, well, he isn't particularly good at the job he has now, so he's not exactly a serious threat to a sitting Democratic mayor either (especially since a successful opponent to de Blasio is going to have eat away at de Blasio's support with the black community and Stringer's political base is Upper West Side white people.)

But it has been rumored that Cuomo has been actively recruiting potential challengers to de Blasio for 2017 and that his "Number #1 priority" is "being anti-Bill de Blasio," so the Cuomo-De Blasio dinner is an interesting gossip tidbit.

It was reported that Cuomo won't mend fences with de Blasio until the mayor publicly apologizes for de Blasio's criticism of Cuomo back in late June/early July, and the feud between the two continued last week when Cuomo accused de Blasio of being incapable of solving the homelessness problem in the city and criticized him for working with Republican Rob Astorino on transit issues, so I dunno what the point of this was or if anything was accomplished at the dinner between the two.

But I think I may have one possibility.

Fred Dicker reported on Monday that some Democrats were criticizing Cuomo for his constant "belittling" of de Blasio, something that was undercutting Cuomo's attempts to get a challenger to run against de Blasio.

The challenger who might have the best shot to beat de Blasio in a primary, Congressman Hakeem Jeffries, was said to be having second thoughts about running because of the damage the Cuomo-de Blasio feud would do to his chances:

U S REP. Hakeem Jeffries, Gov. Cuomo’s choice to oust Mayor de Blasio, is having doubts about entering the race, as Democratic unhappiness over Cuomo’s “belittling’’ of the mayor grows, senior Democrats have told The Post.

Jeffries, whom Cuomo has encouraged directly and through intermediaries to challenge de Blasio in the 2017 primary, “is having second thoughts about running, and has begun resisting Cuomo,’’ a prominent Democratic activist with strong party ties told The Post.

The source said it was now likely Jeffries would not challenge de Blasio, despite Cuomo’s repeated entreaties and polls showing the mayor’s popularity continuing to fall.

A second highly knowledgeable source, calling the Brooklyn-based Jeffries “a very pragmatic guy,’’ said that the well-regarded two-term congressman “has got to be aware that Cuomo can’t necessarily deliver for him in the Democratic primary, especially with what’s been going on.’’

That was a reference to Cuomo’s new attacks last week on de Blasio. The governor said he, and not the mayor, knows best how to handle the city’s homeless problem, and faulted Blasio for appearing at a press conference with Westchester County Executive Rob Astorino, last year’s Republican candidate for governor.

“It’s reached a point where having Cuomo backing you in a Democratic primary could work the other way, and Jeffries must be aware of that,’’ said the second source.

“Just look at what happened with the governor in his own primary with Zephyr Teachout,’’ he continued, referring to Cuomo’s surprisingly weak showing last year, when only mustered only about 60 percent of the primary vote against Teachout, a little-known law professor, and comedian/activist Randy Credico.

Several prominent Democrats said they were “shocked’’ — a word that was repeatedly used — at Cuomo’s criticism of de Blasio for appearing in public with Astorino. The governor cited Astorino’s opposition to abortion, among other things. But that didn’t stop Cuomo from standing with Pope Francis in St. Patrick’s Cathedral in September, despite the pontiff obviously being anti-abortion.

“That was one of the most amazing statements I’ve ever heard,’’ said a prominent Democrat who has known Cuomo for years, noting that the governor in the past has claimed he was committed to cooperating with his political opponents.

“It’s like the old ugly Andrew is back, the way Andrew used to be and had promised after 2002 that he wouldn’t be anymore,’’ the source continued, referring to Cuomo’s repeated pledges of new-found humility after his defeat in the race for governor that year.

Another key Democrat — known to virtually all party activists — said prominent Democrats had become increasingly unhappy with Cuomo’s “belittling’’ of de Blasio.

“Cuomo’s MO of pretending to be high-minded while belittling de Blasio has become a tedious trick,’’ said the source.

“Since [Cuomo’s] sagging polls are in part due to people understanding he’s a nasty piece of work — Astorino’s use of ‘scorpion’ is dead-on — perhaps he should try governing and see if that works.

“De Blasio is tricky in his own way but looks like an alter boy compared to Andrew,’’ the source, who has known Cuomo for years, continued.

So, why the Cuomo dinner with de Blasio?

And who leaked the story to the Post?

My inner bullshit meter says it's in Cuomo's interests to show that he's making an effort to work with de Blasio so he can say to those critics sniping at him that "Old Ugly Andy" is back that this is not the case, he really is trying to work with de Blasio.

In the past, Cuomo had been "winning" the feud between the two, if not in polls, at least politically, because he had successfully isolated de Blasio and had the upper hand in both the political battles between the two and the media accounts of those battles.

But with Dems "sniping" both privately and publicly that Cuomo was going too far, Cuomo may have realized it was in his best interest to reach out to de Blasio and make it look like he's trying to work with him.

In the end, as with everything Cuomoesque, I wouldn't exactly trust him if I were de Blasio (in fact, I probably would have brought a food taster with me to the dinner if I had been him.)

Nonetheless, that the meeting took place and somebody felt the need to leak it to the Post is quite interesting to me.

As for the Stringer/Peebles "power" breakfast, that clearly looks like Stringer reaching out to a potential funder for a 2017 challenge to de Blasio.

Peebles played this same kind of game against former DC mayor Adrian Fenty back in the day and Peebles has already indicated he wants to see de Blasio go.

Stringer also publicly sucked up to Cuomo a few months back:

Gov. Andrew Cuomo over the weekend received some warm words from New York City Comptroller Scott Stringer.

Later today, he will be attending a roundtable discussion with U.S. Rep. Hakeem Jeffries.

Both Stringer and Jeffries just happen to be potential mayoral candidates and rivals to the incumbent, Bill de Blasio.

Stringer on Sunday singled out Cuomo for praise during an event hosted by Sen. Adriano Espaillat.

“Governor, it’s been so good having you in New York City, protecting all of us,” Stringer said.

Boy, how's that for a subtle suck-up job from Stringer?

In any case, given the job he's done as comptroller and the political realities of what it would take to defeat a sitting Democratic mayor in a primary, I think Stringer's delusional if he actually thinks he can successfully primary de Blasio.

Also would note that while Cuomo likes people to suck up to him, he also tends to treat those same people with disdain and contempt if they show weakness - and let's be frank, Stringer's "You make us all feel so safe, governor!" line oozes weakness.

In the end, I bet Cuomo still wants to find a challenger to de Blasio and knows that Jeffries is his best bet to take out his former "frenemy."

Dinner or no dinner, I doubt Cuomo's buried the hatchet with de Blasio - except maybe the proverbial one, right into de Blasio's mayorality.

Eva Moskowitz Not Running For Mayor

This is not a surprise:

Eva S. Moskowitz, the outspoken charter school leader who galvanized critics of the de Blasio administration, has signaled to close allies that she is leaning against a bid for mayor of New York in 2017, according to several people told of her discussions.

The prospect of a run by Ms. Moskowitz has been seen as a significant threat to Mayor Bill de Blasio, a fellow Democrat and longtime antagonist, particularly if her candidacy was backed by wealthy donors who support her prominent charter network, Success Academy.

Ms. Moskowitz scheduled a City Hall news conference for Thursday morning to reveal “her political plans.”

According to a person told of her thinking, Ms. Moskowitz has viewed the speculation about her candidacy as a distraction for her charter school network, which is reliant on the city for school space, and for donors who might confuse the schools’ educational mission with the political ambitions of a potential candidate.

According to two people told of Ms. Moskowitz’s thinking, she is unlikely to say on Thursday that she is pursuing a campaign.

She was never a "significant threat" to de Blasio.

She's too polarizing, has a reputation for nastiness and runs a charter school network famed for children who are so afraid to take a break from test prep that they soil themselves - there is no way she could win a race for City Hall.

Rather, a more friendly pro-charter figure without baggage - especially someone of color who could cut into de Blasio's support with black voters - is a significant threat to de Blasio.

These reporters need to stop feeding Eva's ego here - wouldn't matter how much money Eva's Wall Street sugar daddies gave her for the race, she has serious flaws as a citywide candidate and I bet she knows that.

It was said, I think in Eliza Shapiro's Politico NY piece on Eva a while back, that Eva was going to poll before making a decision on whether to run or not.

I bet she's been polling and has discovered that her appeal is low, her favorability rating in the toilet and a clamoring for her to run for mayor non-existent.

But because this is Eva and everything is always about her, she needs to make a grand announcement with all the attendant drama we've gotten here.

What a piece of work she is - self-centered, arrogant, hubristic, and vindictive.

Quite frankly, a perfect fit for a charter school leader.

Some Republicans Not Sold On Eva Moskowitz For Mayor

A trial balloon was floated yesterday in the Murdoch Post about Mistress Eva of Success Academies running for mayor on the Republican line, but some cold water was thrown on that dream later in the day:

Rejecting a Manhattan GOP leader’s interest in having Democrat Eva Moskowitz run for mayor as a Republican, Republican chairs said today that they would prefer a registered Republican challenging Mayor Bill de Blasio.

“I’m not a big fan of Wilson-Pakulas,” said Craig Eaton, the chairman of the Brooklyn Republican Party. “I’m hopeful this time around we’ll have registered Republicans running on our line.” Mr. Eaton was referring to a state law that requires the approval of three out of five New York City party chairs for a candidate to run on a party line different than their own.

Ms. Moskowitz, the founder of Success Academy Charter Schools and a top de Blasio critic, has never expressed interest in party-switching or renting the GOP line. The practice drew scrutiny after Malcolm Smith, a former Democratic state senator, was convicted of trying to bribe his way into the 2013 GOP mayoral primary.

Adele Malpass, the chairwoman of the Manhattan Republican Party, wants Ms. Moskowitz to give the Wilson-Pakula more thought. “I would be very excited about Eva running for mayor,” she told the New York Post. “Education is a top priority for the next mayor and Eva is eminently qualified to do that. She’s outstanding.”

Ed Cox, the chairman of the State Republican Party, told the Post Ms. Moskowitz is a “visionary” on education issues, though he didn’t say outright she should run as a Republican.

Staten Island’s Republican chairman, John Antoniello, joined Mr. Eaton in calling for a real Republican to get the nod. “Without a doubt I’d prefer a registered Republican to run,” he told the Observer.

I don't see why Moskowitz, a registered "Democrat" can't switch parties and become a Republican?

Bloomberg did it, why not Eva?

Frankly she's a better fit for the GOP line than the Democratic line.

Her union-busting, anti-public education agenda won't sit well with labor and other traditional Democratic constituencies that put on big GOTV operations in primaries.

Republicans, Hedge Fund Managers Look To Run Eva Moskowitz For Mayor On Republican Ticket

As has been speculated here at Perdido Street School blog, if Success Academies Mistress Eva Moskowitz decides to run for mayor against Bill de Blasio, it will probably be as a Republican:

GOP leaders searching for a challenger to topple Mayor de Blasio in 2017 are so excited that Democratic charter-school champion Eva Moskowitz is weighing a run that they’re open to letting her enter the race as a Republican.

“I would be very excited about Eva running for mayor. Education is a top priority for the next mayor and Eva is eminently qualified to do that. She’s outstanding,” Adele Malpass, chair of the Manhattan Republican Party, said Monday.
 
Malpass said wealthy backers of charters are prepared to bankroll a Moskowitz campaign.

Moskowitz, who, as a member of the City Council chaired the Education Committee, is the founder and CEO of the city’s largest charter network, Success Academy. She has said she’s considering taking on de Blasio, but would need GOP permission to run as a Republican.

There's little chance Moskowitz could beat de Blasio in a Democratic primary - the unions and other key Democratic Party constituencies would make sure the anti-union Moskowitz would lose that contest.

That's why she has to run as a Republican, though even there she faces an uphill battle (and is a registered Democrat to boot):

Political insiders said de Blasio would be difficult to beat in a Democratic primary dominated by minorities, left-leaning voters and unions — unless he falters and an insurgent can chip into his base.

A challenger on the GOP line faces an even more daunting task, but former Mayor Rudy Giuliani said he’s proof that a GOP fusion candidate with a reform agenda can beat the odds.

GOP county leaders can use a “Wilson Pakula” procedure under state law to allow a Democrat to run on the Republican line.

The practice has been frowned upon — particularly after two party leaders were convicted of scheming to sell the ballot line to former Democratic state Sen. Malcolm Smith.

Of course Eva could just change parties and become a Republican - hell, Mayor Mike changed parties more often than he changed tuxedos, so it's not like it hasn't been done before.

Even so, if the hedge fundies and charter school shills want to beat de Blasio in 2017, Eva isn't the best candidate to do it.

She's got baggage as head of the controversial Success Academies where diapers come as part of the school uniform (so that the kids can keep taking their practice tests instead of going to the bathroom, of course!) and she has sued to keep from being audited.

Couple the Success Academies controversies with her prickly personality and temperament (if the press thinks Bill de Blasio doesn't answer their questions, just wait until they got a load of Mayor Moskowitz gaggles) and you see how flawed she is as a candidate.

No, I actually think running charter school shill Hakeem Jeffries against de Blasio makes more strategic sense for the charter school operators.

Jeffries can eat into de Blasio's support among the black community, Mayor Bill's strongest supporters in the latest polling, while sucking up a lot of Wall Street cash and charter school donations to be able to run plenty of attack ads against de Blasio.

I suppose the charter shills could try and run Jeffries AND Moskowitz, with the idea that Jeffries softens de Blasio up in the primaries and Eva finishes him off in November, but that seems unlikely.

I think Eva, ego maniac that she is, loves the attention over whether she'll run for mayor and is using the story line to push her personal and charter school brand, but I'm skeptical that in the end she decides to actually run.

She makes an awful lot of money now as Success Academies Mistress, she and Success get limited scrutiny from media now that would change if she decided to run for mayor, and she really isn't the best pro-charter candidate to knock de Blasio off.

De Blasio could be vulnerable to a center-right pro-charter school candidate in a general election in November, but given her flaws, I don't think Eva Moskowitz is that candidate.

My money is on either Jeffries or Ruben Diaz Jr. to try and get the charter school operators and hedge fund managers to bankroll a primary challenge against de Blasio and to get a receptive audience from them, while Eva continues to make sounds like she's going to run but in the end bows out against a less controversial pro-charter figure to run in 2017.

But we'll see how it all plays out - you never know how things go in politics.

Donald Trump's massive poll lead among Republicans even as he beats up on FOX News and hedge fund managers is just the latest demonstration of that, isn't it?

Jeb Bush - The Gaffer That Keeps On Giving

If Jeb Bush is the nominee, he's a gaffe machine who will keep on giving to Hillary:

Democratic critics of Jeb Bush’s ad-lib Tuesday about cutting women’s health spending were joined by conservatives, who are annoyed that the inartful statement may undermine their efforts to finally score a win against Planned Parenthood.

Despite his swift damage control efforts, Bush’s casual aside Tuesday afternoon that “I’m not sure we need a half a billion dollars for women’s health programs” threw the Democratic attack machine into overdrive.

...

 For Bush, it marked the third time in a month that a carelessly phrased off-the-cuff comment has sparked controversy — causing consternation anew that the party’s best-funded potential nominee has been, in the early months of the primary fight, something of a gaffe machine.

...

Less than an hour after making the comment about the overfunding of “women’s health issues,” Bush posted a statement on his website saying that he “misspoke” and meant only to question the $500 million in federal funding for Planned Parenthood.

It was a swifter reincarnation of Bush’s other explanations in recent weeks of comments in which he seemed to call for the “phasing out” of Medicare — he said later he wasn’t referring to a specific program, just entitlements in general; and his suggestion that “workers need to work longer hours,” which, he later clarified, was an attempt to discuss underemployment, not an insinuation that American workers are lazy.

Good thing Bush has raised $120 million already.

He's going to need a lot of money to explain in campaign ads the stupid stuff he says on the campaign trail.

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?

Flanagan Echoes Cuomo, Says De Blasio Must Show Improvement In City Schools To Maintain Control

This sets up an interesting fight next year when mayoral control comes up for renewal:

Flanagan also previewed what kind of changes Senate Republicans may make to mayoral control next year, when the program comes up for renewal again.

“I say this time and time again, I'm going to be guided by Senators [Andrew] Lanza, [Marty] Golden, and [Simcha] Felder in particular,” he said, referring to the three members of his conference who represent districts in New York City.

And he also reaffirmed a statement Cuomo made Tuesday about mayoral control, suggesting that if de Blasio wants continued authority over the city’s school system, he must demonstrate that the schools are doing well under his stewardship.

“I think the administration has to demonstrate what actions they are taking. What’s been the byproduct of that? Has it worked? Is it not working?” he said.

“The mayor wants control, or permanent mayoral control. He originally, when he was on the [New York City] Council, opposed mayoral control. So I’d love to have a discussion about that. What was the transactional nature of that?”

Flanagan, as usual, sticks a lie into his statements - de Blasio never opposed mayoral control of schools when Bloomberg had it, he simply was critical of the way Bloomberg ran the system.

So right off the bat, we have Flanagan setting up a political battle between de Blasio and Senate Republicans and Cuomo over mayoral control of NYC schools next year that's framed with some dishonesty.

Then we have this part about the “the administration has to demonstrate what actions they are taking. What’s been the byproduct of that? Has it worked? Is it not working?"

It will be interesting to see just how they try and quantify that.

None of this is about actually policy differences or making public education work better for students, btw.

This is simply a political battle between Cuomo and his state Senate Republican allies and de Blasio, with Cuomo and the GOP looking to humiliate de Blasio as much as possible to extract revenge for the actions he took to try and help Democrats win the state Senate outright in 2014 and warn him about any actions he might try and take in 2016.

A commenter here at Perdido Street School explain this battle a but further:

The Senate GOP conference is already sweating about the November 2016 elections, when a far different electorate is expected to show up at the polls compared to last November's off-year elections.

The one year extension is meant to send a message to deBlasio that he has to stay out of the state Senate elections or face the consequences all over again.

DeBlasio needs to be very involved and let the mayoral control chips fall where they may. The WFP should not endorse any of the traitor Dems led by Jeff Klein and NYSUT needs to hire professional political operatives to strategically target weak GOP senators for defeat.

Andrew Pallotta is a dope and has wasted tens of millions in VOTE COPE contributions. Make the money count. Bring in a pro and eliminate Flanagan's majority.

That's what this battle is about, but the consequences of that battle are going to play on the public education system in NYC.

Don't be surprised if a "Metric For Student and/or School Success" doesn't show up in the near future that allows Cuomo and state Senate Republicans an excuse to further humiliate de Blasio in the mayoral control battle, snip away at his mayoral control and make him come, hat in hand, to Albany as a supplicant.

And don't be surprised if all of that doesn't go away in 2017 if and when de Blasio is dispatched by some ed reformer ally like Hakeem Jeffries or some ed reformer herself like Eva Moskowitz.

GOP Looks To Tap Eva Moskowitz To Run In 2017

From the Wall Street Journal:

New York City Republicans have quietly begun laying the groundwork to recruit a candidate to challenge Mayor Bill de Blasio in 2017, with some promoting charter-school executive Eva Moskowitz.

A lifelong Democrat and former City Council member, Ms. Moskowitz said she was contemplating a mayoral bid—but expected to compete in the Democratic primary if she did run.

“I have concerns about the direction of the city,” said Ms. Moskowitz, who added that she thought Mr. de Blasio could be vulnerable. “The power of incumbency is always great, but it was a pretty rocky start.”

One problem for Moskowitz and the GOP - some on their team have been complimentary of de Blasio:

While GOP officials have railed publicly about Mr. de Blasio’s performance, Messrs. Catsimatidis and Lhota have been largely laudatory. That complicates the work of the party.

“He hasn’t done a bad job,” Mr. Catsimatidis said. “I’m hoping Bill de Blasio does a great job so nobody has to run against him.”

The takeaway - unless there's a major crisis or things turn very, very bad in the city, a GOP candidate will have a lot of difficulty taking out de Blasio:

George Arzt, a longtime Democratic consultant, said, “The only person who would be viable is a Bloomberg-type businessman with high ID, high recognition and a lot of money.”

“They’re not many people around who are willing to do that and who are willing to leave the shadows of corporate life to become a piñata for the press,” said Mr. Arzt, adding that history shows a challenger would need a crisis to oust an incumbent Democrat from City Hall.

“When times are bad in the city, Republicans have been able to win against the registration odds,” said Jake Menges, a GOP consultant. “An articulate, charismatic, well-known entity in philanthropy, in the financial services industry and is a well financed, self-funded candidate has a real shot.”

I dunno about you, but Moskowitz (who says she has no plans to switch parties to the GOP anyway) doesn't fit the bill of  "an articulate, charismatic, well-known entity in philanthropy, in the financial services industry who is a well financed, self-funded candidate."

I think Eva will preen in the press about running, but ultimately will not run.

She's making too much money and gets to avoid a whole lot of scrutiny where she is now.

If she decides to run for mayor, there will be a lot of attention on Success Academies, the financial record, the academic record, the attrition record that she won't be able to make go away with a lawsuit or some PR.

I don't think Moskowitz wants that.

Instead I think the charter industry will continue to bypass City Hall and push their preferred policies up in Albany where de Blasio can do nothing about them and look for someone more charter-friendly than Moskowitz who can challenge BdB in 2017.

But my bet is, Eva Moskowitz stays in the private sector pulling in $500,000+ a year and expanding her charter empire.

Eva Moskowitz Puts Out Trial Balloon On Mayoral Run

Norm Scott at Ed Notes Online has written numerous times that Eva Moskowitz is setting up her charter empire in various neighborhoods around the city to use as a base of operations for a mayoral run.

We got some evidence last night that Norm may be right:

Mayor Moskowitz?

In an interview last night, Eva Moskowitz, the founder of Success Academy Charter Schools and a former city councilwoman, would not rule out a future primary bid against Mayor Bill de Blasio.

“It’s possible. I have always been very open about my respect for public service. My hope is though that we can really move this city forward,” Ms. Moskowitz said on NY1’s Inside City Hall in a response to a question about her rumored mayoral ambitions.

“I grew up in New York in the 1970s and I remember what it was like when governmental services did not work very, very well and I’m hoping we can keep the forward movement that we have seen in the city,” she added.

“If the forward movement doesn’t happen to your satisfaction, would we see a Eva Moskowitz in a candidacy as early as 2017?” host Errol Louis asked.

“Anything’s possible,” Ms. Moskowitz answered. “I love kids, I love what I’m doing, it’s incredibly hard. I love working with teachers and principals, they are my heroes. They are very dedicated to children and it’s very impactful.”

There is a huge downside for Eva if she decides to run.

Success Academies will get the kind of public scrutiny it so far has mostly avoided.

There's nothing better than a run for a higher office like NYC mayor to shine some light on a person's business practices.

Plus a Moskowitz run wouldn't be a done deal by any means:

Ms. Moskowitz, a Democrat like Mr. de Blasio, could be a formidable candidate if she chose to run. She has access to the wealthy donors who help buoy her charter network and enjoys relatively strong name recognition among primary voters. More moderate Democrats who passed on Mr. de Blasio in 2013 could find a candidate to unite around in 2017.

Still, a Moskowitz candidacy would face significant hurdles. Knocking off an incumbent mayor is exceedingly difficult. Labor unions and left-leaning community groups hostile to Ms. Moskowitz–the types of organizations that specialize in pulling out the vote for low turnout primaries–would rush to Mr. de Blasio’s defense. Ms. Moskowitz failed to win a Manhattan borough president’s race in 2005–Mr. de Blasio, to date, has never lost an election.

There are a lot of public school advocates and teachers out there who aren't happy with de Blasio and Farina, but there's nothing like the prospect of a Moskowitz mayorality to help with a shift in perception around that.

My guess is, even people who aren't happy with de Blasio and Farina would rally around them if Moskowitz was the alternative.

But, if I had to bet today on a Moskowitz run, I'd say she doesn't run.

Besides the scrutiny she'd take over her personal finances and charter network finances, she'd have to take a huge pay cut and develop a relationship with the public that she's just not temperamentally suited for.

Moskowitz has A reputation for being one of the most unkind, self-centered people in politics (just ask some of the people who used to work for her - they'll tell you.)

I have difficulty seeing her overcome that temperament problem, even with the money she would no doubt have at her disposal for political ads and her campaign.

Still, you never know how things will turn out in politics.

Even last summer, early on, few people thought de Blasio really had a chance to win.

So I won't rule out the possibility of a Mayor Moskowitz completely.

But for now I think she's just assuaging her own ego with the City Hall talk.

Eva Moskowitz Says She May Run For Mayor

Not a surprise to anybody paying attention to the "charter wars" - Eva Moskowitz is creating her own little fiefdoms across the city to use as power bases for a future run for mayor:

Charter school maven Eva Moskowitz may have a mayoral run in her future.

“I might run for mayor some day,” she said on the John Gambling radio show. “But right now, I’m very, very focused on educating the 10,000 kids that will be with us in 95 business days.”

 ...
“I thought I was leaving elected office and politics in order to focus on schooling, but as you know schooling turns out to be frankly even more political than politics,” she said. “I may [run for office]. I believe public service is incredibly important. But I also love the kids.”

Moskowitz, who has clashed with Mayor de Blasio since he took office, said her current focus is expanding her Success Academy network.

“I’m very, very focused on not only creating world class schools at scale, but changing the public policy in this country that every day prevents children from getting access to the American dream,” she said.

She'll have the money to try and make herself look good in ads and some segment of the press might be behind her (say the NY Post if they're still in business when she runs.)

 

So I would never count her out.

 

Thing is, even among many charter people she's about as popular as small pox.

 

She's abrasive, arrogant,and is so devoid of attractive personality traits that she makes Andrew Cuomo seem like Regis Philbin.

 

I have no doubt she plans on running for mayor.

Whether she can actually be a serious contender after all the controversy is another matter.

But who knows?

Who'd have thought the same Andy Cuomo who had to slink away after the Carl McCall mess would have 87% approval ratings in the first year of his first term as governor?