I saw the debate and thought Hillary came off looking smart and calm and collected and Lazio was acting, well, Giuliani-ish: petty, bitter, mean-spirited, and avoiding the issues. But that’s me. The papers, I’ve heard, seem to be giving the impression Lazio got the upper hand or something, which makes me wonder what debate they were watching.
What did y’all think?
Depends on which papers you are talking about. You can’t expect the Post and the WSJ to give Mrs. C any good press given their extremely conservative bent.
Otherwise, I completely agree with your assessment of the debate. Lazio looked even worse than I had imagined. The only reason Hillary occasionally seemed patrician was because Ricky-boy was being such a baby.
MR
Well, i didn’t actually watch the debate, but according to Yahoo! News, Hillary got the upper hand.
It was mixed. (I should say at the outset that I despise Hellary, so don’t expect thoroughly objective comments from me.)
That said, I thought she was more poised than he, but her comments were much less substantive than his. And that’s not to say she was entirely graceful – there were moments when she looked uncomfortable, flustered and painted in a corner – even a little spooked by Lazio’s overzealousness. And personally, I think her efforts to tag RL as Newt Gingritch’s lapdog rang very, very hollow – though I’m sure many of my bleeding-heart-liberal fellow NYers ate it up and begged for seconds.
As for Rick, his presentation was not as seamless as hers, but as I said, his points were sharper. The BIG question, of course, is whether he played TOO rough with the “sign the pledge” stunt. I think it was not his finest hour; but HC looked downright rattled, even defeated, by it. Ultimately he gained more than he lost in the gesture, IMO. Besides, pundits have said he needed to stop looking like somebody’s “big brother at the church picnic” and start getting aggressive. This was probably his first, somewhat clumsy, step in that direction.
All said and done, I’ll gave it to Lazio by a nose.
Future prognosis (is that redundant?):
I think we’ve seen Hellary’s best shot. Her campaign is built on children-pandering, warm, fuzzy smoke, an no real record; there’s not much room for improved debating performance. Rick is a different story. If he can polish his presentation skills to bolster his record and platform in next two debates, he has a real chance to be devastating.
Most people in NY who dislike Hillary, as evidenced by Stuyguy, are not going to be convinced otherwise by a debate. Basically, all she could do during the debate was “not screw up” and lose the support she already has, and most Hillary supporters believe (correctly or incorrectly) that she came out on top. I personally think Lazio’s tactics pleased his current supporters, but my purely anecdotal evidence from talking with coworkers who were ‘on the fence’ is that he came off as being really pushy.
Overall, they seemed to trade potshots and I felt they were both off the mark somewhat. Hillary has no voting record. Lazio’s voting record frightens me. :sigh: What 3rd party candidates are there again? :rolleyes:
One item of the debate that is almost completely overlooked by the national media (and even local to some extent) was Lazio’s response to the question from the Buffalo resident. She voiced a growing concern among middle class New Yorkers living in upper and western NY about the increasing amount of state tax dollars being diverted to NYC while upstate NY’s economy continues to sag. (Lazio is from Long Island, and is often critized by upstate residents that he’ll represent NY City first, NY State second.) His response, which cited federal funding issues (which are important, but not what the question was about), seemed to not even address the core of what she was getting at. Granted, Hillary’s response wasn’t a whole lot better (essentailly “I’m there for you, Western New York”), but I was counting on a question like that to give Lazio a chance to calm my fears that he will further damage the upstate economy in favor of NYC, and a chance to indicate that he understands there is an antagonism from upstate residents he needs to overcome. Because he didn’t do that, I fear he may have somewhat damaged his standing in some of the more economically depressed cities in NY (Rochester & Buffalo, mostly).
Anyhow, most of the state is fairly polarized on this issue by now anyway. Personally, I’m just sick of all the f***ing TV ads…both are running negative campaigns at this point, and it’s nauseating.
Hey, Ed. I don’t think we’ve post-chatted before… glad to meet you! I thoroughly enjoyed your post and look forward to your comments regarding the race in the future.
I’m going to take this thread on a slight (but related) hijack based on one of your comments. Rest assured, I’m doing this only for the sake of lively chitchat, not to bait, taunt or dis you. Bottom line: I do not wish this to end up in the Pit, ok?
As you may know from prior posts, I’m a lifelong NYCer. I, too, perked up at the question regarding the imbalance of funds that travel between NYS and Washington. As you cited, this issue touched on (but did not dwell on) the issue of upstate vs. downstate $$$.
Okay, here’s my hijack. I think that you are right that there is “a growing concern among middle class New Yorkers living in upper and western NY about the increasing amount of state tax dollars being diverted to NYC while upstate NY’s economy continues to sag.”
I contend that this resentment, shall we say, is unfair and unfounded – especially as it applies to state monies. I don’t have the figures at hand, but it was common knowledge to those of us working for the Giuliani administration that NYC sends bucketloads more tax money to Albany than it ever gets back. Thus, residents of the Big Apple end up subsidizing libraries in Utica (that, indidentally, they are not allowed to use). And what do we get for our trouble? Bitter, untrue snipes about how our we’re siphoning bucks from upstate.
Now, don’t get me wrong, I love NYS – the WHOLE state – and I desparately want the upstate economy to thrive; I’m even willing to forsake some money to see that it does. I just think it’s a unsporting to bite the hand that pays for your libraries.
(BTW, I’ll be at SUNY Albany in November to present a documentary I produced to a conference of NY State historians and history buffs. See: http://nystatehistory.org/researchny/program2000.html Interested in attending?)
A lot of money seems to be diverted to NYC because it belonged to us in the first place. After years of constantly getting screwed over in the tax game by the federal (a gap of 9% between what we give in taxes and what services we get in return) and state government (much larger gap), NYC is finally getting soem of its proper share back.
And NYC is still getting screwed as far as education dollars are concerned. I was at the Campaign for Fiscal Equity closing arguments last month and was truly shocked. The average public school allocation for NYC per student per year is about $8000. Upstate and Westchester students are allocated anywhere from $10000 to $15000 dollars per year because of the NYS education formula, which is vastly disproportionate to the needs of students.
I live in NYC and feel that the city should get its share of state and federal funding.
MR
This is the bit that I don’t get - are people that foolish that they can’t see this as the stunt that it is? I can’t imagine any person signing some piece of paper that they haven’t had a chance to read. I mean, she is a lawyer after all, I can’t think she’d ever sign anything without looking at it for awhile, and in the middle of the debate there wasn’t really a chance to do that, obviously. Not that he gave her that opportunity, anyway, he just walked over and shoved it at her…
Since we’re on the topic - why is it that people don’t like Hillary? 'Cause her husband got that blow-job or what? I don’t really get that, either.
I thought Lazio was magnificent-HC did not even attempt to rebut him (on her role as education Czar for the state of Arkansas). She cam across to me as an idiot-she clearly knew nothing of the average New Yorker’s concerns about government. People have criticized the question about Bill’s affair-but I think this is wrong-Lazio was showing how she was prepared to ignore the truth about her lecherous husband.
The only downside for Lazio-if he is perceived as being “too merciless” , he might get a backlash against hime. But, to all of you Empire Staters-think long and hard-do you REALLY want this carpetbagger representing you?
By the way, I think everything you said in your entire post is a steaming load of manatee shit. But your last comment…
Let me put it this way. I would rather have someone from East Bumblefuckski in Siberia represent me than any Long Island politician. My regional prejudice is just as valid as yours.
MR
Definitely depends on your source of news. USA Today had HC giving Lazio the what fer, and good ol’ Rush says that Lazio absolutely flayed her.
BF, Rush essentially says that republicans shouldn’t be critical of other republicans in his column on the subject. Not that I considered him unbiased, but he mentions no specifics of the debate.
From what little I saw, Hillary looked poised, confident, and said nothing of substance. She’d make a perfect newspartner for Stone Phillips. And gotta agree with McDavis- the “soft money” pledge was a pretty ugly and transparent stunt. I wouldn’t sign anything under those circumstances even if I agreed with it 100%.
D McDavis, the reason I don’t like Hillary is that she comes across as very condescending.
Look at who her opponents have been. Giuliani and Lazio. Two little yipping, scowling dogs. Debating anyone else with a modicum of poise and statesmanship, she would not have looked condescending at all.
MR
Wow, this got ugly quick. Let me see…
Stuyguy, I may just make it to your presentation at SUNY Albany. I’m currently a student in the SUNY system, so even if it’s restricted to students I should be able to make it. My fiance is also currently in the process of becoming a history teacher, so it would likely interest her as well. Of course, we’re both probably what you would consider “bleeding heart liberals”, so I’m not sure if you really want us there. 
BTW, it’s nice to discuss NY politics with someone, particularly of differing opinion, in a respectful manner.
Your point about the problems with the New York State economy are, of course, well founded. I probably even agree with you on most of it, but needless to say it is an extraordinarily complex issue. The economies of NYC and that of Upstate are two wildly different animals, and we could open a whole thread based on this discussion alone. And for discussion purposes I don’t count Westchester county as “upstate”, as it is close enough to NYC to have an economy that is very closely tied in with the city’s. BTW, I would WAG that a lot of the education $$$ that gets diverted from NYC schools ends up in Nassau, Suffolk, and Westchester counties(which we despise anyway, if it makes you feel any better :D). Most Upstate cities (Scenectady, Rochester, and Buffalo in particular) have economies that are thoroughly dependant on a specific industry and have no relation whatsoever to NYC, and most are declining rapidly. Justified or not, this sows the seeds for confilct. NY is not the only state to have this rather ugly situation, although with the possible exception of California and Michigan it is among the most pronounced.
My point, as Stuyguy noted, was that many average upstaters strongly resent anything south of Poughkeepsie regardless of what they actually know. Or to put it more subtly: in a politics class I was in recently, our proffessor discussed the somewhat serious proposal that had been made for NYC to secede and form its own state. His point was that an action of that sort would need, among other things, consent from the rest of the state of NY. Several people responded, in unison, “And the problem is?”
Is it a short-sighted biased attitude? Absolutely. But it IS fairly prevalent, and one that Lazio should not underestimate if he hopes to win. Maeglin’s comment is true of a lot of people I know; that being from Long Island is actually worse than being from out of state (don’t yell at me personally, I have family there). For these people, Lazio’s protrayal of himself as “local boy” produces howls of laughter.
Hillary knows that Lazio offends a great deal of people, and his stunt may have furthered that impression. Keep in mind that (unfortunately for Stuyguy )NY is historically speaking a relatively liberal state. And with people still reeling from D’Amato being such a…well, let’s face it, a jackass, and Pataki beginning to take some heat lately (even from his own supporters), it might not go as well for Republicans this year as they would hope.
For the record, I’m not really that enthusiastic about Hillary. Politically speaking, she’s much closer to my viewpoints, but it IS admittedly hard to be enthusiastic about someone with no experience in NY state politics, especially since I am such an ardent supporter of local government first. My problem is that I cannot stand Lazio, and the fact that he is so openly endorsed by Pataki (another of my favorites :rolleyes: ) frightens me. Watching a debate between these two was like arguing over what bullet to put in the gun I’m about to get shot with…I just got depressed by the whole thing.
Davis McDavis:
Her blatant phoniness. She spends her life in Illinois and Arkansas (attending many Cubs games quite fan-fully), and suddenly she puts on a Yankee cap and expects New Yorkers to believe she’s one with their concerns? She makes many statements that are pro-Palestinian, and then tries to recant them to court the Jewish vote in New York? All politicians pander, but when it’s done so blatantly, it’s downright insulting.
Her strongarming the Democratic party into handing her the nomination. Chuck Schumer, Bob Abrams, Liz Holtzman, Geraldine Ferrarro…these people, long-time New York public servants, actually had to take their case for the Democratic nomination to the voters of New York. Suddenly she walks in, while folks like Carolyn Maloney and Nita Lowey are waiting in the wings, and makes backroom deals to get the nomination? I resent it, and I’ll bet many other New Yorkers do as well.
Her attempts to parlay her victimhood into a position of power. No explanation necessary, I assume.
These are the main reasons. Nothing to do with that “innocent little blowjob” her husband got.
Yeah, what he said…
Chaim, have I ever told you that I hold you in the highest of respect?
I agree with almost everything Chaim says. For the record, I don’t like Hillary at all. I have asked myself over and over: “Am I just afraid of an ambitious woman in power? Am I falling prey to some kind of male stereotype?”
And the answer has been a resounding [no. I just don’t like Hillary.
But my opinion of the woman is irrelevant. For better or for worse is she more solid on my issues? Yes. Do I think she will bring in money for New York State? Yes.
Lazio rings up a resounding no on both of those questions for me. So even though I might not like a phoney New Yorker with all sorts of baggage, I will vote for her all the same.
MR
Mojo,
I was referring to Rush’s radio show. He was crowing the whole time about how Lazio made Hillary look like a fool when he pulled the ‘sign this’ stunt.
Once again. Hilary’s biggest problem is that she has done NOTHING! After leaving law school, her biggest accomplishment was making a fast $100,000 in cattle futures. She has never managed a business, taken care of her own daughter (a babysitter was provided by the state of Arkansas), written a book (“IT TAKES A VILLAGE” was ghost written),or taught school. In short, she has no conception of how real people live and work. Her entire philosophy is summed up as “more government = better”. In short, she is a statist, and sees the solution of all problems in passing more and more laws and regulations. Both she and the class she springs from, are a menace to the life and liberty of the rest of us.
For all these reasons, please DO NOT VOTE for her.