A Third Term for Mayor Mike Bloomberg?

ICOT: 3) Undecided

who’s else is in the running for mayor?!

was he that bad?

People of NYC have short memories, or don’t you remember his first year in office? We called him Mike Taxberg then, because every tax that exists in NY was raised shortly after his election. From the 25% property tax increase, to the huge increases in parking fines (and meter maids to hand them out), to the increase in State sales tax that he was instrumental in bringing about.

Well, he’s a smart guy and he did the nasty stuff pretty early on, so he was able to live down the nickname of Taxberg in time to get reelected. But now he wants the sales tax to go up again, and who knows what else he will pick on if you reelect him – because he will have nothing to lose.

The only people whom he spared from taxes are the real estate developers. So the next time you see a 50 story high-rise building in Manhattan that is full of rich yuppies who paid $1-$2 Million+ for their loft/duplex/penthouse and who are straining the natural resources of NYC (think of your water bill now), realize that they and the guy who put up that building are living in a tax haven and the lost revenue is coming out of your pockets when he raises taxes. </rant>

But what do I care, anymore? 😉

So, who’s he running against? Anyone?

i can only try: None of Bloomy’s possible major opposition candidates are good, and in fact are all a lot worse than Bloomy. You already know the handful of candidates who have a real chance to be the democrat nominee. Do you think ANY of them are ANY good?? I think definitely not.

You all remember how he got in to office in the first place, it was “MONEY” and now the only reason he was able to push for a third term is also “MONEY” regarding his opponent, why should a normal human being run against a man who has resources to spend $15,000,000,000 with a “B” and flood you out via TV the last couple of weeks of the campaign, Remember Mark Green?

icot, gotta disagree w/one point you made. Clinton would never have one a 3rd term — in face even Gore blamed HIS loss due to his association with Clinton (as Clinton’s Veep) due to all the horrible personal things Clinton did.

I also think that it was good to allow bloomy to run again since otherwise the Democrat whoever it would’ve been would’ve been a shoo-in. And we all now what problems the city always has under democrat mayors.

Joseph: Outlawing campaign contributions would, by that very fact, give rich candidates the upper hand. There would be no way for poorer candidates to compete in the publicity dept., which is a major factor in winning elections.

Also, regarding the constitutionality of McCain-Feingold, there is a strong argument to be made that it is curtailing our freedom of speech.

From Wikipedia on Campaign Finance Reform: Most opponents claim that CFR infringes on free speech and violates First Amendment rights. The argument is that the purpose of the free speech clause of the First Amendment is the guarantee that people have the right to publish their political views. Under this view, when the laws prohibit people from advocating for or against political candidates by restricting the content or the amount of political advertising, the laws are in conflict with the constitutional guarantee of freedom of political speech.

There also other criticism of CFR in McCain-Feingold: In addition, many opponents point out that campaign finance regulations are excessively complicated. This, they say, prevents ordinary citizens from participating in the election process (especially from running for office) and limits participation to a wealthy elite who can afford the legal apparatus necessary to run. In modern campaigns, legal and accounting expenses are significant percentage of the overall budget. Opponents also claim that excessively complicated rules discourage participation more generally by dissuading people from even attempting political work or activism.

Personally, I think John McCain’s own law limited his chances to win the 2008 election, unintentionally of course.

Joseph: As stated above, In modern campaigns, legal and accounting expenses are a significant percentage of the overall budget.

But then what about the other expenses in the campaign? The rich still have the advantage.

ICOT: That is very well said.

ICOT: There are valid points on both sides, but I feel that the risk of not having a political voice in the greater society is the greater evil. Politics is a dirty business, but there are many issues that affect the frum community which call for political influence.

What would be, if we didn’t have this influence to defend ourselves from our adversaries and to advocate for our concerns?

Joseph: And yet there are countless stories of when our Rabbonim utilized bribery to influence govt. officials in the past, whether in Europe of the Middle East. Were they incorrect to do so?

This political system isn’t perfect, but it is better than any of the other goyishe models out there, IMO.

Joseph: One of the richest guys in the world is far-left radical, George Soros. Do you think it would be better to have him in a political position over us, rather than someone who accepted campaign contributions from different groups, and which were disclosed to the public?

And what about Pres. Obama, who is beholden to the unions, who helped to get him elected. The outcome of the bankruptcy judgments of the car companies is an example of the “political payback” awarded to the unions. And yet the unions’ influence was achieved legally under campaign finance reform, which limits campaign contributions.

If Rudy Giuliani was in the running, would you choose Mike or Rudy?!

Yeah. Jax would do a good job as mayor.

Jax 2017!

(2017, so its after he becomes old enough to vote.)

You’ll win all the yw-cr posters votes for sure.