The Morning After Winners (Thompson) and Losers (Bloomberg, UFT and Anthony Weiner), Updated

Updated Thurs. Nov. 5, 10pm

From the NYTimes today:

Said one top Bloomberg campaign adviser, who spoke on condition of anonymity to protect internal discussions: "If a poll had come out showing that the race was within five points, Barack Obama would have swung into town, the United Federation of Teachers would break for Thompson and Mike Bloomberg would not be mayor today."


Addition to loser list: Obama- See below under Losers

The big winner, and maybe the only winner in the mayoral election, was Bill Thompson. 51% to 46%. Add the other anti-Bloomberg candidates and it's a statistical tie: 51-49%.

All along I felt he was running for the 2013 race. Everyone declared him a loser from the very beginning. The obvious issues: Bloomberg was pretty popular and his money. But Thompson also ran an inept campaign, refusing to really go after Bloomberg on his education record and other issues. When Giulianni pulled the race card while campaigning with Bloomberg standing at his side, Thompson showed no fight back. A lot of the enthusiasm for Thompson that existed was due to anti-Bloomberg feeling.

Ed Notes was predicting from the get-go that Thompson didn't want to go overboard, preferring to husband his resources for the next time. And I felt that the lack of the UFT endorsement was a sort of quid quo pro, where he pretty much figured he would get it in 2013 in his face-off with Anthony Weiner, who the UFT despises. Thompson is now the most viable candidate in 2013 and has 4 years to build a war chest.

The losers:
The big loser is Michael Bloomberg. Listen to news reports and he's almost a laughing stock. Jeff Greenberg on Imus calculated what he spent per vote (I think it was thousands) and suggested Bloomberg should have just gone around in a Brinks truck and hand out a thousand dollars to everyone who promised to vote for him and he could have saved $50 million. (Thanks to Leonie, I realize he meant applying the thousand dollars a vote to the margin of victory. He could have spnet 50,000,000 by giving a thousand doilars each to 50,000 people who promised to vote for him. My math still may stink, so check it.)

By the way, if Bloomberg had donated the 100 million he spent for class size reduction in the 100 worst schools in the city he would have done a lot more to improve education for a great number of kids than anything else he's done in his education deforms. Remember what happened in Ed Koch's third term. May the same fate befall Bloomberg.

The other big loser is the UFT, which sat on the sidelines (see comments below). Their performance should cause as much embarrassment as Bloomberg faces. The numbers come out to their worst nightmare. At the debates over the Thompson endorsement at the October Delegate Assembly, the UFT leadership made the case that Thompson was a sure loser and at most could move the needle only 3 points. Let me do the math: subtract 3 from Bloomberg and I get 48%. Add 3% to Thompson and I get -- let me see now, it comes to 49% for Thompson. Thus, every time another idiot policy comes out of Tweed or out of the mouth of Bloomberg, every single teacher in the system should think about these numbers.

When the UFT folded on term limits in rejecting an ICE proposal at the October 2008 Delegate Assembly, Paul Egan also made a lame case, as I reported on my blog: In opposing the ICE amendment to the term limits resolution, UFT District 11 (Bronx) rep Paul Egan made the astounding argument that if each individual in the room went home and called their city council rep that would have a greater impact than if the UFT as an organization took a stand and pressured the reps to deny Bloomberg another term of office."

Will the election results affect the upcoming internal UFT elections? ICE/TJC will make sure to remind the members how Unity Caucus and Mike Mulgrew put Bloomberg in office.

(See the Ed Notes report from Philip Nobile on the Oct. DA:
Endorse Thomson Resolution Trashed at DA Fearful UFT Leaders Surrender to Bloombergs’s Reich)

Another big loser was mayoral wannabee Anthony Weiner, who folded like a cheap suit when faced with a few measly attacks from the Bloomberg machine. Counting on Thompson being the sacrificial lamb and would get swamped to the extent he would not be a viable candidate for mayor in the future (call it the Ruth Messinger syndrome), Weiner figured to be a shoo-in in 2013. In fact he could have beaten Bloomberg this time and maybe even handily. Look for a mea culpa, but his jelly fish spinelessness will not easily be forgiven.

Obama is also a loser here. He shunned Thompson while campaigning 5 times for Corzine. How embarrassing is that? What kind of message does it send to Democrats? Obama favors the millionaires like Bloomberg and Corzine over working politicians who came up through the ranks like Thompson.

ICE members comment on the election

Michael Fiorillo
The election results demonstrate the moral and political bankruptcy of the Unity Caucus, and particularly Randi Weingarten.

She was in many ways the chief enabler of Bloomberg's weak victory. Had she fought the overriding of term limits, had she exposed the fraud of Bloomberg's and Klein's educational regime, had she endorsed Thompson (admittedly, far from a perfect candidate), the entire political climate in the city might be perched on the edge of movement and change, and the axe might be a little further from teacher's necks. Instead, she took the craven route of sucking up to power.

Well, movement and change is going to happen regardless. Bloomberg's popularity and political support has been shown to be a Potemkin Village. If there is any validity to the Third Term Curse, then he is likely to soon become the most hated man in NYC.

It couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

Loretta Prisco

Certainly, Thompson was not all we wanted, but at least we would have a had a shot of having a more compassionate school system, kinder to kids and teachers. The media declared Thompson a loser a long time ago which seriously effected his ability to attract money and volunteers. If only our union...


Out of Oakland
The Perimeter Primate has left a new comment on your post "Comments on UFT and Bloomberg Embarrassing Win":

Yesterday I heard on the news that Michael Bloomberg had spent about $100 million on his campaign.

With a net worth of $16 billion (the most recent Forbes figure, making him world billionaire #17), the amount of money Bloomberg spent on his campaign was the equivalent of $312.50 to someone with a net worth of $50,000. In other words, it was a chunk, but not all that much -- relatively speaking of course.

I'm so sorry that the campaign finance laws of this country are permitting the wealth of this person to rule NYC. I'll keep my fingers crossed that more and more New Yorkers give him absolute hell for the next four years!

UPDATE: Scott Stringer Video at PS 123 After Walk-Through and Answers Questions from GEMers

UPDATE VIDEOS: PS 123, Harlem, July 10, 2009
(I'm reposting this with some new material)

When the DOE ruled in HSA's favor in its invasion of PS 123 on July 9, two days after we rallied there after teachers physically prevented HSA movers from removing their stuff, we held a rally up there on the morning of July 10. Tony Avella and Scott Stringer came by.

In this new video (also viewable in the Ed Notes sidepanel) from July 10 PS 123 July 10 2009: HSA Press Release Discussed GEMers and others review the Harlem Success Press Release attacking Stringer and ACORN as UFT lackies. The release calls the failing schools "UFT schools" when in reality they are Joel Klein/Mike Bloomberg schools and have been for 7 years. The press release attacks the UFT for trying to preserve a "luxurious" teachers lounge.

Remember, Stringer defeated Eve Moskowitz for Manhattan Borough president with strong UFT support, which the press release talks about.


In this video posted yesterday (Scott Stringer at PS 123 After Walk-Through and Answers Questions) Scott Stringer emerges from PS 123 after his walk through om July 10, 2009. After a speech, members of GEM question him about the influx of charters. He tries to duck and keep it to the local situation. Some of the locals are a bit nervous at the direction this is going.

Here is JW's excellent report at the GEM blog:

GEM people asked all the right questions and made all the right points.

Stringer: "We're on the case."

Stringer: "We're going to work."

But, they haven't been on the case, and they're only going to get on it if it becomes politically expedient.

You could tell there's a long way to go after Norm Scott asked:

"If Bloomberg and Klein run the schools for 7 years, they're in charge of every school, how do they manage to push the idea of a charter school, which basically absolves them of the responsibility.

In other words, isn't that an admission of their failure if they say that public schools are failing and they need charter schools. Isn't there a contradiction in that very concept?

Stringer dodged it, claiming his purpose that morning was to see what's going on at 123 and try to figure out a solution.

Stringer: "Today's not about THAT fight."

Of course it isn't — to him. Because he and his colleagues on the City Council have watched privatization for seven years, first with the Gates money and now with the charters. The flood of no-bid contracts, non-educator corporate ideology, and inflated PR teams are not new, and it's obvious these people have bought into the process. In fact, it's in their interest to let their constituents, not to mention the entire nation, believe that the NYC school system is a model of "accountability" and "transparency," with scores going "up" and graduation rates "on the rise."

The fight that Stringer sidelined at Scott's question is the fight, no two ways about it. And it's going to have to get much louder before elected officials like Stringer get down with making quality facilities equal for all public school kids.

— JW

All videos of the PS 123 rallies on July 7 and July 10
PS 123 July 10 2009: HSA Press Release

Scott Stringer at PS 123 After Walk-Through and Answers Questions

Scott Stringer, Tony Avella at PS 123

PS 123 July 10 2009 (Angel Gonzalez and George Scmidt)

PS 123 Rally

PS 123 Harlem Parents Make Their Case Against Harlem Success

Before Talking to a Politician...

...Show You Can Organize a Crowd

I posted an article about the Los Angeles teacher union on Norms Notes but never got to comment on it here. Remi left a comment on "The Day My Union Died":

Danzinger is right to criticize the current UTLA Leadership for its failure to make an effective attack on the anti-public education policies that dominate our state. But he is wrong about the effectiveness of a one-day strike. Even if the proposed one-day strike had been legal it would not have "convinced" Cortines and the Board that UTLA opposes their lay-offs and negative budget; Ray already knew that. All a one-day strike would have done was cost every participating teacher 1/2 of one percent of their salary. The real problem is not in Los Angeles, it is with the ultimate school board in Sacramento. The current UTLA Leadership should have been pushing, for the past two years as economic strom clouds gathered, for a statewide strike led by the CTA and CFT, UTLA's two statewide affiliates. Current state policies are destroying not only the LAUSD, but K-12 education, and California's once great system of a low cost university education for all those who want one. California needs to modify Prop. 13, and re-establish a tax policy that will make it posssible for the state to pay for the public services our citizens demand.

Remi is responding to a post critical of the ULTA for backing down on the one day strike after the injunction. This commenter seems to be looking through the narrow lens of political action as lobbying and misses the importance of the impact of a militant union willing to take a 1/2 of one percent hit. I have these discussions all the time with people who put their eggs into addressing politicians with pleading and lobbying and private meetings. Or letters and petitions. As the Marine Park rally showed, first demonstrate the ability to bring people out in force on a consistent basis and then talk to the politicians. All too often people get bogged down in lobbying and never get to the organizing necessary to back it up.

Spitzer Does as Spitzer Says

I didn't vote for Spitzer.
Everyone said we had to in order to save public education.
The UFT led the cheers.
Spitzer even came to a Delegate Assembly.
I didn't trust him for the way he treated people.
He could create sympathy for a slime bag like Joe Bruno.
Another rich guy buying his way to power.
Believe me, this prostitution thing is the least bad thing he did.
There aren't enough bad things that can happen to him.
There are few politicians, if any, I trust.
I don't remember who I voted for.
Certainly not a Republican.
Did I waste my vote?
I think not.