Poll: Gillibrand And Paterson Could Be In For Rough 2010
So how are the political fortunes right now for New York Governor David Paterson and the newly-appointed Senator Kirsten Gillibrand? The answer, according to a new Quinnipiac poll: Horrible, with both of them trailing potential challengers in the Democratic primary in 2010.
The poll says that Paterson would lose nomination against state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo by a whopping 55%-23%, while Gillibrand is behind Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy, a champion of gun control, by 34%-24%.
In a general election, Paterson is tied 43%-43% with Rudy Giuliani, while Cuomo has a 51%-37% lead over Rudy. Gillibrand is still ahead in a general election against Republican Congressman Peter King, with a 42%-26% lead. Unfortunately, there is no match-up of McCarthy against King for comparison.
It gets worse for Paterson. Only 35% approve of how he handled the process of picking a new Senator, with 52% disapproving. Those numbers are distributed pretty evenly across all party lines. Gillibrand herself gets a better approval number on her own specific appointment, with 45% approving of her selection and 33% disapproving, again distributed evenly across party identification.
The primary is a certainly a while from now, and a lot of things can change. But this is not a good starting point.
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
We could probably do without both of them!
February 17, 2009 9:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Gillibrand will be able to boost her numbers if she sells herself downstate to the liberals. McCarthy won't challenge her because Gillibrand is running away from the NRA like a frightened deer.
Paterson, on the other hand, is a goner. Good riddance! He's a disaster, not to mention a congenital liar. And he's not even a clever liar. His fingerprints are all over that bullshit hatchet job he did on Caroline Kennedy for no other reason than he felt she wasn't sufficiently deferential to him.
Guiliani always looks better in pre-election polling than he does up close. His campaign was such a turkey and made people remember the pre-9/11 Rudy who was a total asshole.
February 17, 2009 10:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
I wish my fellow liberals would chill out about Gillibrand's stance on guns.
Some of us liberals don't think that guns should be banned and that people do have a right to own firearms.
I sure don't want people packing heat on a subway but for sport, and for protection, people have an absolute right to own guns.
Nothing could be better for the Democratic party to have a prominent pro-gun Senator from a major state like New York to continue to make serious inroads into the rethuglikkkan's blue collar base.
February 18, 2009 3:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
'scuse please. There's a difference between gun ban and gun control. Most liberals want the latter. Gillibrand has a 100% rating from the NRA so me thinks she's in the "bring your gun to church just in case someone tried to take a dollar from the collection plate" crowd.
February 18, 2009 8:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Cuomo-Paterson numbers are truly stunning. I expected Paterson to have trouble, but for an incumbent to only get 23% in a primary??? As for Gillibrand, I'm glad she is becoming more liberal but she is doing so in a caricatural way with too obviously cynical flip-flops. The changes she went through on gun control this week alone are laughable.
February 17, 2009 10:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
The hilarious part is that Paterson refused to name Cuomo to the Senate because he didn't want to give Andy a platform.
Instead, Paterson handed Cuomo the Governor's chair.
The harder you try to stop the thing you fear, the more you make the fearful thing come true.
February 17, 2009 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
I live in New York and I've been unhappy with Paterson. It makes me wish Spitzer hadn't resigned. What he did was dumb, but I'm not sure he should have resigned.
Paterson blew the Senate pick. Unlike FreeRider, it's not clear to me what happened. I'm surprised there hasn't been any reporting that has gotten to the bottom of it. Further, I don't know where the charge that he is a congenital liar comes from. I think the problem more is that he is lacks an assertive vision and strong leadership skills at a time (fiscal crisis) when it is sorely needed.
On the state budget, Paterson has shown a lack of guts in being afraid to call for tax increases on the wealthy. He's said he's afraid wealthy New Yorkers will move to New Jersey if their income taxes are increased. The lie is put to that notion by a glance at the huge number of luxury apartment buildings that have gone up in Manhattan over the last fifteen years. Manhattan is an extremely desirable place for them to live. They have been willing to pay exorbitant amounts to live there. I doubt many will flee their swank digs to live in less glamorous locals in New Jersey.
In this time of crisis, it seems like Paterson's idea of bold leadership is to propose a tax on soda pop. Maybe not a bad idea, but not quite the caliber of stuff we need to get us through this. And now he's even backing off on it as if it were the new third rail of politics.
Cuomo would be an excellent replacement. I hope he runs.
As far as Gillibrand, I'm no fan, but I wouldn't be surprised to see her win a lot of folks over in the run up to the next election. She has a reputation as a skilled politician.
February 17, 2009 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Read the story in the NYT which detailed how the smears about Kennedy got into the bloodstream.
Paterson called in his fixer; they came up with a story about how Kennedy had a nanny problem and a tax problem. (Both were extremely minor and had been settled decades earlier). Then the fixer had Paterson's staff tell these lies to the press to make Kennedy look bad. There was no reason to do this since she had already withdrawn.
Paterson went on TV and said he had NO idea who on his staff leaked that confidential information to the media. Another lie.
He's been caught in two huge whoppers surrounding the Kennedy affair and demonstrated his penchant for pettiness and backstabbing.
He has no political skills. How else can you explain a governor who has the opportunity to shine in picking Clinton's replacment but ends up alienting the Kennedys, Cuomos and Clintons in one fell swoop? And assuring that he'll get beaten in the primary. LOSER!
February 17, 2009 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
As an upstate NYer, I really dislike Paterson, imo, he has done more to hurt the democratic party here than any republican could possibly have, first with the naming of Gillibrand to Clinton's seat (leaving her House seat vulnerable in a highly republican district)and the snub and confusion surrounding the nomination of Caroline Kennedy (we would've been better off, not losing a democratic seat). His hystrionics regarding his portrayal on SNL is ridiculous too, tell me why does he think he is entitled to better treatment by them just because he's blind? He shouldn't be in politics if he is so sensitive , bet there are many NYers wishing he wasn't and that is the shame of it all. Perhaps I would not have voted for Spitzer, had I known more about Paterson, but too late for that.
To say he wants to tax soda (only regular not diet -lol let's allow the poisonous sweetners to have a free ride), movies, and music and PORN....wtf?? And he won't tax the rich....this guy is a piece of unfinished work..... his blindness is beyond the physical. I've been thinking of moving from NY, so has most of my family and it looks like that may happen sooner rather than later.
February 17, 2009 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is the price of looting the senate to fill his cabinet. Once safe seats are in play, fringe goopers have control of purple state AZ. I hope this works out, but I fear the loss of some presumed safe seats in the house and senate.
February 17, 2009 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
The only Congressional seat we might lose is Gillibrand's and that always tilted republican. Paterson is to blame for that, not Obama. There were a dozen people Paterson could have appointed.
There's no way repugs win senate seats in NY & IL in 2010.
February 17, 2009 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink