Ferrer's Futile Fight

The first actual debate between Fernando Ferrer and Michael Bloomberg took place early Sunday morning. Admittedly, I was not awake to watch the debate, but the coverage provided by The Politicker and Gotham Gazette provide what's needed to understand this debate. The debate had what's become the standard fare for this campaign, the same one-liners and an attempt to look less conservative than the other guy (Bloomberg attacking Ferrer for having NRA-approved Howard Dean as an ally to which Ferrer counterattacked with Bloomberg's financial support for many Republicans, a rare point scored by Ferrer). A disappointing debate that took place at a disappointing time.

Why bother having a debate if it's going to take place at 9 A.M. Sunday morning if only people really following the race will tune in? The people's awareness of the government and the mayoral race are sacrificed for the sake of making a few million more during a sensible hour. Why can't there be a greater effort to have such debates take place when people will watch? Yet everyone wonders why turnouts at elections are pathetically low, especially in municipal elections.

Ferrer is rapidly running out of time if he hopes to stage a comeback of historic proportions. Polls by Pace University, PDF (in cooperation with the New York Observer, WCBS 2 News, and WNYC Radio) and theNew York Times show the incumbent mayor with a huge lead as Election Day nears.

An except from the Pace University poll (Page 5):

How badly is Bloomberg beating Ferrer? If only Latinos voted, Bloomberg would win
53% to 35%. He’s leading among Blacks, 44% to 29%. He’s leading in The Bronx, 52%
to 36%. He’s leading among The Working Poor (50% to 37%). Ferrer may well be
correct when he says there are two New Yorks, but they both want to vote for
Bloomberg.

Also mentioned in the poll were results stemming from questions and situations that were hyped earlier in the campaign season (Page 4):

In terms of voters’ perceptions of key campaign events and candidate attributes, this
study has some surprises. As mentioned already, Ferrer’s bid to become the city’s first
Latino mayor did not excite anyone; three fourths (75%) of all voters, including two
thirds (66%) of Latino voters, think this particular dynamic is irrelevant. Bloomberg’s
wealth and party affiliation also proved to be toothless hounds; 72% consider his wealth
irrelevant while 63% think his party affiliation doesn’t matter. While slightly more
voters consider Bloomberg’s financial support to GOP candidates to be problematic, a
majority (51%) thinks it doesn’t matter, and 14% consider it to be a reason to vote for
him. If Bloomberg has any weakness at this point, perhaps it’s his decision to raise
property taxes despite his 2001 campaign pledge to the contrary, which 42% consider
either a strong (26%) or somewhat strong (16%) reason to vote against him.

There is also this juicy tidbit provided by the New York Times poll:

Yet in this strongly Democratic city - 53 percent of voters identified themselves as Democrats - Mr. Ferrer draws support from only 37 percent of likely voters from his party, while 49 percent support Mr. Bloomberg.
These Bloomberg Democrats appear to continue a trend against deep partisanship in city elections. A third of Democratic voters supported Rudolph W. Giuliani in his 1993 mayoral race, 45 percent were with him in 1997, and 34 percent were with Mr. Bloomberg in 2001, according to surveys of voters leaving polling places.

Even Jen Bluestein, a Ferrer spokeswoman, gave a weak offering when explaining Bloomberg's popularity among Democrats:

"Mike Bloomberg may be doing better among some Democrats, but Freddy Ferrer has the support of Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton and on down," Ms. Bluestein said.
From New York Times article on poll.

That is wonderful. Though even if the Clintons were residents of the city, they're still only two voters and although they remain very popular with Democrats, especially in New York, it doesn't necessarily mean that the voters will vote for whomever gained the endorsements of the Clintons.

FernanD'OH Ferrer can not run a winning campaign.
New nickname courtesy of my good friend, Steve.

It is now obvious that Bloomberg's decision to skip the October 6th debate at the Apollo Theater had not harmed him at all.

While certainly anything is possible, it is now close enough to the election to say with near certainty that Bloomberg will win a second term and extend Republican control of the mayoralty to 16 years once the second Bloomberg term is over.

Finally, the Pace University poll also conducted a favorability survey of well known public figures and it came to this conclusion (Page 4):

Voters are favorably inclined towards all public figures who aren’t named Al Sharpton.

Other than wondering how it is possible that Governor George Pataki finished with a 52% favorable opinion, it is funny how Sharpton has been seen as a kingmaker in local politics considering this poll shows he commands only 38% favorables and 54% unfavorables. Perhaps he should stick to running for President. At least then, he was a less divisive figure.

The wonders of New York City politics never cease to amaze.