Skip to main content

The Daily News is reporting that a deal is close between the Working Families Party and Governor Andrew Cuomo to provide him with the parties endorsement.

This is the most frustrating thing about organized labor - and more importantly, the leadership of organized labor when it comes to todays political arena.  When they have an opportunity to exert any influence, they generally back down.

The Albany press is painting this as an "all labor leaders" decision, however, the problem is, it is only a select few unions that seem to be in agreement on this and pushing the WFP activists towards Cuomo - mainly the CWA and SEIU 1199.

If labor can no longer form working coalitions to face down politicians like Cuomo, organized labor is dead.  Period.  It has no way to ever gain back any of its power and to be able to help the working class.  Even if the activists win the vote and decline to endorse Cuomo, CWA, SEIU 1199 and other unions have threatened to pull their funding from the party.

Either way, Cuomo apparently wins, and the working class of New York State loses.  Hooray assholes.

Update:

http://www.nystateofpolitics.com/...

It's apparently "more official" - the WFP essentially bows to Cuomo for peanuts:

1.  He'll support local control for minwage increases.

2.  He'll work to turn the state Senate over to Democratic control.

Excuse me, but shouldn't a real fucking Democrat be doing that ANYWAY?  How the fuck is this a "concession?"

Idiots.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (10+ / 0-)

    "There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy." - Me

    by Darth Stateworker on Fri May 30, 2014 at 06:30:04 PM PDT

  •  My concern about this (3+ / 0-)

    If they enter a candidate, and the candidate is destroyed, then they might hurt their own movement by giving validation to Cuomo's agenda in the form of a landslide.

    Streichholzschächtelchen

    by otto on Fri May 30, 2014 at 06:35:01 PM PDT

  •  WFP (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mannie, Vatexia

    They have been around for some time in New York, getting several hundred thousand votes for at least one fusion candidate.

    Someone has raised an issue, namely if they nominate Cuomo, (I understand why this is said to be a bad idea) and get enough votes, they replace the Republicans as the second party in New York, e.g., when you go to vote there would be D and WFP poll watchers, not R poll watchers.

    Your mileages will all vary.

    Restore the Fourth! Save America!

    by phillies on Fri May 30, 2014 at 07:01:39 PM PDT

    •  It's not so much about the poll watchers. (5+ / 0-)

      The major parties control the state level and county boards of elections.  Poll watching is just part of that.

      It's also quite a coup to relegate the GOP to minor party status and would likely put some egg on their face nationally.

      However, for me, that's secondary.  Sending a message to Cuomo is the primary concern.  New York can't take any more of this socially liberal, fiscally conservative nonsense.

      "There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy." - Me

      by Darth Stateworker on Fri May 30, 2014 at 07:05:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  PS: (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mannie, jbsoul

      If I read what you wrote correctly, you're assuming the WFP needs to nominate Cuomo to have a chance to relegate the GOP to minor party status.

      It's the other way around.  It's a liberal challenger to Cuomo that polling indicates the WFP might have a chance to garner enough votes to knock the GOP down a notch to minor party status.  The WFP nominating Cuomo gives them no chance for that to happen.

      Apologies if I misunderstood.

      "There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy." - Me

      by Darth Stateworker on Fri May 30, 2014 at 07:08:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  PS (0+ / 0-)

        Darth,

        While I was once a New Yorker, that was almost 50 years ago. The last discussion I read on this, not here, seemed to say that running a liberal opponent to Cuomo as opposed to running Cuomo was the less favorable strategy.

        However, I am not there, and I am delighted to take your work for the polling estimate.  Certainly, I would view news that the Republicans had been relegated to third party status as very positive, whichever way it is accomplished.

        In my state (MA) the Republicans are down to about 11% of the registered voters, independents (we use a different word) are apparently over 52 %, leaving about 36% for Democrats and under 1% for all the rest. (Note that independents can register D or R at the polling place and vote in the primary).

        Many thanks for the interesting news.

        Restore the Fourth! Save America!

        by phillies on Fri May 30, 2014 at 09:35:29 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It's actually been discussed here a few times. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Cuseology

          Kos has even done a few posts on it.  However, unless you were looking, you may have missed them, so let me try to explain further:

          New York has a "fusion voting" system most other states don't have.  Candidates can run on multiple lines.  I think you understand that part already to some degree.

          The next part is polling.  Recent polling by Siena indicated that if the WFP was to run an unnamed liberal on their line, they would essentially cut Cuomos +30 lead over his Republican opponent to +15 (numbers might be a bit off, doing it from memory).  Cuomo would still win, but the liberal challenger would offer him a severe rebuke from the left in the polls, weakening him politically, which would likely mean that would be the end of the Andrew Cuomo "Let me ram through my austerity agenda" fiscal policy show because he'd no longer be strong enough to scare the pants off of Democrats in the Assembly.  This is a guy that scuttlebutt has often stated he has threatened to support Republican challengers of Democratic legislators that cross him - so with his high polling numbers, he's been able to get essentially whatever he wants through the legislature.  Obviously, weakening him at the polls would be a good way to stop that.

          A potential secondary effect (that I think you already understand) of this is that the Republican candidate is currently polling so weakly that it is possible that the WFP candidate could potentially end up with more votes than the Republican candidate.  If this was to happen, it would have relegated the Republican party in New York to minor party status, moving them from row B on the ballot to row C, and removing them from all boards of elections - to be replaced with WFP board members.

          I can't see why anyone elsewhere would write a post stating that this would be a "bad" strategy unless they don't understand New Yorks funky fusion voting system, they're just flacking for Cuomo, or they're WFP leaders concerned that Cuomo will dismantle the party as payback.

          Essentially, from a liberal perspective, to put Cuomo in his place and either get him to start governing as a liberal, kill off any national ambition he had (we don't need that kind of Dem in the White House), or at a minimum stop his fiscally conservative agenda cold, a stern rebuke to Cuomo - that polling appears to reflect had a real possibility of happening at the polls - was a great course of action - though not without peril to the WFP itself.

          I hope that clarifies things.

          "There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy." - Me

          by Darth Stateworker on Fri May 30, 2014 at 09:56:39 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  The problem Darth (0+ / 0-)

            is that the WFP right now doesn't have any big name candidate.  If they nominated anyone they'd run the risk of not getting the minimum needed to remain on the ballot.  It sucks and unfortunately it comes down to lack of planning but time has just about run out.  

            I would love nothing more than to have a strong progressive challenger to knock Cuomo a peg down while at the same time knocking the GOP to minority status.  But running just anyone won't do that.  It would have to be someone who could get alot of votes and nobody has stepped up.  We're already in June and elections are only a few months away.  Just to put it in perspective, when we challenged Liarman in CT in 2006, we were already planning behind the scenes a year prior to the elections.  Ned Lamont came onto the scene in late winter/early spring.  By this time that year he had a solid grassroots effort behind him which had been compiling voter databases for months and was knocking on doors and calling people.  By August he had real momentum and beat Liarman in the primary.  The WFP candidate whoever that would be would have none of that in a state that is significantly larger than CT.  It sucks but logistically it's just not possible right now to mount a challenge to Cuomo that would be in any way effective.  he'd swat that challenge down like flies and then he would pull a Christie and fuck over anyone who dare challenge him after he got re-elected.  Worse the WFP would possibly get kicked off the ballot in future elections for failing to get the minimum number of votes to remain on.    

            This is your world These are your people You can live for yourself today Or help build tomorrow for everyone -8.75, -8.00

            by DisNoir36 on Sat May 31, 2014 at 07:11:21 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I don't disagree on that. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              rexxnyc

              I certainly had reservations about Teachout having enough name recognition to do what polling suggests could have been done - because she is a virtual unknown.  On the flip side, the palpable disappointment in Cuomo by NY progressives and the massive press coverage the coup by the WFP would have garnered might have been enough.  But it would be risky.

              I do believe that Ravitch, on the other hand, had a very good shot at doing it had they been able to convince her to accept the nod.

              They also might have been able to do it by cross-endorsing the Green candidate, because he has a bit of name recognition due to his performance last election.  Though that would have been a bit riskier than a Ravitch candidacy.

              At the end of the day, I'd still rather have the WFP stand up for its principles and be destroyed rather than fold like a cheap suit just to live on as a weaksauce 3rd party no one gives a shit about anyway.

              "There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy." - Me

              by Darth Stateworker on Sat May 31, 2014 at 07:20:01 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  I confess (0+ / 0-)

            that I had thought that running Cuomo was the approach more likely to move the Republicans to row C.  I am I gather misinformed.

            This is the point at which polling is the answer.

            Restore the Fourth! Save America!

            by phillies on Sat May 31, 2014 at 09:06:46 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  I AM FUCKING PISSED! (6+ / 0-)

    Sadly, I know how bad a union the CWA can be and a backroom deal with them is not surprising to say the least!

    Wonder why unions are on the decline?!

    THIS

    Instead of standing up for its members, the union stands for the top elected leadership!

    Don't get me wrong, I am all for unions, but damn, until union leadership stops pandering for just the top elected buffoons, and starts truly working for its members union leadership itself is its biggest enemy!

    DAMN DAMN DAMN!

    I FUCKING HATE CUOMO!

    Seeing Cuomo on the WFP line is just a real shit sandwich rubbed into every NY progressive's face!

    Never underestimate stupid. Stupid is how reTHUGlicans win!

    by Mannie on Fri May 30, 2014 at 07:24:25 PM PDT

    •  I hate to say this (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mannie, sturunner, LI Mike

      but the leaders of the CWA and SEIU just gave some legitimacy to the whole talking point the GOPers throw out there that union leaders are only in it for themselves.

      As a blanket statement concerning all union leaders, it's still  wrong, but the CWA and SEIU aren't helping to knock it down any by screwing over their own members.

      I happen to know a CWA member or two, and they knew nothing about this, and are apparently PISSED.  And rightly so.

      "There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy." - Me

      by Darth Stateworker on Fri May 30, 2014 at 07:32:28 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I used to be in CWA (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Rosalie907, Vatexia, Andrew Lazarus

        And know they backroom deal a LOT!

        Of course the rank and file knew nothing of this, after all, they are just a dues check to the elected asshats!

        If CWA leadership cared about its members, it would stand AGAINST governor 1%er! They would stand AGAINST a governor who has already attacked public UNIONS! They would stand AGAINST a Koch funded governor.

        But CWA leadership cares for power only!

        Never underestimate stupid. Stupid is how reTHUGlicans win!

        by Mannie on Fri May 30, 2014 at 07:35:47 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Not surprised (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Rosalie907

    Disappointed, but not surprised. They saw too much risk in pissing off Cuomo with little to gain by doing it.

  •  I'll reserve judgment until (0+ / 0-)

    we see what the final deal looks like. If this is only what labor has agreed to then it is not a done deal yet.

    "Do what you can with what you have where you are." - Teddy Roosevelt

    by Andrew C White on Fri May 30, 2014 at 08:34:37 PM PDT

    •  The press could be wrong (0+ / 0-)

      and the activists might say no, but the way it's being reported by multiple sources at this point, I think it's fairly safe to say this is a done deal.

      I hope they're wrong, but I doubt it.  The Capital Press Corps usually doesn't get something this big wrong.

      "There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy." - Me

      by Darth Stateworker on Fri May 30, 2014 at 08:42:31 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  At the same time (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Darth Stateworker

        the early reports are often inaccurate in the details. I have no doubt at all that wheeling and dealing is going on. That is a fully expected part of the process. But it is easy for Cuomo's people to say we have a deal and it looks like this or for labor leaders to say we have a deal and it looks like this while the third part of the equation keeps its mouth shut in public. I note that the original article reporting a deal had a labor leader saying that it was as if the activist wing didn't want to say yes and that no matter what was offered they wouldn't say yes. Hardly surprising. That's not to say they won't say yes in the long run but it is to say that labor saying we have a deal is premature.

        "Do what you can with what you have where you are." - Teddy Roosevelt

        by Andrew C White on Sat May 31, 2014 at 11:54:36 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  True. (0+ / 0-)

          I've seen some tweets today from WFP committee members that seem to suggest they're not so sure it's a done deal.

          Since they'll be the ones doing the voting, it looks like tonight could be interesting.

          "There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy." - Me

          by Darth Stateworker on Sat May 31, 2014 at 11:59:56 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  And what does WFP get out of it? (0+ / 0-)

    That's something that seems to be going unaddressed.  

    Ultimately, unions are political entities, and will seek paths to build their influence.  Endorsing a sitting governor whose re-election looks effectively locked-in is a fairly logical strategy in that regard.

    Its completely counter-productive, of course, especially in the long term.  Sadly, I don't see them changing course or unions realizing their real power.

    •  As I noted above (0+ / 0-)

      essentially, a bunch of stuff they should be getting without negotiating with a Democratic governor in the first place - like Cuomo working to get a Democratically controlled state Senate.

      In my opinion, they basically got bupkis, because nothing Cuomo seems to have offered in the items I've read so far are anything out of the ordinary for an actual Democrat to support - especially in a blue state.

      It's not like they were holding out for Cuomo to do something extraordinary and ultra-liberal like implement a state-wide single payer system - as our neighbors in VT are doing....

      ...and no union there had to force Shumlin to do that, either - and that IS a big lift even in a blue state.

      "There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy." - Me

      by Darth Stateworker on Fri May 30, 2014 at 09:32:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thats the smart move. No need to get stupid. (0+ / 0-)

    Like I said, one needs to pick ones battles with care. Without a candidate, youre just blowing a small whisper of hot air.

  •  Leave Cuomo alone (0+ / 0-)

    There is virtually no chance that he will be defeated as governor this year. The Republican Party in the state is virtually non-existent, and I can't imagine it putting up a strong challenge. The Working Families Party usually doesn't get more than 3% of the vote, so I don't see it being a game changer. Nor do I find it likely to say the least that the WFP will outpoll the GOP. It would be breaking national records for a third party if it did that.

    •  He doesn't seem entirely safe in this poll (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bananapouch1
      With a Working Families Party candidate in the race, Cuomo would receive 39 percent of the vote, down from 58 percent without a WFP candidate on the ballot. The unnamed WFP candidate and Astorino would each get 24 percent, according to the poll.
      http://auburnpub.com/...

      At the least, it would be hilarious if the WFP beat the Republican party.

      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is." - George W Bush

      by jfern on Sat May 31, 2014 at 03:01:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Polling shows it... (0+ / 0-)

        but polling and real life are two different outcomes. Polls also showed in 2009-2010 that if the Tea Party organized as a third party, it could push Republicans into third place.

        It would be an upset of historic proportions if a group like WFP were to push Republicans into third place. Still worth a try though I guess.

        •  Pushing Republicans to Row C (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          bananapouch1

          is really a secondary concern for those of us in New York - because the Republicans here are pretty weaksauce as it is.  Well, if you don't consider Cuomo to be one of them, anyway.

          That was more of a primary concern for guys like Markos thinking about the national implications of such a thing.  It would likely have been a great embarrassment to the GOP as a whole if in one of the bluest states in the nation they were relegated to being a minor party.  It would further reinforce the message that demographics - and the seeming resurgence of populist liberalism - is going to eventually drown their party out entirely.

          Sure, it's a great thing to have happen when looking through a national lens, but we're more worried about slowing down or stopping the Cuomo machine here in New York, because he's killing our municipalities and schools and tearing our state agencies apart by underfunding and understaffing them like a Republican would.

          "There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy." - Me

          by Darth Stateworker on Sat May 31, 2014 at 10:19:11 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Had nothing to do with (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bananapouch1

      "defeating" him, and everything to do with cutting his margin of victory to bring him down a few pegs and teach him a lesson and force him to move much farther leftward economically.

      And as jfern links to above, polling does indeed indicate that was a distinct possibility - because people are tired of Cuomos bullshit in this state.

      "There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy." - Me

      by Darth Stateworker on Sat May 31, 2014 at 07:00:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site