Search
EXCLUSIVE: DFNYC to endorse Gifford Miller... ....NOT!
As you may have heard, New Democractic Majority made their candidate endorsements earlier this week. They gave the nod for mayor to Rep. Anthony Weiner.
It has has been mentioned in other posts here and elsewhere that Gifford Miller tends to encourage his supporters (and often his employees) to join local clubs in an effort to stack them in his favor. This is hardly a new tactic, but usually it produces better results.
Because it appears that Giff just lost another one.
Though they have yet to offically release the numbers yet, it seems that the ballots cast by Democracy for New York City members show a solid majority for Anthony Weiner and another club packing failure for Gifford Miller. Weiner won the NDM ballot over Miller by more than two to one and I hear that the DFNYC numbers are looking much the same.
It seems that NYC progressives just don't like Giff no matter how much he tries reach out. Some rather informal polling also reveals that many DFNYC members were kind of insulted that Gifford would assume that he would be their choice. That kind of rejection has gotta hurt.
It also appears that DFNYC is also likely, though not certain, (candidates have to poll at least 55%) to endorse Scott Stringer for Manhattan borough pres.
UPDATE: It looks like the Politicker has noticed.
That's a well-connected little bird
Interesting, indeed.
FWIW, my take on Gifford is that he is genuinely a progressive at heart, and he has made some genuine gains and proven himself as an effective Council Speaker, but he suffers from an inability to connect, to convince people that he is the person New York needs now, that what he does comes from the heart and the gut rather than from political calculation.
I honestly think it's in there somewhere, but he hasn't been able to be himself. I was talking to a candidate in a congressional race about his own message, which he delivered with heartfelt intensity - real passion and truth coming from him. I complimented him on his ability to project his message and he said "it's easy because it's true - I'm just being myself." We haven't gotten that with Gifford.
Of all the mayoral candidates, Weiner has done the best at articulating a genuine concern for the state of the city and a thoughtful, grounded message about what's wrong and what needs to happen. That's why progressives have been so attracted to his candidacy.
Giffy
i too think that gifford believes that he's a progressive at heart. it's just that nobody else believes it. i think he really thinks that he performed wonderfully in the williamsburg/greenpoint rezoning mess and that he delivered a plan that the community should embrace. once again, it's just that very, very few in the community feel that way about it.
i know giff wanted both the NDM and DFNYC endorsements pretty bad. but, he lost the NDM ballot more than 2-1 for weiner and, from what i've been told, the DFNYC numbers look pretty similar. ouch.
and besides, do progressives really need to take that much developer money? 'cuz giff is effin' loaded with it.
Yeah, well
Development is a whole other ball o'wax. Not just Williamsburg, but Atlantic Yards too. He's clearly not the hero he wants to think he is.
I dunno. I'm just amazed at how so few political leaders take seriously the deep anxiety people have over development and real estate issues in this town. I know I shouldn't be (money talks, of course). But c'mon, someone wants to call himself a progressive leader and he doesn't get this stuff?
Miller
I have met Gifford Miller three times now. I have to say that I very much like him. I agree he is too pro-development, but honestly I am not sure any of them would satisfy me on the development issue. Don't get me wrong. I like Wiener, too. Fields I haven't met yet, but mostly hear good things about. Even Ferrer I am starting to like. But I lean towards Miller, at times even strongly. I feel disappointed that he hasn't connected better with progressives. I don't know how much is a flaw in him and how much is a flaw in us.
I may have a history of liking excellent people who just aren't able to connect. Way back when I loved Senator Paul Simon and supported him for Pres (to dream the impossible dream!). I always loved Al Gore even before his fiery side came out with his collaborations with MoveOn.org. I like Paul Wooten MUCH better than Mark Peters for Brooklyn DA, though Peters seems a little better able to connect with progressives. Bottom line is all of these folks would be excellent in every way except they lack just the right personality, so progressive tend to be turned off by them.
I don't want to suggest that progressives only go for flashy, slick candidates (nor do I want to suggest that Wiener is flashy or slick!). But sometimes it does seem like progressives, like the nation as a whole, miss out on the best candidate because he is a little too stiff or robotic or whatever. Mark Peters strikes me as slick and weasely. Maybe he'd still make a good progressive DA. But I don't trust him. Paul Wooten is by far the better choice in my book, but I doubt he will get anywhere because he is too technical, not dynamic enough.
I think Miller suffers from the same problem. He isn't dynamic enough. He was VERY robotic the first time I heard him speak. He has gotten better, but not enough to make the right impression. Pity.
Well, I don't want to sound down on the other mayoral candidates. They are good too. I haven't even fully decided that Miller is my choice. But I feel he is being dismissed too soon and for the wrong reasons.
I don't want to go too far
dissing Gifford Miller. I genuinely do respect him and I think that he does have the potential to do more good things.
What I'm trying to get at is not about being slick - when I talk about connecting to people, I mean something more about how people relate to authenticity. The eternal paradox of good leadership is that you have to both lead and follow, and the relationship between those two dynamics has to be coherent and genuine. It's easiest to do that when people understand where you're coming from, when people believe that, as a leader, you're leading from your principles, and you can articulate and defend those principles - and you're listening to people at the same time. I think most politicians don't quite get this right - it's why I tend to believe that while there are a lot of people who would be competent in government, there are very few who convince me that they are genuinely good, visionary leaders. And frankly, NYC needs a good, visionary leader, not just a good officeholder.
My qualms about his development policies aside, I still feel like Gifford Miller does have it in him to be a real leader. But it's just not coming out yet. Maybe he just needs more time, or less advice (a lot of politicians get too much advice and it holds them back in certain ways). I really do intend to keep my eye on him. But at this moment, I'm not convinced he's showing the leadership necessary to beat Bloomberg and set the city on the right track. That's not to discount his skills as Council Speaker. But parliamentary skills and legislative accomplishments are not the whole picture. Where there is no vision, the people perish...
Politics and advice
Interestingly, at least two of the candidates that I loved most (Paul Simon and Al Gore) showed themselves to be MUCH better speakers and better able to connect with people AFTER they were no longer viable candidates (after the one stopped campaigning and the latter won...er, the Supreme Court says lost...the election). I head Simon twice. The first time he was still in the running. What he said was excellent, but he was Orville Reddenbaccher in delivery--nerdy and robotic. The second time, he was still on the ballot but knew he wasn't going to win. So he actually said not to vote for him but for one of the two frontrunners. He then proceeded to give one of the most rivetting speeches I have ever heard, superceded only by the two post-2000 fiasco Gore speeches I have heard. Then Gore was presented by the media as boring and stiff. The only 2 times I heard him live was post-election when he spoke to MoveOn crowds. He blew the crowd away and had us eating out of his hand. One time I went with an avowed Green and SHE was blown away. She never said she wished she'd voted Gore in 2000, but she came damned close. So handling isn't always a good thing. One thing I notice about Miller more than most candidates is he has an entorage. His entorage turns me off. Hell, I notice an entorage with most politicians except Chris Owens, who always just shows up himself or maybe with his campaign manager. But Miller's entorage has turned me off. Are they his handlers, perhaps???
One thing I want to point out about Miller is that he is the ONLY candidate how has routinely gone up against Bloomberg. Not in an election, mind you, but in city politics. He is very proud, and forceful in mentioning, that he has led the City Council to override Bloomberg's veto 28 (27?) times. That shows an ability to stand up to Bloomberg that others have not yet shown...though the context may not be relavent.
Lest I come off too much a Miller partisan, let me reemphasize that all of the Dem mayoral candidates look good to me (see my earlier diary). I LEAN towards Miller and don't want him short changed. But Wiener is excellent, at least as a legislator (and he has impressed one of my main political gurus in Brooklyn). Fields I still want to hear personally. I don't know enough about her and want to hear more. But mostly I hear good things about her. With Ferrer I have trouble forgiving him and Green for their previous childish fiasco (I blame BOTH of them), but I have been warming to him especially after hearing him speak. He is the most condescending of them, but also most, how to put it...avuncular? Reassuring? At least in the venue I heard him in.
Anyway, thanks for your response. Clearly you are right that Miller isn't connecting. I think he should be, the same way I felt Simon and Gore should have been better supported by progressives and the way I hope Wooten will be supported. But there is no question that Miller has so far not succeeded in doing so...
unless, of course, this whole diary is wrong and he does manage to get the DFNYC endorsement.
That's what I love so much
about Chris Owens. Well, one of the things. He doesn't need handlers. He is totally genuine. And damn, he's smart.
DFNYC Ballots Have Not Been Counted
This is Heather Woodfield, Director of Democracy for NYC. I am writing to dispel the rumors about the DFNYC endorsements. No sealed ballot cast for the DFNYC endorsement for Mayor or Manhattan Borough President has been opened or counted. In addition, I can't imagine how anyone could take a remotely accurate poll of our voting membership. Some of our members voted at the forums, but they also voted in-person at a dozen different Meetups which took place at locations in all five boroughs and via-mail.
The official announcement of the DFNYC endorsement vote results will be made on Monday via the DFNYC email newsletter. If you want to hear the results first, I suggest send a blank email to updates-subscribe@dfnyc.org to sign up for our weekly newsletter. The results will be posted later in the day at www.DemocracyforNYC.org where you can also find our endorsement rules.
Rumors, rumors, rumors
Not to give any credence to rumors (see Heather's post above), but I wanted to respond to something David . . . er, "mole333" mentioned about Gifford.
I met Gifford at the last DFNYC meetup: He showed up unannounced to the DFNYC meetup in Williamsburg. Hello! Half the meetup was vehemently opposed to re-zoning and the compromise, and one of the members took him to task. And, IMHO, Gifford responded forcefully and eloquently. I think it took a lot of guts/moxy/something to walk into a Williamsburg meeting, to talk with people who were tremendously against what you did, and to respond to them. For that, Gifford won my respect, and--I don't mind saying--my vote, too.
I don't know if Giff is "too development." It's a city. It's growing. I think the question is about whether we elect people who can control growth so that it's responsible and fair. I think Giff brokered a reasonable (but not perfect) compromise.
My 2 cents.
And, yes, Paul Wooten should be the next Brooklyn DA. No question about that one.
Giff and Paul
Now I know which Ben BrooklynBen is! Good to see you here.
Interesting! I have never seen Miller in a hostile environment. All the times I saw him it was either friendly (a club that I think subsequently endorsed him and they knew they would) or neutral (DFNYC and an education forum). He did well in each. But I have to say I, too, am impressed by someone who can stand up to tough questions. You reenforce my liking for Miller, though if Wiener HAS BEEN endorsed by DFNYC (and thank you Heather for emphasizing that predictions cannot be made at this point) that will carry some weight with me as well.
The time I met Paul Wooten was in a venue with some real tough lawyers. They grilled him like crazy! I have not seen Peters or Hynes (the other candidates I have met) subjected to anything like the grilling Paul was subjected to. But Wooten stood up to it...politely and carefully. He commented AFTERWARDS about how tough people were, but his answers were good and thoughtful. THAT, above anything else, is what impressed me about him. I also know that Norm Siegel likes Wooten and will be, at least in some venues, introducing him to folks. That also carries weight with me.
My fear is that Paul doesn't have the presence and savvy to beat an incumbant, a slick, name dropping "progressive" candidate, AND a machine endorsed candidate. I really hope that groups like NDM and DFA take notice of him and realize his worth. He needs the boost. But he doesn't put himself forward the way the other candidates do. He lays out his record, says what he wants to do as DA and leaves it at that. Hell, he doesn't have a website yet (though someone else I know is planning on putting one together for him). But, thanks to some pressure/help from one of his main fans, he is scheduled to talk to some DFA groups. So I hope that jump starts his campaign.
Any suggestions on how to help out Wooten? I am planning on petitioning for him, but he needs more than just getting on the ballot if he is going to win.
What Wooten Needs
I don't know what Wooten needs. I'm new to the NYC politics, but I am going to think that he needs canvassers/activists. He needs people who are going to GOTV and get his name out there.
I don't think ANY of my non-political friends could name the current DA, and I doubt that any of them could name the people running.
He's going to get on the ballot. There are Wooten/Siegel petitions drawn up, and Norman's push will get him some leverage. Hopefully, the Siegel activists will do some canvassing for Wooten.
BUT, I don't have any Wooten literature. (He was at my last meetup, but I don't think I have a sheet on him.) And he has no Web site. Let's start there: Wooten needs a Web site.