Politics: The ‘Shock’ of a Close Race

When it comes to the results of yesterday’s mayoral election, I’m surprised that people are surprised.
About six months ago, I would predict to anybody who would listen—and nobody really cared, sensibly enough, what I had to say on the matter—that Mayor Michael Bloomberg would lose his re-election bid. Of course back then I did not know he was going to b low through his previous spending records and toss more than $100 million at the race.
Anyway, I was wrong about the result. But not the anger among a large part of the electorate. People like their term limits, by and large, especially in a city where they were combined with a sensible strategy of campaign finance. Even skeptics of term limits would have reason to be somewhat impressed with what they have meant to the New York City Council, where they added some life to a lot of neighborhood council contests in the past few years.
Bloomberg did not just mess with term limits; he did it in what looked like a slow and misleading way. He waited until voters could not have another referendum. And then he coupled the term limits move with record spending. When the richest person in town puts that much of his own money into a contest, some people are going to say it’s unseemly.
So on this post-Election Day, I think the pundits have it right. I think a lot of New Yorkers wanted to send a message to their mayor. The only compelling question left is whether he heard the message. Or cared about it.