Peter Robinson · Oct 12, 2010 at 3:09pm

Paladino's new television ad: simple, direct, to-the-point, memorable.

Yes, I know. The latest average on Real Clear Politics shows Paladino trailing Cuomo by more than 18 percent, and I wouldn't argue that Paladino can close that enormous gap in just three weeks. But if Paladino continues to talk about reforming Albany while cutting taxes, and not about Cuomo's failed former marriage, Paladino's own out-of-wedlock child, or social issues about which no governor of New York could ever do anything anyway--if, that is, Paladino disciplines himself, devoting the next three weeks to running a pointed, intelligent campaign, then he can still shake up the New York establishment, revive the New York GOP, and set himself up as a political force to be reckoned with in New York from now on.

Steady, now, Carl. Steady.

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

Michael Labeit
Joined
May '10
Michael Labeit

He should do himself a favor and stop commenting on the ethics of homosexuality. That doesn't fly in New York.

Trace Urdan
Joined
May '10
Trace Urdan

But Peter, come on. You can't post his most recent campaign ad without addressing the issue of the remarks he made about homosexuality to a group of Hassidim. My Facebook account is blushing from the vocal outrage. Whether you agree with him, or believe it is a canny gesture to some silent upstate majority, the conventional wisdom is that this set of comments, followed by his waxing on during the Today Show about flamboyant homosexual behavior is being treated by the MSM as the de facto end of his candidacy. So how do you factor in those expressed views much less discount the notion that he is capable of running a "pointed, intelligent campaign" (I notice you didn't say disciplined) over the next three weeks?

Edited on Oct 12, 2010 at 3:18pm
Kenneth
Joined
Jul '10
Kenneth

Trace Urdan: But Peter, come on. You can't post his most recent campaign ad without addressing the issue of the remarks he made about homosexuality to a group of Hassidim. My Facebook account is blushing from the vocal outrage. Whether you agree with him, or believe it is a canny gesture to some silent upstate majority, the conventional wisdom is that this set of comments, followed by his waxing on during the Today Show about flamboyant homosexual behavior is being treated by the MSM as the de facto end of his candidacy. So how do you factor in those expressed views much less discount the notion that he is capable of running a "pointed, intelligent campaign" (I notice you didn't say disciplined) over the next three weeks? · Oct 12 at 3:16pm

Edited on Oct 12 at 03:18 pm

Peter is entitled to his man-crushes.

I used to be madly in love with Enoch Powell...oh, wait: it turns out Enoch Powell was right.

Scott Reusser
Joined
May '10
Scott Reusser
Trace Urdan: But Peter, come on. You can't post his most recent campaign ad without addressing the issue of the remarks he made about homosexuality to a group of Hassidim.[....etc]

I think Peter's post is a plea for Paladino to quit focusing on such stuff, to get disciplined, keep his head, shush on the moral issues, etc. You two agree, I think.

Trace Urdan
Joined
May '10
Trace Urdan
KennethI used to be madly in love with Enoch Powell...oh, wait: it turns out Enoch Powell was right. · Oct 12 at 3:22pm

Once again Kenneth sends me to Wikipedia to learn something new. (I'm receiving my classical conservative education at the same time as Glenn Beck!) So I see your point Kenneth, Enoch Powell does have a sort of Christopher Plummer vibe. And yes, it seems he was largely right.

Peter Robinson

As Scott notes above, Trace, we agree.

And I once had dinner with Enoch Powell. Honest.

A story, I suppose, for another time.

Ursula Hennessey
Trace Urdan Once again Kenneth sends me to Wikipedia to learn something new. (I'm receiving my classical conservative education at the same time as Glenn Beck!)

You and me both, Trace.

Trace Urdan
Joined
May '10
Trace Urdan

Peter Robinson: As Scott notes above, Trace, we agree.

And I once had dinner with Enoch Powell. Honest.

A story, I suppose, for another time. · Oct 12 at 3:48pm

Apologies. It was too subtle for me on a Tuesday afternoon.

Kenneth
Joined
Jul '10
Kenneth

Peter Robinson: As Scott notes above, Trace, we agree.

And I once had dinner with Enoch Powell. Honest.

A story, I suppose, for another time. · Oct 12 at 3:48pm

Darn it, Peter...you're just so far ahead all the time.

I say Sebastian Junger, you say, "Oh, I interviewed him in May..."

I say Enoch Powell, you say, "Had dinner with the guy..."

If I said Isosceles, you'd say, "Oh, he was my math tutor."

I don't like doing this, Peter, but you leave me no choice:

"Miley Cyrus"

Edited on Oct 12, 2010 at 4:20pm
Peter Robinson

Kenneth

"Miley Cyrus" · Oct 12 at 3:59pm

You win.

Kenneth
Joined
Jul '10
Kenneth

Peter Robinson

Kenneth

"Miley Cyrus" · Oct 12 at 3:59pm

You win. · Oct 12 at 4:27pm

Quitter.

EJHill
Joined
May '10
EJHill

Totally off-topic, Trace, but I liked your Uncommon Knowledge suggestion in the Liberal Twighlight thread. May it be as inspirational to Peter and Diane.

Jonathan Matthew Gilbert
Joined
Jul '10
Jonathan Matthew Gilbert

I love Enoch Powell, but he made a lot more sense and had a lot less baggage than Paladino, who's personal life was always a strike against him. To attack the personal lives of anyone else--especially in New York--was not wise, and attacking the gay community when Andrew Cuomo already has such a rocky relationship with us was ridiculous from a strategic standpoint. He's lost my vote at this point. And that IRRITATES me, because I really liked a fair amount of the other stuff he was saying...Since there's no circumstances under which I could support Cuomo, I now have to give serious thought to voting for Elliot Spitzer's madam. Or not voting for the office at all, but I've never done that and am deeply uncomfortable with the idea. Focusing on divisive social issues isn't going to restore balance to our economy, it's not going to create jobs, and it's not going to get Republicans back in the majority. It WILL make us look like exactly the type of hate-mongers the Democrats so desperately need to portray us as.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In