Bloomberg and Giuliani were both right-wing nutjobs who got reelected despite them getting in bed with Wall Street, enforcing racial profiling, supporting Bush's war crimes, and discriminating against minorities. Also, except for a four year period nearly 30 years ago, NYC has failed to elect a non-white or female mayor. Shame on Chicago as well for having only white male mayors in the last 30 years despite showing some signs of progress before that.

Four people have been Mayor of Chicago since 1987, and two of them were African Americans. It's just that Daley was mayor for 22 years.

On what planet were Bloomberg and Giuliani (the mayoral Giuliani, not the current) "right-wing nutjobs"? Bloomberg massively raised taxes on the wealthy, and his three biggest issues were public schools, affordable housing and public health.

Bloomberg makes Obama look like Ted Cruz. If Bloomberg is a "right wing nutjob", what is Obama? Well to the right of Hitler?

And every mayor of NYC, regardless of politics will "get in bed with Wall Street". Isn't that kinda a "duh" statement, given that Wall Street is NYC's lifeblood, analogous to Hollywood in LA, Silicon Valley in the Bay Area, and autos in Detroit?

Also, pretty sure that neither Giuliani nor Bloomberg ever supported Bush II, to say nothing of support for "war crimes."

It's fairly hard to compare some on a local vs national level. But from statements and beliefs it seems clear that Bloomberg was well to the right of Obama.

Why are you people entertaining this troll by responding to his off the wall comments?

Both served the interests of Wall Street and the 1% instead of the diverse 8+ million people they were elected to serve. Both cut city and social services and were antagonistic towards unions. Both supported Bush's illegal war and genocide in the Middle East. Both supported local police and Bush policies that discriminated against and violated the civil rights of racial, ethnic, and religious minorities and the homeless population. Bloomberg is a bonafide right winger who pretended to act progressive, so he could gain power. Shame on NYC voters for allowing him to do so.

Because he received big business support and kept getting reelected in spite of there being several qualified African Americans who ran against him.

it's worse than this. Detroit has elected a white mayor, despite being a majority black city. the horror!

:rolleyes:

There is no obligation of a city to elect a black mayor. Citizens vote for who they vote for due to many reasons.

Stop being racist

Oh please, stop playing the race card. Someone shouldn't be elected mayor only because they are black, even if they are qualified. Let the voters speak.

I'm not sure what statements you're referring to, but if you look at policy positions, Bloomberg as mayor, to me, was quite far to the left of Obama as President.

Now, granted, that may be a function of differing roles and constituencies. In any case I can't imagine Obama would devote extensive political capitol to pushing for highest-in-history tax increases on the wealthy, massive amounts of subsidized housing, and huge investments in poorer schools.

Bloomberg was all about housing and schools. On a national level he's been all about gun control and health issues (smoking and soda tax, mostly). These would generally be characterized as "liberal" or at least "activist" type issues. He was very much for a powerful regulatory role. He also has the repeated theme that the wealthy in the U.S. pay too little in taxes.

Bloomberg is one of the wealthiest people on earth, of course, and is somewhat arrogant, and a bit brash, and ran as a Republican, so can maybe be characterized as a "third way" or something, but in terms of policy, I can't think of any remote conservative leanings (at least in the U.S. context). Who besides Bernie Sanders runs on a "tax corporations and the rich" platform these days?

NYC has Republican council members and the electorate doesn't automatically elect the winner of the Democratic primary. The NYC Republican party is actually viable and competitive. That being said, the NYC Republican party differs greatly than the National Republican party.

this might be of interest:


Ohio Supreme Court rules against city residency requirements

Henry J. Gomez, cleveland.com
on June 10, 2009 at 9:41 AM, updated June 11, 2009 at 1:30 AM

Lynn Ischay/Plain Dealer

In a split decision, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled today that municipal ordinances requiring city employees to live in the city are trumped by state law banning the practice.

Updated June 11 at 1:29 a.m.

COLUMBUS —

In a decision that could be crippling for Cleveland, the Ohio Supreme Court this morning upheld a 2006 state law that bars cities from enforcing residency rules.

Writing for the 5-2 majority, Justice Paul Pfeifer dismissed arguments from Akron and Lima attorneys who said the General Assembly violated cities' home rule authority.

The 5-2 ruling deals a crushing blow to Cleveland, which requires its employees to live within city limits. The state legislature set up a showdown over the issue in 2006 by approving a law that made such requirements illegal.

Cities contend that home-rule provisions of the Ohio Constitution allow for local residency laws.

Mayor Frank Jackson, in a meeting with reporters at City Hall, acknowledged that the ruling upholds the 2006 law and said the city will abide by the law.

Jackson said his staff is working to implement necessary changes to comply.

"At the end of the day, Cleveland will survive," he said. "We've been through difficult times before."

I woulda liked a Bloomberg vs Trump confrontation. It might have made more sense than the delusional "Feel the Bern" opposition to the Chump machine. It is unfortunate that Americans have been mindfucked for so long into repudiating the social net and trade unionism, and voting for platforms antithetical to middle class aspirations. Less progress and security, more precarious lives were marketed as Freedom from Government interventionism. The result is disastrous. Both parties are blameworthy. Let's just hope Chump is the wake up call to an efficient movement toward more justice, not more punishment.

Pretty sure Serenade is a troll.

He was unsurprisingly strongly against the Occupy movement and disliked criticism of finance. He also presided over a huge expansion of stop and frisk.

Only because he wasn't an idiot. Wall Street is actually physically located in NYC, and it is the main industry here, its not some ethereal notional construct like it is for the rest of the country. Imagine if the mayor of San Fransisco was suddenly against people who lived in Portero Hill for example, it makes no sense. If another financial crisis happens, even DeBlasio would be pro-Wall street.

Any mayor of NYC will be pro-Wall Street, for obvious reasons. Bernie Sanders would be singing Wall Street's praises if he were mayor.

Again, Wall Street is NYC's bedrock economy. It has nothing to do with politics; it's the lifeblood of the economy. It would be like a Detroit mayor fighting against the auto industry, a Silicon Valley mayor demonizing tech, or an LA mayor telling Hollywood to get lost.

Wall Street (and skyscrapers) is where most of the pride associated with NYC is from. :cheers:

Just to illustrate how much Giuliani has changed, here's a link to Giuliani's fervent support for NYC as a sanctuary city.

He actually defied the Clinton administration during these years, and was outspoken as an immigrant advocate. Now he's basically Atilla the Hun.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/poli...icle-1.2955883