Queens: The Ohio of NYC

When people ask why New York City has elected Republican mayors for the past twenty years, the answer is to be found in Queens. In their tight victories in 1993 and 2001/2009, Mayors Giuliani and Bloomberg owed their wins to getting a large chunk of votes in the borough. According to the last Census, Queens has a population almost 2.5 million, a close second to Brooklyn. 

If Staten Island is the Alabama of NYC and the Bronx is the Massachusetts, Queens is the city's Ohio -- the swing borough, the place where mayors are made. Unlike the Bronx, Manhattan, and Brooklyn, which are highly urban and Democratic, or Staten Island, which is nearly highly suburban and Republican, Queens is a mixture of urban and suburban, Democrat and Republican. In a diverse city, Queens is its most diverse borough -- ethnically, racially, economically, and politically.

Most of our city's mayors have been Manhattanites or were living there when elected. After all, Manhattan was home to Tammany Hall, the political machine that controlled the city's government for close to two centuries. But Tammany Hall is long gone; Manhattan is no longer "the center of it all." These days, if you believe the hype, New York City is experiencing a Brooklyn Moment. From Girls to food co-ops, Brooklyn is on the rise -- heck, it's become a brand. If Brooklyn-resident Bill De Blasio is elected our 109th mayor on November 5th, the Brooklyn Moment will be complete. 

But his margin of victory and the depth of his support will be determined in Queens.

Assuming he wins, De Blasio will rack up huge margins in Brooklyn and the Bronx. Joe Lhota will probably win Staten Island and still lose the election overwhelmingly (much as Fernando Ferrer won the Bronx in 2005 and still lost the mayoralty by twenty points). Wealthy Manhattan may be more friendly to Lhota, as it was to Bloomberg and Giuliani, but De Blasio should still do well there. But if the middle-class white ethnic vote in Queens turns out for Lhota, and the minority voters in borough don't do the same for De Blasio, De Blasio's margin of victory might not be as huge as most polls predict. While De Blasio will certainly do better in Queens than previous (losing) Democratic candidates, he won't necessarily sweep the borough this year.

Also, Queens is the only borough to feature competitive city council races between Democrats and Republicans -- in areas like Bayside, Howard Beach, and Middle Village. Currently, two of these seats are held by Republicans. The Bayside seat is held by indicted Republican Dan Halloran (who is not running for reelection) and the race to replace him, between Democrat Paul Vallone and Republican Dennis Saffran, is fierce. In Howard Beach, Councilman Erich Ulrich is running for reelection against Democrat Lew Simon, who lost a close special election to Ulrich in 2009. The Middle Village race has Democrat Elizabeth Crowley running for reelection in a seat previously held by Republicans. If either Saffran or Ulrich wins, or if Crowley loses, in the face of a De Blasio landslide, it will show that even in a deeply Democratic city, these conservative pockets in Queens remain strong -- now and in the future.

However, if De Blasio triumphs in the borough and the Republicans lose these council seats, not only will De Blasio's margin of victory be enormous but it will show that the city has most definitively swung in a Democratic direction. His unapologetic progressive agenda will have the people's blessing. Like Ohio in presidential election, Queens will have the final word. 

So if De Blasio wins big, this Brooklyn Moment will have been brought to you courtesy of Queens.

Stephen Colbert at the Al Smith Dinner

Tavern on the Green Lives!

In 2009, the legendary Central Park restaurant Tavern on the Green closed, after almost 75 years in business. It was built in the 1930s by that grandaddy of New York City building, Robert Moses, and over the decades had become a bridge-and-tunnel destination and tourist trap. It was also a popular place for private events. For years, it was the highest-grossing non-chain restaurant in America.

And it still went out of businesss!

Like many places, it was a victim of the financial crises. Bad food and high prices and poor management sealed its fate. The Warner family, which had run it for decades, lost their lease and then restaurateur Dean Poll took it over and then walked away when he couldn't make a deal with the kitchen workers union. Since then, the big restaurant on Central Park West has sat empty, populated with food trucks out front. It was a modern-day relic, a burgeoning ruin in its own time. To say you had once eaten at Tavern on the Green was almost becoming like saying you had once gone to Woodstock (although not as cool).

Well, it's back. Two guys from Philadelphia have taken it over and plan to re-open it in December. The new Tavern will be half the size of the old one with less cheesy glitzy interior design. How good the food will be remains to be seen.

Some New York restaurant types predict it will fail. It's not haute cuisine but it's also not down-home cooking. It's sorta middle of the road. Also, it's not exactly a place for the hip foody crowd in this city and knows if it will pack-in enough tourists and B&Ters to make up its high overhead. But I wouldn't be surprised if it succeeds -- after all, it's a legendary place and has one of the best locations for any business in NYC. 

I doubt I'll go there myself anytime soon but, as the new owners said, it'll be a great place to take your grandmother for her 90th birthday so who knows?

P.S. I went to the old Tavern once back in the 1990s for my high school prom. Not all that memorable. I'm sure the new version will be better. 

Banksy takes NYC

Banksy is in New York! 

Yes, the secretive, elusive British graffiti artist has taken up residence in our fair city, spray painting buildings nearly every day. If you're unfamiliar with him and his work, basically he's this artist that no one knows or has ever seen, putting museum-quality art in public spaces. Examples of his work:

Many in the city are thrilled to see his work appear around town while others, like our fair mayor, call him a vandal and want to catch him an put him in jail. Anyway, this artist that no one knows anything about and whose work can't be seen in any museum, is currently the talking of the town, getting immense press coverage.

Here's a review of his NYC "residency."

Here's a map tracking his "work" around NYC. 

Here's some coverage of the controversy that Banksy is causing.  

And here's an interview with the artist

How long will Banksy stay in NYC? Will he be caught? Will he get away? Will he come back?

We shall literally see. 

Five is Really a Crowd

One of the things I love about New York magazine is how they run articles in the regular magazine that are very well-written, high-minded, and informative -- and then, on the website, how they run articles that are a little ... less so.

To whit: this interesting web-only piece by a young lady who talks about her experience arranging, and then being the focal-point of that exercise routine known as a ... gangbang ... For those of you unfamiliar with the practice, it's when a woman engages in coitus at the same time with multiple men, manipulating multiple male genatalia while manuevering her body masterfully. Multi-tasking at its finest.
 
Sounds exhausting!

And this article confirms it. At least it's exhausting for the lady involved. For the men, the experience must be similar to that of trying to get through a crowded subway door -- only with bodily fluids involved.

Gross.

The other interesting thing about this article is that it demonstrates the existential divide between men and women. Only a woman could advertise (like this one did) for men to join her in a gangbang and actually expect to get serious replies -- and for the event really to happen. Any man who advertised for a similar experience -- with women -- would get either joke replies or none at all. Also, this article shows the influence that porn has had on our culture -- I don't think most people would even think about doing something like this unless they'd seen it in a dirty movie first. And what this article also makes clear is that, as a sexual experience, gangbangs don't seem particularly pleasurable for either the men or the woman. In a gangbang, it sounds like there's not much actual bang from the bucks (sorry, couldn't resist).

So what's the point?

However, it sounds like it probably burns off a few calories, at least for the woman. But I think there are probably less disgusting and more comfortable forms of exercise. 

P.S. I indicated that this article was an example of one that wasn't high-minded, well-written or informative. While it was certainly not the former, it was the latter two. So I humbly apologize to the writer.

Political Theater New York Style

Right now NYC is going through its most competitive mayoral election in over a decade. The race to replace Mayor Bloomberg iz on! And it's getting exciting!

Except, well ... not really.

Sure, Public Advocate Bill De Blasio (Democrat) and former Deputy Mayor Joe Lhota (Republican) are attacking each other in debates, running ads against each other on TV, and doing all the expected stuff that goes on in political campaigns. (Trading barbs, as the pundits call it.) But it's all kabuki theater. Currently, according to the latest independent poll, De Blasio has a 67% to 23% lead over Lhota -- that's a 45%, almost 50%, lead for those of us who need help with the math. So, at this point, it looks like De Blasio is going to win in a landslide, Lhota is going to suffer an historic defeat, and the campaigns are totally pointless -- unless Mr De Blasio is caught with either a dead woman, a live boy, a dead boy, or in a compromising position with either a farm or domesticated animal.

At this point, instead of campaigning, De Blasio should probably start packing and calling the movers for Gracie Mansion, and Mr. Lhota -- who gave up the MTA chairmanship to run for mayor -- should probably scour Hotjobs or Monster.com or call a headhunter since he's probably not going to get the job he's currently applying for. Maybe he and Mitt Romney should start hanging out, two unemployed loser Republicans, and bitch about those darn Democrats and those darn minority and "entitled" voters (Lhota might want to go drinking while Mitt the Mormon would probably get wasted on Diet Coke).

Unless there is "movement" in this race, I probably won't blog about it until election night (or after) on November 5th. Until then, for those of us paying attention to the media, let's enjoy this Political Kabuki Theater -- New York Style.

John Gambling Should Apologize‏

On Friday October 18th, at around 9:27 AM, WOR radio host John Gambling called President Obama a "street thug, a community organizer."

Not cool. And Mayor Bloomberg had been on this show, in studio, about an hour ago.

Gambling should apologize. Bloomberg shouldn't appear on the show until he does.

Making a Modern NYC: Bill De Blasio for Mayor

"Modern" is a word that gets thrown around a lot and yet, when asked to define it, most people would probably be stumped to say what it is exactly. Dictionary.com defines modern as:

1. of or pertaining to present and recent time; not ancient or remote: modern city life.

2.  characteristic of present and recent time; contemporary; not antiquated or obsolete: modern viewpoints.

3. of or pertaining to the historical period following the Middle Ages: modern European history.

4. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of contemporary styles of art, literature, music, etc., that reject traditionally accepted or sanctioned forms and emphasize individual experimentation and sensibility. 

So, basically, something modern is anything that relates to today.

Which begs another question: what makes NYC a modern city? In the past, NYC was the modern city of its times. It was always the city of today -- and tomorrow. But will it always be so?

Before contemplating the future, let's look to the past. This recent segment from WNYC recounted the history of how two men in the 1930s helped to shape modern New York: Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia and President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. These two titans of their era used the power of government to re-build a decaying city and drastically improve the lives of its citizens. They had a progressive vision: clean and affordable housing, good jobs with safe working conditions, health care, and education. These services were provided and improved in order to empower people in their lives and to help them to contribute to the life of the city. FDR and LaGuardia saw progressive policies not only as compassionate and moral but as smart and necessary -- they helped people help society. Because of these two leaders, NYC emerged from the Great Depression and World War II to be the most powerful city in the most powerful nation on earth -- the very zenith, the very cusp of modernity.  

Now, almost a century later, the city is again looking to the future -- and trying to define its modern identity. 

Increasingly, we've become a city of rich and poor with a dying middle class. If you're rich in this town, times have never been better. But if you're not, they've never been this tough. If you can afford it, there's never been more luxury housing available. If you're can't, there's never been less affordable housing available. Schools are great -- if you can afford good private ones or live in the right neighborhoods. If you don't, you're condemned to failing schools. These have been great times for the rich, lucky and connected -- and terrible for everyone else. 

For Mayor Bloomberg, he has worked very hard to regulate how much soda you drink but not how much you pay in rent. He has tried to make NYC a "luxury product" and not a city for all. Basically, he wants NYC to be Bergdorf Goodmans and, if you can't afford it, you can go shop at Target for all he cares. 

To me, this is an unacceptable future for NYC. 

So what will the future of NYC in the 21st century be like? Is our city going to go the way of Ancien France or Tsarist Russia? Or can we make a change? Can we recapture the same progressive spirit that saved this city almost a century ago?

We can't be a modern, progressive city without investing in our people. We can't have a city of rich and poor, squeezing everyone else out. A brain drain from NYC would be a disaster. As Lena Dunham, creator of the HBO show Girls and a lifelong New Yorker put it: "We can't have our generation's Patti Smith moving to Tampa."

That's why we need to elect Bill De Blasio as our next mayor. He's the best progressive we can elect to fashion a modern New York that closes the gap between rich and poor. He has a simple, straightforward agenda that would go a long way to closing this gap: impose a tax surcharge of .04 to 1% on incomes over half a million dollars, universal pre-K, reform "stop and frisk", support a living wage, and build affordable housing. Sounds like a good plan to me. A 21st century progressive plan that a leading American economist, Jeffrey Sachs, strongly endorses. And believe me, very few people are smarter than him. 

Sounds good to you, right? I would hope so.

But not to some people -- like our current mayor or the 1%. If De Blasio wins the Democratic primary -- as it looks increasingly likely that he will -- it'll be a battle royale between him and the Republican candidate.   

Oh yes, there will be a lot of fear mongering. "Oh no! If we elect De Blasio mayor, it'll be like the 1970s again: high crime, fiscal crises, white flight!" Those arguments are crap: this isn't the 1970s anymore, we have new accounting rules that don't allow a fiscal crises to emerge, and crime has fallen so low that I don't think that a mayor, any mayor, could just somehow make it flare up again. No, the city is facing new a crises: affordability, quality of life, fairness, justice. Without these, NYC can't be a truly modern city.  

The last presidential election showed that American is moving in a more progressive direction. With Obama in the White House, America is moving forward. Does NYC want to be left behind?  

If we are to truly be a modern city, we need to move in a more progressive direction and, for that, we need progressive leadership. For mayor, De Blasio is the way to go.

NYC Blackout August 2003