Another indication of how the election rules in New York City tend to benefit the left is evident in the way discussions are shaped during the televised debates managed by the Campaign Finance Board. The moderators have noticeably diverted attention away from issues that are of real importance to most residents of New York City.
Those casually tuning in to the two Democratic mayoral debates might have easily come away believing that “combating President Trump” and “safeguarding illegal immigrants” are critical duties prescribed by the City Charter for the mayor.
Of course, these aren’t the case, nor are they the top concerns for the majority of registered Democrats, who are far more interested in quality public education, the safety of streets and subways, and the challenging cost of living in the city.
You can perhaps blame the candidates for how the discussion of “affordability” devolved into shouting about city government controlling rents and replacing private developers as the prime source of new housing, but the moderators plainly drink the same progressive Kool-aid on those issues.
The Public Advocate debate also featured “scenarios” steeped in progressive framing, e.g.: “A family of four in The Bronx is behind on their rent and they’re facing eviction; there are not enough free lawyers to represent them in housing court.”
Another focused on “the mother of a young man who’s being held on Rikers Island says her son is wasting away” as “his mental health is deteriorating”; a third, on the needs of an undocumented-immigrant family.
These hot-button progressive concerns have no relation to the problems of most New Yorkers.
Missing: Voters’ anger over the deaths of children under the gaze of the city Administration for Children’s Services, fears over shootings involving gangbanging teens; anger over schools that don’t teach.
If future debates are to serve the needs of average New Yorkers, they need to adjust for the fact that most local media types share the prejudices and obsessions of the progressive elite.
