The future of Andrew Cuomo

With the appointment of Kirsten Gillibrand to the Senate, all eyes have been on New York. What I am interested in is the future of the state, politically, and some of it’s politicians. Gillibrand was never to favourite. At a time, Caroline Kennedy was the favourite only to be turned down/drop out in the past week. However, she only dropped out after she began to lose in polls that pitted her against state Attorney Gerenal Andrew Cuomo. Cumo, for my mind, was the best pick until I did some research on Gillibrand. Then I decided that they were probably equally qualified.

The state is a traditional Democratic fort. Not in the next 100 years will Republicans carry the state (not unless their party radically changes, as well as the state demographics). It’s a solid 34 electoral college votes for them. Because it’s so Democratic, the Democrats to come out of the state tend to be somewhat more liberal than, say Southern or mid-Western Democrats. One of the most popular politicians to come out of the state though, in the 1980’s and early 1990’s, was a man by the name of Mario Cuomo. He was the 52nd Governor of New York, serving for 11 years. He was a moderate, and extremely popular after cleaning up New York and bringing about institutional changes. However, he came around at the wrong time. He hit his peak of popularity, nationally, under President Ronald Reagan. After President Bush was elected, with a war going on and approval ratings through the roof, Cuomo declined to run in the Democratic primary (as did many other high-profile Democrats at the time), which left room for some unknown Governor of Arkansas Bill Clinton to sneak in and win it. Had Cuomo run, he would have won the primary and most likely the general election. But the economy hadn’t yet faulted, so he had no smoking gun to unseat an incumbent president. Cuomo would stay as Governor until the Republican wave in 1994, where he was defeated by George Pataki.

That’s Andrew Cuomo’s father – the ‘what if’ Democrat. Now, I wrote in a post, some time ago, the following:

Not so much a problem for the Democratic party, but rather the career of David Paterson. He will have to appoint someone to serve in Hillary Clinton’s to-be-vacated New York senate seat. As governor and Democrat, he was the likely choice. But he has said he doesn’t want the job. He now has to contend with the three pressure groups: Women, who think a woman should replace a woman; Hispanics, who think they are due a representative because they make up a large number in the state, and; himself, and whether he should appoint his main rival Andrew Cuomo (former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development under Clinton, current state Attorney-General, son of wildly popular New York governor) to eliminate him from a primary challenge. Personally, because I think Cuomo has a future in the Democratic party, and that a governorship would do him better than a senate seat, I hope that he appoints someone else. If it is someone else, it will be a woman or a Hispanic.

That was all true then, and is true now. And stars are starting to line up for Andrew Cuomo by not getting appointed to the Senate. Cuomo, who has shown moderated interest in stepping up to the governorship, has the perfect scenario now. It will be the opposite of his father – Andrew Cuomo is in the right place at the right time. Governor David Paterson, after his handling of the whole appointment, has made him look weak and ineffective. I didn’t report much on it, but if you kept up with it you would wonder what the heck was going on in Albany. And, the way Caroline Kennedy’s potential appointment was handled (after being instigated by, most likely, Ted Kennedy), he has probably got offside with the most powerful political family in the US.

So if Cuomo wanted to become Governor of New York, 2010 is the best situation for him. He would win a primary battle against David Paterson reasonably easy. He is popular across the state, his father more popular to the point that people still remember him. Then, Cuomowouldn’t have to fight the uphill battle against an incumbent Republican. It is way above helpful that there will be no incumbent if Cuomo defeated Paterson in a primary. It is a right place right time moment.

So, in 2010, Cuomo could easily be the New York governor. Not getting too far ahead, I want to imagine the year 2015. Here you have a Democrat, powerful and popular, who has a recognised name among the base and in the North-East corner of the country. He’s served 4 years as Secretary of Urban Housing and Development under a wildly popular President (Clinton), a 4 year stint as New York’s Attorney General, and then 5 years as Governor of one of the biggest states in the country. When his father had bad timing for his political career, Cuomo seems to be having great timing. 2016 will be the end of President Obama’s second term, with no incumbent VP running (it’s safe to assume Joe Biden won’t run). Cuomo will be 58 in 2015 – a year before the election and enough time to build some momentum for a Democratic primary run. Win that, and he’s looking down the barrel of a general election run. The fact of the matter is that the stars are aligning for Andrew Cuomo to be the Democratic candidate in the 2016 presidential election. Of course, he has to do a good job as Governor, and that’s after the demands of winning it.

If you want some more ‘stars aligning’, it’s these two bits of information. First, the Republican pool of talent in New York is pretty scarce now to challenge for the Governor’s mansion. Cuomo would go into the state election as favourite, and would just need to run a simple campaign. The second bit, the Republican party is in no shape to win a national election. At the very least, they will have to wait to 2016 to even stand a chance. But who will they front? Sarah Palin will long be forgotten (hopefully), Mike Huckabee will be done, Mitt Romney too – these are the ‘future names’ of t he Republican party. And they will all be out of the political circles in 4-6 years tops. They don’t have anyone like Cuomo or Gillibrand (two people who are being floated as rising stars in the Democratic party) to talk about. It will take some serious work by the party to have a serious and credible candidate in 2016. And, if the reputation for ‘change’ in the Republican party is anything to go by, they won’t have anyone.

This is all something just to keep an eye on. There are so many variables, so many hicups that could derail any political career, stars aligned or not. But, like I said, it’s something to keep an eye on – if only to make things even more interesting and exciting.

Thomas.