What some are calling the nastiest political race of the national midterm elections is going on New York right now. New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, the Democrat, is running against New York real estate mogul Carl Paladino, the Republican nominee and Tea Party favorite who surprised most by beating the more conventional Republican candidate, former Congressman Rick Lazio in the primary a few weeks ago.
Many assumed that the governor’s seat would easily go to the crime-busting Attorney General Cuomo, whose father governed the state from 1983 through 1994. But, a Quinnipiac University poll released last week found that Paladino is only six points behind Cuomo. Further, Lazio, who was going to run on the Conservative Party ticket, decided to drop out of the race on Monday, which will likely give Paladino more votes from conservatives who prefer not to vote for Cuomo.
What this all adds up to is a nail-biting contest of star-spangled proportions. The intensity with which the candidates will have to ask themselves questions about changing the way the state, now facing around a $9 billion deficit, will operate can only mean good things for residents.
Of course, at the same time, I am highly cautious of the level of self-serving politics that is breeding in the Cuomo and Paladino campaigns as I write this.
Currently, my hat is off to Cuomo, who has taken the higher ground in the mudslinging. To recent childish insults from Paladino about his lower anatomy, Cuomo did not strike back but said, “I am not now going to be part of an effort that degrades state government and degrades New York politics and degrades democracy,” according to Albany's Talk 1300-AM.
Yet, I realize Cuomo’s words may not be sincere. He may be trying to guard his lead in the polls by giving the impression that he is not getting dirty. Just ask Eliot Spitzer, the disgraced former Democratic New York governor, who on CNN recently called Cuomo "the dirtiest, nastiest political player out there." Shockingly, Spitzer said this but at the same time gave Cuomo his endorsement.
Meanwhile, both Cuomo and Paladino are trading punches both direct and indirect about their pasts, including Paladino’s alleged racist e-mails and Cuomo’s alleged payoffs from slumlord Andrew Farkas.
In the political playbook digging up dirt is somehow better than name calling. As Americans, I think it’s time that we say they both are a dumb waste of our attention and our country’s resources. What does digging up dirt mean? If it was illegal then let the authorities deal with it. If it was tasteless, then let whatever publication wants to fill itself with tasteless things report on it.
In the old days, politicians were humble and reserved in the face of public opinion.
"Most candidates before 1828 stayed in seclusion or at least out of public view during their campaigns," according the New York Historical Society. "Similarly, supporters were expected to confine their electioneering to modest displays of appreciation for their candidate's … ideals."
Our early presidents had great accomplishments and they let those accomplishments speak for themselves. Isn’t that the way it should be?
Not only should we require that our candidates not play filthy politics, with name calling and dirt digging, I propose something radical. Let’s ignore what they have to say, since it's bound to be loaded one way or the other, and simply look at what great positive things they have done.
And if they haven’t done anything of note? Don’t vote for that one.
