Wednesday, November 07, 2007

Give Jon his Due.


Well, we have a new d.a. and unfortunately it's not Jonathan Sennett. It is however, Holley Carnright who is a nice guy and the county will be well served by him. The Democratic party can blame only itself for not winning that office. If you look at the numbers we must give Jonathan Sennett a lot of credit he lost by only 4500 votes in a three way race with another democrat running. Head to head Sennett would of crushed Carnirght. And, rightfully so, Politics aside, Jon Sennett, is the most honest caring and compassionate person I have ever met and a true gentleman, I'm honored to of met him and to count him as a close friend. I just hope that his experience with a power hungry selfish party does not detract him from running in the future, public service was made for him.


We can all sit here and play Monday morning quarterback about whether the party should of allowed a primary or whether Bradley should of dropped out but the fact of the matter is certain members of the party got to greedy and the in fighting lead to our defeat. We must now look to regroup, obtain new leadership and start the healing process. This must not be allowed to carry over into future elections.


I just hope that without blaming people that we use this race as what can happen when as a party we lose our way.


84 comments:

Anonymous said...

Great!

Please fill everyone in on Carnright's plan to use water boarding techniques to get to the bottom of the jail investigation.

Anonymous said...

Can you please update me on where we will be in four years?
Where are all of the people coming from to move into the delusional mayors imaginary housing projects?
Let me guess....low income housing or state funded?
What a shame that so many people in Kingston are so simple that they didnt look into the future, to see where this city will be....

Anonymous said...

cahill did way better then i thought

Anonymous said...

Hopefully the dem party learned a lesson - Next time you will have a primary and the people will pick the candidate instead of having a vocal group intimidate everyone into picking there choice. If not you will lose again in 4 years.

Anonymous said...

And all this while I thought Holley Carnright was a woman, and just like Hillary Clinton, and I HAD to vote for her because she is a woman. Damm, I want my vote back. Marshall, Will and Holley.. in the land..of the lost.... ahhhhh....

Jane Simpleton

Anonymous said...

I don't think Kingston will be able to stand another 4 years of Sottile - what were the voters thinking? Or drinking?

Anonymous said...

They weren't drinking the Kool-Aid(tm), or then we'd be waking up to Mayor Cahill. Praise Adonai that our great Mayor was re-elected!!

Lots of mazel to Mayor Sottile and Alderman-at-large Noble, as well as the winners in Wards 2,3,4,5,7,8,9.

Sy Greenstein

Anonymous said...

He didn't deserve a primary. he lost four times. Get over it.

Anonymous said...

Jon's the leader of that "vocal" group called the majority of UC democrats. I think he deserves Parete's job. He'd never pull such a sleazy manuever. Draft him!

Libra said...

Jeremy, I can't believe you called Bradley a democrat!

Jeremy Blaber said...

you know what I mean Libra.

Libra said...

What you meant, Jeremy, is not what you said.

Anonymous said...

HELP WANTED:
Democratic Party has immediate openings for a chairman, elections commissioner, assistant elections commissioner.
Must put party values and beliefs ahead of personal and individual gain. Must be a good leader capable of rallying large groups together instead of dividing them.

Must apply rules eqaully and fairly reguardless of personal, community and business connections.

Must be willing to put in countless hours of work that is likely to not be recognized and is likely to be criticized.

Must work well with others and seek solutions and compromises in a professional manner.

Must not abandon party members or intentionally stab them in the back in public and private settings.

Must have strong financial managent skills and not cry to local newspapers that the party is out of money.


Must not allow or demand that family members be given county jobs or benefit at taxpayers expense.

Those who feel this is not too much to ask can drop off resumes at Dem Headquarters.

8:33 PM

Anonymous said...

We had one Democrat running and another that was taking away Dem votes in key areas. That is what Blaber meant and we all know it.

Libra said...

8:33 PM has it right! Dem HQ is located at 292 C Fair Street. Resumes are gladly accepted.

Anonymous said...

7:50 - Based on the vote it wasn't the majority of any party. You and 7:31 need to get over it. 7:31 you clearly dont't get politics and if this party doesn't figure it out we'll be having this discussion 4 years from now. It was never about deserving it ' it was about winning and the only way we could have won was to hold a primary. Maybe Sennett would not have won? If he did win the primary he would be DA. Never put what you can control- as a party- in someone eles hands! Stuborn people tend not to learn lessons.

Anonymous said...

Should have done the right thing and had a primary. Who ever was advising Sennett not to give Bradley a primary lost it for Sennett and the Democrats.

Anonymous said...

Can some tell me who is right?

The people on this blog who insist Bradley should have dropped out of the race

or........

The Bradley Camp that would have dropped out after a primary, if lost.

The bottom line is that both sides have a reasonable argument. Let's get over it. Vince and Jon are both an asset to the party.

Anonymous said...

he was not a dem until nov 7. rules are rule regardless of who is your daddy.

Anonymous said...

Totally disgusted that's what I am. If I hear Sottile say "moving forward" one more time, I will surely throw up. We are in another four years of deep shit.

Anonymous said...

I made a mistake by voting for Bradley. If Jon runs for something again I'll vote for him. Vince is a good guy and there should of been a PRIMARY!

Anonymous said...

Those pseudo democrats, the Parete 3 must be drinking a mug of cheap red wine together tonight toasting their successful efforts to elect a republican DA.

ALL HAIL THE SPITEFUL TRIO!

Let's start working to unseat them now! Find a credible alternative and vote Richie, Robbie and Petey out. Let's elect someone who cares about democratic issues, not Papa issues.

Send them packing.

Anonymous said...

Roughly 40% of eligible voters cast ballots yesterday. This is a poor reflection on all DA candidates. To only get 16,500 votes on Dem line in Ulster County is pathetic. To win with only 20,000 is terrible. To spend $140,000 for 11,000 votes stinks.

Sennett was done when he denied primary, anyone with any political instinct knows that. He spent $70,000 on convention. He got bad advice from the start and had rookies working for him. To blame Bradley is a copout, John and his supporters should admit they screwed up. I think John would have won primary and today he'd be DA. He took poor advice and paid the price.

To blame Democratic leaders is a copout. If Sennett listened to them he'd be our next DA. He had a choice and he chose to listen to the wrong people.

Anonymous said...

Sennett is a nice guy. You're right he was meant for public service and I hope he runs again. In a two way race he would of kicked ass.

Anonymous said...

No one trusted Vince to keep his word after losing the primary that he would drop out. His goal was to be a spoiler at any cost. He has no self awareness.

Here is a test...will Morganthau take him back now? No way. Because he ran a shady campaign where he disrespected many people. He's damaged goods.

He is not an asset to the Democratic party. Furthermore, this loss handcaps Dems from getting the county exec spot because dems can't get themselves together.

Anonymous said...

At the risk of rehashing, didn't the Committee deny the primary; not Sennett? It wasn't Sennett's call to make. Also, is it o.k. for the denied "Democrat" to attempt to "extort" a primary by taking the alleged and unenforicble position that if the preferred candidate doesn't somehow convince the Committee, at the risk of alienating his own supporters, or by threatening the Committee itself, to allow the primary, then he'll stay in the race just to spoil a Democratic victory (which is admittedly his right)? I still don't understand why he didn't do what most thought he should have done from the beginning: Bank whatever political currency he had to draw on in the future and stick around for a few years and contribute to the community and allow others a chance to get to know him. Then take his shot. Oh well, water under the bridge. The Bradley camp won't get it. They continue to think that the majority of Dems don't get it. The good news is the Party will ultimately be stronger under new leadership in touch with the majority's desire to base decisions on merit.

Anonymous said...

I just don't get it.

A primary would have resulted in what?

In all likelihood, Sennett would have won the primary based on vote totals in the general election.

That is unless all those dems who thought Bradley was the better candidate slavishly voted for Sennett cause he was the democratic canidate?

Bradley still would have run on his lines and taken the 10K votes away from Sennet. Does anyone really think that conservatives choose Junior over Carnwright? Those weren't 10K conservatives for sure.

So, committee agrees to allow Bradley a waiver and he primaries. He causes Sennett to spend rest of his money. Sennett wins, Bradley is still in race and still takes 10K votes from Sennett.

Bradley could not win the election, but he denies the democratic candidate the win.

Seems pretty clear. What would a primary have resulted in other than Sennett spending more money pre-general election?

Carnright still wins.

Thats okay, its democracy. Bradley gets two inconsequential parties to allow him on their lines and soaks votes away from the Dem candidate who should have by all rights won the election. Bradley had no chance of winning, but denied the democratic candidate a victory.

I think that is the definition of spoiler. No?

Or would that primary have resulted in something different?

Somebody, anybody?

"The Bradley Camp that would have dropped out after a primary, if lost." Really? That just isn't true, did Bradley ever say that he would drop out if he didn't win a primary? I must have missed it if he did.

"Sennett was done when he denied primary, anyone with any political instinct knows that." Again, if Sennett won the primary, Bradley is still there as Conservative, thats why Carnright choose not to seek a primary for conservatve line? Right? Carnright may not know XP from DOS, but he knew enough to let Vince keep the conservative line.

Anonymous said...

If the candidate, Sennett in this case wanted a primary and he asked the committee to grant one then there would be a primary. If they did not listen to the candidate then they are stupider than I thought. And if you want a new chairman then you should find one that can mend not break the committee further. If you idiots want a power struggle then you will have nothing to show for it, just like you got in the DA's race.

Anonymous said...

Amazing that some still don't see what is so painfully obvious.

Vince had the cash in hand from the elite of the Kingston community, he thought he had political clout to use in the wake if the death of his father.
That capital was waning fast and if he did not take advantage of it this year, he would have lost it for good.

Translation, he was running no matter what. Primary or not, this was going to be a three way race, and he was destined from the beginning to come in last.

What was clear throughout this process was that Vince had no people skills, no ability to relate to those outside his comfort zone. He was one of the worst campaigners that we have ever seen and he was painfully uncomfortable in public.

His supporters privately admitted his deficits, but they convinced themselves that they could isolate him and fool the public. The public wasn't fooled, the party wasn't fooled, and here we are.

Holly will do a fine job. Jon will have more work than he knows what to do with and he will have time to enjoy his house full of women. Vince will return to being the introverted loner that was most comfortable standing in the back of a crowded room surrounded by his nearest and dearest.

What is cleat is that the clout of the Kingston elite is dissipating before our eyes and their own actions are expediting their fall.

As to the future of the party, reconciliation takes selfless, intelligent leadership that understands that process comes from decades of experience and knowledge. Process cannot be abandoned when the result is not perfect. Process cannot be abandoned when leadership disagrees with the majority of the party. Leadership must remember that consensus is more important that any individual's opinion, including the personal opinion of an individual leader.

Lets learn, move forward, and avoid another bloodletting over the executive position. Otherwise we will be watching as some republican is sworn in as the county executive.

Anonymous said...

Bradley knew what would happen if he stayed in the race.....he must be on the republican payroll. Nice going Maurice, you should have been advising Vince to drop out of the race a long time ago. I wonder how your voters feel about you now? Not endorsing the democrat? Political suicide for sure!

Anonymous said...

Give Clint Brown his due, too!

Peace Love Zen Unity

CB Love child #2

Anonymous said...

Glad that "Ornery Prick Jr."
didn't win.

Anonymous said...

Hasn't Bradley announced his candidacy for County Exec yet?

Anonymous said...

Most assumptions here about the primary is that Jon would shave won, and Bradley would have been on the Con line anyway. EVER think, just for a moment, Bradley would have won the primary? He had far more money than Jon. He had far more name recognition than Jon. He was FAR more electable than Jon. Bradley would have won the Primary, and you would have had a democratic DA.

Parete tried his best to primary the DA position. It would NOT have cost the county 100K as some say, because THERE ALREADY WERE PRIMARIES going on. But special interests shouted the loudest, and kept the committee from allowing a primary.

I think Bradley's move, to stay in the race, was more of an "FU" to the special interests.

You should be directing your anger at Zimmet, and try to OUST her.

Anonymous said...

Bradley is a worthless candidate for any job or position. He's shown himself to have no ethics,no values, and no intelligent worth what-so-ever. His life is in ruins from listening to self serving power hungry parasites that couldn't care less about throwing him to the dogs. Morganthau included. He's lucky he has his "accountancy" to fall back on. With 10,000 idiots who are so stupid,he'll have customers. Bradley is no asset to the party,he's an albatross. He's finished.

Anonymous said...

Bradley, by the time the election came was a true contender. It was too late to get the line but he will be a rising star in Ulster County. Who will be the next executive. Mc.

Anonymous said...

Election is OVER Jeremy. It's time to STOP filtering comments which make too much sense. You won't get into trouble anymore.

ralph childers said...

"obtain new leadership"...."I just hope that without blaming people"
Yo Jeremy, you are really sounding like a female presidential candidate now. But no amount of distorted discourse can alter the facts that the Ulster County Democratic Committee chose Jon Sennett as their candidate. If the "leadership" of that committee had acted responsibly instead of selfishly, Jon Sennett would be the Ulster County DA today and there would be no "blaming" necessary. But as we all know he(they?) didn't.

Anonymous said...

Maurice either has no plans to run again or doesn't need the support of Ulster County. He was a sell-out and has a lot of Dems really ticked off at him. He's probably hoping we'll forget. It is unfathomable to me that people are still whining that Jon should HAVE (not OF) allowed a primary - it wasn't Jon's decision. The committee denied Vince a primary because he sucked - why would we encourage a shitty candidate to run against a stellar one? The Kingston Committee wanted Vince because he was from Kingston and he was "electable" - yeah, right - he lost four times. If Vince cared at all about being a player in the Democratic Committee, he would HAVE (not OF) dropped out and thrown his support to Jon. Wendy Ricks, Frank Engel, and John Beisel had the class to do that when the committee nominated Tony McGinty. The committee members have abided by Robert's Rules of Order (which require a majority, not a plurality, for a motion to pass) for decades - now that it didn't go their way, they want to change it. If they were willing to allow their weighted vote to make the decision for nominee, then why - just for this year - do we now have to "take it to the people"? Do they not want their vote to count? Let's skip the convention, have no nominees, and go right to a primary for every office. There is no doubt that they wanted to change the rules just for Jr. - if this was a nobody they'd never fight this hard for a primary or encourage him/her to stay on minor party lines. The Bradley supporters are brats - their attitude is like a 3-year old's: if I can't have it, then you can't have it either. Unfortunately, the citizens of Ulster County are the casualties of their childish behavior, because we don't have a superb DA as we would have had with Jon.

Anonymous said...

Bradley couldn't win anything outside of Kingston. Let him run for mayor. He'll never hold any office any higher than that. He's a loser now for life. Burnt toast! With a negative opinion of nearly three to one,his chances of ever redeeming himself are nil. King of Kingston maybe,but nothing more.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Zimet didn't stab the democratic party in the back. Distel did. He didn't deserve to represent the people he betrayed.And since when is the democratic majority a "special interest" anyway? Sounds like a bushy thing to say.

Anonymous said...

If Democratic Chairman John Parete truly believed in the importance and value of a Democratic Primary, with a stroke of his pen he could have simply signed a Wilson-Pakula to permit Bradley to participate in a primary. There was no rule to require that Parete stop and consider that the majority of votes were cast for Jon Sennett at the County Convention. He had unilateral power as party chair to sign the Wilson-Pakula. Parete didn't have to consider input from Democratic leadership from the Towns (the Executive Committee) or hold a special meeting (re-convention) to try and assemble enough support for Bradley among the entire committee. He also didn't really need to urgently fill committee vacancies, a mis-guided effort to "stuff" the committee ballot box. He could have just summarily given Sottile and Cahill and Hinchey and Al Spada what they desperately wanted - a shot for non-enrolled Vince Bradley JUNIOR to be the Democratic candidate for DA. I bet others will try to figure out what motivated Sottile, Cahill, Hinchey and Spada, the Tuchmans - I have my own thoughts - but I am not so sure it matters. What matters is that everyone on either side of this Bradley-Sennett contest needs to recognize that neither side of Democrats (no to mention the citizens of Ulster County) was well-served by the spactacular failure of the Chairman Paretes leadership.

Anonymous said...

"...with a stroke of his pen he could have simply signed a Wilson-Pakula..."

Absolutley not! It is clearly and unequivocally stated in the County Committee By-laws and State election law that the power of granting a "Wilson-Pakula" lies solely with the County Committee. Parete first tried to usurp that power and was thwarted. Then tried to grant that power to the Executive Committee and was thwarted. Thank god.

Now it's time for the power hungry little turd to go.

Anonymous said...

All of this is making me really wonder what Spada and Hinchey are up to. Why don't they want a man of integrity and justice as district attorney?

Anonymous said...

How much money is "Dadley" left with?

Anonymous said...

9:31 AM ???? Bradley couldn't win anything outside the city???? He didn't even win the city...or any other town for that matter. Bradley spent close to 200k and did not carry a single town!

Anonymous said...

4:14-I'm glad to hear that! I was beginning to think there's something wrong with the water up there. I wouldn't wish that scumbag on anybody. Thanks for letting Kingston off the hook.

Anonymous said...

To "11:09 PM,"

Based upon your comments, you are deserving of being the next Dem County Chair. Kindly identify yourself and consider applying for the position. We need more like you.

Anonymous said...

Still with the primary? Are you tuchman/bradley/parete people stupid?

You do NOT offer a primary to an inferior candidate who is not even a member of your party. Period. No matter who his daddy is.

Mike Harkavy said...

After viewing the past DA race, how does a Democrat seeking county office feel confident about putting in time, energy and money to secure the party nomination if they can be undercut by committee members and leadership? That is my main concern. We need to strengthen the by-laws to clearly define disloyalty. If an elected committee member can not support the party's nominated candidate and chooses to support another, it is their right, but they should resign from the committee. Two Saugerties committee members had the integrity to do just that in this past election cycle. If we don't support our candidates and continue the environment that led to the past split, we are a party with a foundation built on sand.

Anonymous said...

He can get a job at H&R Block.

Pundit said...

It is the height of hypocrisy to bring disloyalty charges against Saugerties committemen and then do the same thing on a grander and more public scale.

The County Chairman doesn't support the County candidate? Then resign the position and your job as Elections Commish.

Anonymous said...

Hector needs a job.

Anonymous said...

It is nothing new for committee people to support non party candidates. There are too many personalities involved and too many bad candidates. It is a tough task to ask every committeeman to work for someone that they don't like or feel is not the best candidate as in the Sennett - Bradley case. If you feel screwed by a group within the party then you dig in your heels. Thay is nothing new.

Anonymous said...

"If we don't support our candidates and continue the environment that led to the past split, we are a party with a foundation built on sand."

Exactly. Vote Republican.

Anonymous said...

i luv it when you democrats fight.
in 2 years the legislature is ours again. enjoy what time you have left.

carntight? darnright!

Anonymous said...

11:09 Does sound like an intelligent individual that could effectively repair this party. Please do take over! You'd have people like me to back you up.

Anonymous said...

Two years is a pretty optimistic goal. The complete destruction of your current party next year is not likely to make it possible. I hope you start the process soon of dumping all your theocrats and picking up the libertarians. We democrats are still cleaning out. Contrary to what you might assume,the two party system works when both sides recognize the constitution. I wish you luck in that endeavor. With 75% of the populace against the republicans,you have tough row to hoe. A libertarian democracy would be great,but it seems only possible under democrats right now.

Anonymous said...

Can we impeach the Democratic elections commissioner?

Anonymous said...

10:07 - Committee-people are elected to support the Democratic slate - if a committe-person doesn't like a candidate, then (s)he should just sit on his/her hands. You DON'T publicly support a non-endorsed candidate - what you do in the voting booth is your business. What you do publicly is definitely committee business. It is not a committee-person's right to choose whom to support. If you've ever sat on a board and been part of a subcommittee, whatever the committee's decision is, you all must abide by it. You don't come out of the board room trashing fellow committee members or disclosing who voted and how. You put on a unanimous front. Most of all, the committee leader is supposed to LEAD - and that means practicing principle above people. John Parete didn't want Sennett - he made that clear from the beginning. It doesn't matter - he should've abandoned his support for Bradley or resigned from the committee. Instead he was a selfish idiot who lost the DA slot for the Democrats - it was ours to be had.

Anonymous said...

Whoever takes over the county leadership needs skills to reconcile, compromise and build consensus and also needs to know how to function within the bi-laws of the committee.

Roberts rules of order are a useful tool when dialogue gets too heated, but rules of order should not be a deterent to free dialogue and the productive exchange of ideas. These are basic tools necessary to do the job, but far more is needed.

Whoever takes over needs to be thoroughly versed in the goegraphy of the county and must know where the natural alliances are. The next chair will need to know what debts are owed and by whom, what loyalties exist outside of party affiliation, where the dirty laundry is buried and who benefits from the laundry staying buried.

The next chair needs to know how to take advantage of alliances, loyalties and debts to build coalitions of voters. Blocks of voters win elections.

It is disturbing and a sign of trouble when we have to grasp at straws to find someone who has the skill set to perform the job.

Flattering as the suggestion may be, that person I am not.

While I have experience with consensus building and I run a good meeting, I do not know the difference between a town, village and/or hamlet, i couldn't tell you where the City of Kingston ends and the Town of Ulster begins, I still cannot keep Platekill straight from Walkill and I get completly lost whenever I try to find the shortcut between Rosendale and New Paltz.

I also have real problems keeping straight how the Paretes are related to the Bradleys, how Gilpatrick is related to Bruhn, how and whether Rich Cahill is related to Kevin Cahill, whose great great grandfather is buried at the Old Dutch Church and who sat next to who in elementary school.

Whoever the next chair may be, it is going to be a difficult job, and the chair will need the support of the party and the benefit of the doubt from the rank and file. While we need to learn our lessons from the past eight months, the sooner we can put this episode behind us the better for all concerned.

I will just sign off as 11:09

Anonymous said...

to 2:46......
No.

Anonymous said...

How can anyone associate the libertarians with democrats. Democrat platform is filled with "government knows best" policies. The government should control every aspect of our lives, through the use of taxation and legislation, both limit and restrict our personal freedoms. The republicans are not nescessarily any better, but limited government, although not always practiced, is still a cornerstone of their platform.

Anonymous said...

Troy Ashdown for Chair. He'll need a new job anyway, that backstabbing motherf@cker!!!!!!!!!

Jimmy won, so you are done!!!!

Congratulations to Mayor Sottile!!!!

D E M O C R A T S
U N I T E
N O W

Anonymous said...

WAS a cornerstone,the current GOP is about as far away from limited government as it can get. Maybe if Ron Paul was to emerge as their leader,it would then be for limited government. It's doubtful though that they'd give up the fascist theocratic agenda and do something republican like limit the control of government over the people. We'll see.

Anonymous said...

The anti-regulatory rhetoric from the radical right (in the guise of "libertarianism") scares the piss out of me.

Two words..."nuclear energy"

Two more..."social security"

Thank god for Democrats and government control.

Right wing regulatory policy is most telling in the role of the FCC. And in the tax code with it's regressive structure favoring the rich at my expense.

Yeah, less control... Just what we need.

Anonymous said...

I'm glad their "libertarianism" scares you. I'm certain that promoting a new republican split will benefit our party and our nation. Dividing out the theocrats from the so-called "fiscal conservatives" can be quite effective in wresting power from them. Keep posting your fears to spur them on. Divide and conquer this right-wing agenda. We have less than a year.

Anonymous said...

Ron Paul, much like his buddy H. Ross Perot is on the Clinton payroll. (or vice versa) When he doesn't win the nomination (assured), then he'll declare his intentions to run as an populist independent, and many media co-conspirators like Lou Dobbs @CNN will back his candidacy knowing full well that the 20% which Paul will garner in the national election will be more than enough to give their REAL choice, Hillary, enough votes to win the key battleground states since 7 out of 10 of Paul voters would have voted for the GOP nominee anyway. (Perot stats) 1992 redux. Pathetic if it works, but it did once.

Don't Faul for the Paul trap!

Ronny E. LaPhant
Proud Republican
*Only about 700 more shopping days until the Republicans take over the UC Legislature!!!!

Anonymous said...

Blabs thanks for your kind remarks regarding Carnright. He will be a good D.A. All I can say is thank you Vince.

Anonymous said...

Thank God democrats are for government control! Finally! Some light is shed on their true intentions. The government SHOULD control each and every life. None of us are smart enough to make our own decisions. There are only a few highly evolved persons (such as Jon Sennett) who should be put in charge of us. Am I close?

Anonymous said...

700 days until the gay flamers take the legislature? Lol. That'll really mind-fuck you conservatives. I hope you get your wish.

Anonymous said...

That's perfect 3:47! Keep that going for a few months and the right-wingers will all scatter to get their guns before the "communist" democrats take them all away. Watch out for that pesky FBI though,and don't plan on travelling. At least not until 2009.

Anonymous said...

We keep bitching about Sennett versus Bradley.....IT IS OVER!! There is plenty of blame to go around, stop the whining.

Sennett barely carried Saugerties over Bradley, and Sennett had HUGE, ACTIVE support from Harkavy and company.

Don't you see the writing on the wall. There is enough stenght on each side of this power struggle to ruin the party.

We need wake up. NOW!! or risk losing everything the party has accomplished!

You do the math.
30,000 republicans
vs
15,000 "New Dems"
vs
20,000 "Old Line Dems".

We lose EVERY TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Not changing minds, just the people. Lot's of talk about the "new democrats". Well, just who the hell are these "new democrats". You know who they are, they are the NYC relocates because they didn't want to live in a 'target' city. Since when do locals like 'city folk'?

Strange bedfellows are made by this arrangement of NYC democrats and local democrats. Remember, it was NYC that ruined Westchester, Putnam, Rockland, Orange, and recently Dutchess open spaces over time. The same is bound to happen in Ulster. Local democrats should be rejecting relocates, and telling them to return to where they came from. Do we want to become the next suburb of NYC? Think about it enviromentalists.

Anonymous said...

I'm on the committee - I'm from here - and I'm one of the supposed "new Democrats" because I'm a Sennett supporter (I'm guessing that's the criteria). Most of the "new Democrats" have lived here for many years. I know of very few people on the committee who moved here from the city less than 10 years ago. How many committee-people from NYC can you name? I don't think I could name more than 5...and I know a LOT of committee-people...

Anonymous said...

"...democrats should be rejecting relocates, and telling them to return to where they came from..."

You're disgusting.

If NYC "relocates" were Mexicans, you'd be Lou Dobbs.

If they were black, you'd be racist. (Same thing actually.)

I have an idea, let's welcome the "relocates" and send your parochial, narrow-minded ass to NYC. No wait, then I'd have to see your disgusting face when I went to visit friends and see a show. Go to Idaho you moron.

Anonymous said...

Vincent Bradley relocated here this year.

Many who supported him currently live in the city, including Zali Winn.

The divide is not between locals and "relocates" (btw, this is not a real word in Webster's dictionary). The divide is between the rulling-class, both republican and democrat, who are used to picking and choosing their government officials and real people with mixed incomes who want an effective, open and truly democratic government.

Anonymous said...

I've been here fifteen years and still I can't believe that these "local" morons would want to protect their filthy decrepit lifestyles. Without our money and input you'd all still be waiting tables or plowing fields. Get the hell out already if you can't handle change. This area belongs to no one,least of all the inbred. We "new democrats" are the majority of democrats.

Anonymous said...

6:41, the fact you immediately came to the conclusion that 'relocates' reffered to some minority group, the YOU sir (or madam) are the RACIST pig. It must be YOU that have some kind of hate for minorities.

More SENSIBLE and INTELLIGENT people understand what was meant, such as 6:38 (although I do not agree). 6:41, You must be one of those regressives that are often brought up.

Anonymous said...

Want to avoid this in the future?

Simple, if you're seeking the Democratic nomination you cannot seek any other lines until you have the Democratic nomination.

That way you can tie up other smaller lines after you've gotten the democratic nod, there is no siphoning votes away like Vince did.

Oh, and assuming there was a primary here and Bradley won (as all his buddies claim would've happened), Sennet wouldn't have been the spoiler drawing votes away on minor line.

The official democrat can always get the Flat Earth, Independence, WFP, etc lines after they sew up the Dem line.

Of course, as Lincoln said "a house divided cannot stand," and it looke like Ulster CO Dems are not quite united....

Anonymous said...

8:57 - You are right - unfortunately these " New Democrats " are so bent on shoving there agenda down your throat they don't get it. They are the biggest group of intolerant NUTS going. Good Luck UC Democrats.

Anonymous said...

Keep dreaming! The new democrats outnumber the hard-liner conservatives two to one. You're the minority and it's only getting worse. The nop's are definitely leaning to our side.25,000 new dems,plus 35,000 nop's,to 30,000 reds, and 10,000 traitors. 60,000 to 40,000 in our favor. By next election the traitors will be far less than this year. You're shovelling sand against the sea. Haven't you noticed all the "for sale" signs around? They're not the transplants,we're buying.

Anonymous said...

Bradley group sold everyone a bill of goods on a bad candidate. The rest is history. 95 percent of the people who voted for Bradley probably did not meet him. If they did, they would see that he is a slug of a candidate. It was more about backing the "home team." The home team lost.