In Part 1 of a 4/4 interview with GOP consultant Roger Stone, Stone comments on the ’06 New York State Democratic and GOP gubernatorial contests.
In Part 2, for Thursday, Stone evaluates Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential prospects and her apparent tack to the middle, and sizes up the ’08 GOP presidential primary contest.
Stone has worked 8 GOP presidential campaigns, from Richard Nixon to the GW Bush ’00 Florida recount, where he handled Dade County.
The Spitzer-Suozzi contest
DCs: Just the fact this is now being called the “Spitzer-Suozzi race” in the popular political lexicon is good news for Suozzi, and the reporting is beginning to reflect the fact it’s an interesting race, and of increasing news value.
RS: Spitzer is mistaking name ID for support at this juncture – he has an impressive lead in the polls, but it’s built almost solely on name ID, and very little of it is rooted in deep knowledge of him and his record. There are aspects of his record that will be troublesome to voters.
First, he has only recently gotten on the bandwagon in cleaning up Medicaid – where has he been for the last seven years?
Second, he has aggressively gone after the prosecution of Ken Langone and Dick Grasso – two prominent Italian Americans; but no penalty to Carl McCall, who is certainly responsible in the entire matter. I also think that he’s not careful enough about who he takes contributions from in terms of people who may or not have business in front of the Attorney General’s office.
DCs: That’s a provocative statement – raising Italian-Americans and Carl McCall.
RS: Well I think it’s questionable whether there’s political pandering there. I’m not saying anything about the guilt or innocence of Carl McCall, but he was in a position of responsibility at the New York Stock Exchange – he signed off on this package.
Eliot, I think, would not — looking at a run for governor — prosecute an African American or harass an African American the way these other two gentlemen have been harassed. So, it’s a question – it’s a vulnerability.
I think Suozzi, in many ways, is a perfect antidote to that. Suozzi is an Italian-Catholic – he’s an attractive, working class guy – he’s imminently more likeable than Eliot, and that’s Eliott’s greatest problem. He’s a dour fellow, he’s very Upper East Side, and he’s an elitist.
He’s done some things well, granted, but running for Governor you have to be likeable. I think you can get elected Attorney General when there’s less focus on your personality, but to be Governor you have to have that quality – and it’s a quality Suozzi has. I think he has that kind of Kennedy style, he’s a young reformer, he was on these issues long before others, and he’s far more credible as a critic of the system.
And that’s Spitzer’s other biggest problem: he hasn’t rocked the boat in Albany – he’s been part of the Albany gang. And now he’s suddenly for reform in an election year? Come on. Suozzi can plausibly make that case. He’s got to build his name ID a little faster – but then you also don’t know what the prospects are here for independent expenditures. Everybody knows that Tom Golisano and other business interests who are opposed to Eliot are looking at funding some kind of political action – that’s an open secret, but whether that’s really going to happen I have no idea. But I do think that if you were going to do that you’d do it in the primary, not in the general election.
DCs: Are we basically looking at a situation where Spitzer will win, but get dinged up, and that Suozzi will over-perform and be “the news” on primary night?
RS: I think that’s the likely outcome. Eliot has to be given his due – he has worked very hard to get to where he is, he’s mostly consolidated the base of the Democratic Party – he sold his soul to Dennis Rivera and 1199; how you can do that and claim to be a reformer I don’t know. But in winning, if he does, he’ll be more vulnerable in the general than current conventional wisdom suggests.
The GOP Gubernatorial Primary
DCs: There’s kind of a basic scrum going on with little movement thus far. What’s the deal?
RS: I think Bill Weld will be the nominee of the Republican Party. He can muster the resources and he has enough conservative credentials to fend off a primary challenge from John Faso.
DCs: But what about Mike Long and the Conservative Party?
RS: That’s obviously problematic – it puts an enormous premium on Weld somehow figuring out how to secure the independent party nomination – which I don’t think is outside the realm of possibility. It’s not clear that’s locked up – Tom Golisano has a lot of influence in that party. It remains to be seen what he does.
DCs: Faso is ahead of Weld by a couple of points in the few polls out there – basically a lead just within the margin of error. How important is that at the moment?
RS: Faso has run statewide in New York, Weld hasn’t – so he’s got some residual name ID from that; he spent several million and ran a very strong race for Comptroller. But in the end, the Party machinery in most places will be for Weld – which is worth something – and Weld will outspend Faso 10-1…
DCs: 10-1?… that large a disparity?
RS: Bill Weld is a very good fundraiser. People should not lose sight of that.
DCs: What about Decker?
RS: I don’t think the Decker issue will be as easy to overcome as perhaps some in the Weld camp think. It is problematic, and a handy lever for opponents. That being said, I have a lot of admiration for Weld’s intellect and his gumption – and he’s got a very supply-side oriented record on taxes, which fits New York State very well. If he wins, as I expect, taxes will be a major factor.