Runoffs Tomorrow: Press Favors No Election at All


Oh shit — tomorrow’s the runoff election! Who’s up, again? Ah right — John Liu versus David Yassky for comptroller, and Bill de Blasio versus Mark Green for public advocate.

Forgive our confusion. The papers sure haven’t been covering it like an honest-to-God election, and even the candidates are taking election eve easy on account of Yom Kippur.

Not that they haven’t gotten some licks in. Green’s been kicking de Blasio for his “shady money.” de Blasio’s blasting Green as out of touch with city governance…

David Yassky tries to make something bad of John Liu’s Working Families Party endorsement — normally considered a big plus in New York elections — suggesting the WFP wants to make government “their plaything.” Liu reaches out for the Brooklyn lefty-intellectual vote with an interview in the Brooklyn Rail, suggesting that Mayor Bloomberg got such fast support from the local papers for his term limits overthrow because “Bloomberg was openly talking about how he wanted to buy the New York Times. And the fact is that he could buy all three major newspapers — tomorrow!” (Last week the head of the Citizens’ Union told Tom Robbins how Yassky finked out on term limits.)

But the worst vitriol is reserved for the election itself. “Are Runoffs Superfluous?” asks the Times. “Runoff Elections Costing You $14.4 Million!” cries Gothamist. “Runoff Elections Cost A Lot, Mean Little,” says NBC News.

The Post, as usual, declines to endorse for public advocate because they believe the office itself is a waste of oligarchy. And everyone reminds us that turnout is expected to be low. It’s like they didn’t want us to vote. And that’s silly. In whose interest would it be if we —