Search Salon

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Recently in Salon News

Guarding their silence
Prisoners' rights advocates say a code of silence among prison guards led to the acquittal of the officers charged with arranging the rape of an inmate.
By Christian Parenti
[11/22/99]

Throw away the key!
Jesse Jackson has betrayed the civil rights movement by defending young thugs who need to be punished, not babied.
By David Horowitz
[11/22/99]

Maybe I should buy you a globe for Christmas
George W. Bush's father planned to hit then-Gov. Bill Clinton with a series of one-line "zingers" about his foreign policy ignorance in '92, but guess who's laughing now.
By Robert Parry
[11/20/99]

Bush channels Reagan on foreign policy
With his first major speech, the GOP front-runner sought to put a string of gaffes behind him.
By Mark Dennis
[11/20/99]

"Drop the Chalupa, Al Gore!"
Republicans are plotting a strategy to court the Latino vote.
By Anthony York
[11/19/99]

Complete archives for News

- - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Jake Tapper

Nov. 22, 1999 | NEW YORK -- Danny, 29, and his wife Allison, 30, live in New York City. Danny's a labor lawyer; Allison's an executive in the fashion industry. And if the election for the New York Senate seat were held today, both would be voting for Mayor Rudy Giuliani over his likely Democratic opponent, first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton.

"Who cares?!" you might -- understandably -- ask.

Well, Clinton and Giuliani care. Or they should, at any rate. Because Danny and Allison are two near-perfect representatives of the swing voters who will decide next year's Senate race.

Danny's a registered Democrat, Allison a registered Republican; both routinely split their tickets. Danny voted for Clinton for president twice, incumbent Mayor David Dinkins over Giuliani in '93, Ruth Messenger against Mayor Giuliani in '97. Allison voted to re-elect President George Bush in '92, went with Clinton in '96, supported Giuliani on both of his recent mayoral runs. In 1998, the couple supported both Republican Gov. George Pataki in his re-election contest, and Democrat Chuck Schumer over incumbent GOP Sen. Al D'Amato.

Danny and Allison hail from the suburbs where the Senate fight will be waged -- he's from Long Island and she's from Westchester County.

They're Jewish, well-educated, higher-income -- just the sorts of voters who, according to polls, are either split down the middle between the two candidates, or are, as of now, leaning toward Giuliani.

New York voters as a whole are split 47 percent to 42 percent in favor of Giuliani, according to a Quinnipiac College poll conducted in early November. An even more enlightening poll came from CBS News and the New York Times at the end of October, which indicated that almost 70 percent of the voters have already made up their minds. With so many voters already adamantly in favor (or opposed) to the candidates, the battle will now come down to a relative handful of New Yorkers.

Thus, Danny and Allison -- both of whom say they support Giuliani, though that might change -- are precisely the people whose votes will be crucial to the outcome a year from now.

Clinton is "in a difficult position because she's got dual roles right now," Danny says. "One being the first lady, the other being a future Senate candidate. But because of that, some of her actions -- or more accurately, her inactions -- show that she lacks conviction on issues important to New Yorkers."

Danny's clearly not just referring to the fact that the first lady was in Chicago the night the Yankees clinched the World Series. Clinton's far more significant slip came last week, during a visit to Ramallah in the West Bank, when Suha Arafat -- the wife of Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat -- standing next to the first lady, made the ludicrous statement that the Palestinian "people have been subjected to the daily intensive use of poisonous gas by the Israeli forces, which have led to an increase in cancer cases among women and children."

Clinton's response was to stay quiet, reportedly so she didn't upset the delicate balance of the peace process. But, as the New York Times editorial board noted on Tuesday, "a more adroit diplomat ... might have been alert to the highly charged atmosphere and weighed in with something distancing herself from the comment. Mrs. Clinton did not do so until that night, after the controversy was in full boil."

Next page | New York to Hillary: Get a clue!