Tuesday, January 24, 2006

Buzz Free Bruce Tytler To Run for Congress?

Last night, on an article related to the 24th District congressional campaign this year, an anonymous reader left the following message:

"From Cortland County, native of the district, educator Bruce Tytler is announcing a run, according to well placed democrats in the county. A true everyman, He will work tirelessly for the benefit of his district and bring forth the well of leadership to thirsty constituants.

So it is that the Bruce Tytler campaign for Congress is announced on the web. Seriously. This blog post that you're reading is only the second mention of the Tytler for Congress campaign available online. The first mention was at the comment on the article I previously mentioned on the New York Liberal web site.

Through a supporter's comments, the beans are spilled. Actually, I've been hearing rumors of a Cortland-based additional Democratic candidate for a couple days now, as I've been talking to people involved in the campaigns throughout the district. There's been nothing in my area's newspaper, though, and certainly nothing online.

Is this the way that the Tytler for Congress campaign means to announce itself? A bit more discipline will be called for in the future.

So, what do we know about Bruce Tytler? Well, I can see, by looking around on the web, that Tytler is the mayor of Cortland, and a long time participant in local Democratic politics. We also see here from this comment that Tytler is a teacher of some sort.

We also know that Tytler's supporters value the idea that their candidate is in touch with "well placed democrats". Pardon me, but what is a well placed Democrat? Rule one for campaigning: Don't insult the voters. The last thing that Democratic voters want to hear is that they are not well placed, that there are Democrats who matter much more than them. Democrats in the 24th District ought to get the message from their congressional candidate that the most well placed Democrats are the common place residents of 24th.

This comment also tells us that Tytler is an "everyman". Catch the contradiction? Tytler is supposed to be working with well placed Democrats, not the likes of you and me in the Democratic rabble, but he's also supposed to be an everyman, just an average Joe, working tirelessly.

Here's another suggestion to this anonymous Tytler supporter: An everyman does not work tirelessly. Ask any everyman you meet. An everyman is very, very tired these days, and chances are that he's working two jobs.

A final hint to Tytler's supporters: If you want to elect Bruce Tytler to the House of Representatives, you have to do so this year. Not last year. The election is in 2006, not 2005.


Anonymous said...

Tytler, Arcuri, and Roberts are running. Roberts seems like a good person but he comes across as a policy wonk and not a regular guy who "gets" the district.

Anonymous said...

From what I can gather, Bruce is a high school social studies teacher, who, in the 1980s, taught history and government at an inner city school in Texas. I guess he also has never lost a race....on the flip side of that, here in Albany the buzz is it was a republican in Cortland who leaked it to some blogs as a bit of dirty pool. This is a serious canidate folks, and he could get the nod.

24 Independent said...

Okay, anonymous, I think an interesting discussion could begin here if you would explain why it's "dirty pool" for a Republican to tell some blogs that he or she knows Bruce Tytler is considering a campaign for Congress.

What do you think is dirty about that?

What problems would it cause for Bruce Tytler?

Anonymous said...

Under cutting him, would be my guess, I can't really say that would be my speculation since I'm only going on buzz heard here among assembly aides. I'm from Brooklyn, but went to Cortland and knew some people who were involved in local politics. Bruce is a good guy in a dirty system, and he was mayor so he's got to have enemies.
As an observer I can estimate that the announcement will come after the Super Bowl.

24 Independent said...

Okay, here's what I don't understand, though.

Why would it be regarded as a dirty trick to say about a candidate that the candidate will be running for office?

Either he's a candidate or he isn't. If he is, let people know, set a date for a formal announcement, and go for it. If he isn't, then deny it.

The emphasis people place on secrecy is really overblown in its importance, in my opinion. An open campaign is much more appealing than one that keeps all of its cards held to its chest. Of course, I would never advocate giving all information away, but merely revealing that someone wants to run for a certain office - now that's not such a big deal, is it?

Anonymous said...

24 Democrat, I completely agree with you, I'm just trying to explain the "logic", as it were. lol