Sunday, June 04, 2006

Why is Michael Arcuri Keeping Wage Proposal Offline?

It's been days and days since I wrote about the strange absence of a press release from Michael Arcuri's on Arcuri's own web page. The press release, on his proposal to increase the federal minimum wage, was finally reported on by a few news outlets with a delay of a few days. But still, the proposal is nowhere to be found on Michael Arcuri's web page.

Now, some might see this as a sign of duplicity. The Working Families Party did, after much reluctance, finally endorse Michael Arcuri just a few days after a press conference by Mike Arcuri proposing a minimum wage increase. Some might say that Arcuri's neglect of mentioning the proposal on his own campaign web page reflects that Arcuri only made the proposal in order to get the WFP endorsement, and now that he's got the endorsement, he's going to let the issue drop from his campaign.

That would be consistent with Michael Arcuri's pattern of dealing with other Democrats. From what I've been told, Arcuri told members of the Les Roberts campaign that he would be speaking out more strongly on their progressive issues, including the Iraq War and energy alternatives, and would even use the Les Roberts policy papers. Once Arcuri got Les Roberts to drop out and received an endorsement from Arcuri, those promises were forgotten.

But then, I look at that empty calendar on the Arcuri for Congress web site. I look at the months-old goofy promise that very soon, voters could have Michael Arcuri trading cards for their very own. I look at the way that no "breaking news" or press releases, or new issue statements have been added to the Arcuri for Congress campaign in weeks.

Then, I decide to give Mike Arcuri the benefit of the doubt, and conclude that his campaign either has very little control over its own web site, or has forgotten about it.


Curious said...

Sadly, Arcuri seems to have ceded his messaging to the Oneida Dems blogspace.

Anonymous said...

Jon, Mike Arcuri has a simple electoral plan for this campaign. He wants the Sherry Boehlert vote - simply replacing the diehard Republicans with diehard Democrats and keeping the whole middle. Once you view his campaign through that lens, you'll understand his policy reluctance.

Curious said...

12:00--What is "the whole middle"?

I'm not being facetious, I really don't get it. Who are these mythical people who are neither R nor D and yet don't vote on the issues? And why, when I've lived in what's now District 24 for 15 years, have I never met one?

"Policy reluctance"??? Now THAT's what I look for in a candidate for national office.

Anonymous said...

The middle are the reps and dems who don't vote the party line. Approximately 30% of your party voters vote only the party. Neither party has a lock on the issues which is why the middle swings back and forth.

24 Independent said...

Anonymous 10:19, please get specific. This general description of the middle isn't useful for this particular campaign.

If you want to claim that "neither party has a lock on the issues", then I'd like you to cite specifically which issues you think the Republicans have right that the Democrats have wrong.

Name those issues if you want to change my mind, and convince me that Arcuri's tilt toward this mythical "middle" is not really a run toward the right wing.

In my experience, every time someone who claims to stand as a "centrist" "moderate" or in the "middle" is asked to get specific about the issues, they get suddenly and suspiciously silent.

Anonymous said...

Sorry Jon, I'm not taling about my views. I'm talking about Arcuri wanting the Boehlert vote. Are you disagreeing with me? Do you think he has some other strategy?

24 Independent said...

Unfortunately, no, I think that Arcuri is trying to get the Boehlert vote, and working hard to woo Republicans as a result. He will represent us Democrats quite poorly as a result. People forget that Sherwood Boehlert cast many destructive right wing votes, including supporting the creation of the Iraq War.

Arcuri's strategy to win the Boehlert Republicans seems to be to remain as vague as possible on most issues. As far as I can tell, Arcuri isn't really motivated by any issues as much as he is motivated by ambition.

That doesn't mean I support Ray Meier, who would be a terrible congressman. It does mean that I am very disappointed in the way Michael Arcuri is running his campaign, and I have strong doubts as to whether Arcuri would be a congressman that we could count on to do the right thing rather than cave into pressure from whatever the prevailing sentiment of the day might be - or where power lies.

Anonymous said...

Jon, I don't always agree with you, but you got this one right on. Issue-less campaigns begin to look like power graps really quickly. No one votes for a candidate based on the desire to help them add a line to their resume. Arcuri needs to give us an issues based reason to vote for him.

We all saw how well DC consultants worked for Al Gore and John Kerry. Arcuri ain't no President, but he could be a good Congressman if he would start talking issues.

Anonymous said...

The fact is that in order for Arcuri to win he's going to either have to get some Republicans to vote for him and/or boost Democratic and Independent turnout in this mid-term election. However, 99.9% of Republicans aren't going to put in volunteer hours for Arcuri no matter what. So, the more he does to alienate fellow Democrats and Independents the less chance he has that they will work for him or go out of their way vote for him. And, if a alienated Democratic or Independent voter casts a vote for him it will most likely be a vote against the Republican, which doesn't bode well for Arcuri holding the seat in the 2008 election cycle if he manages to win in 2006.

24 Independent said...

How do you get those Republican votes? By appealing to the many, many Republicans who currently feel betrayed by the GOP, from Bush on down. There are a lot of them.

You DON'T get those Republican votes by adopting Republican positions on the issues. The Republicans will always be the first choice for voters who vote by those issues.

Anonymous said...

I guess I am one of those mythical people, although I am pretty sure I am really here. I think. Wait let me check...yup I'm really here.

For example I am totally against the Iraq war, I know damned well we went there under false pretenses. No need to go into details we all know.

However, I am dead against letting illegal aliens off the hook and believe they should all be sent back. I believe they are part and parcel to a well thought out plan to continue to bring down the standard of living of Americans. I am also sick and tired of paying for their medical costs in my ludicrously priced Single-Pay premium while their employers make record profits and pawn responsibility for their care onto me. If we don't take care of our own first we will surely become closer to a third world country. I think immigration is a wonderful thing. When it's done legally.

I am a democrat by registration. I am also ad hoc in my reasoning. Issue by issue, I sometimes lean to the left, sometimes to the right. Overall, I would have to say I wouldn't be caught dead as a registered republican given what I have seen.

Curious said...

7:32--Sorry, but this doesn't make you one of those mythical middlemen. You're a litmus-test Democrat who, like most Democrats, votes on particular issues rather than a whole vision. You're not some "moderate" in-between namby pamby voter.

Anonymous said...

Where'd you hear that the WFP was reluctant about endorsing Arcuri? I heard they'd been supporting him for a while. When I saw Arcuri speak, he talked about getting out of Iraq now, and I've heard it's part of his stump speech.

Sounds like you're reading to much into an out-of-date web site.

Anonymous said...

He's not keeping that coverage offline, the Republican press in our district is keeping it offline.

24 Independent said...

The Republican Press is keeping Michael Arcuri from putting his own press release on this issue up on his own campaign web page???

Please, explain to me how the Republican Press can manage to do that. Through what kind of technical wizardry is such a thing accomplished?

Curious said...

Hey, if MA wants a model of a website that's working FOR the candidate rather than AGAINST him, he might check out
I don't entirely love the guy (although for sure he's a gazillion times better than Randy Kuhl), but his site is chock full of information, opinions, and ongoing events.