Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Thursday, October 27, 2016

Still trailing Democratic candidate Bill de Blasio in the New York City mayoral race, Republican Joseph Lhota is growing desperate — and his latest ad proves it.

The ad, titled “Can’t Go Back,” was released on Wednesday and depicts a regressing city to come under de Blasio. It strives to paint the current public advocate as a mayor unable and even unwilling to reduce crime in New York City, stating “Bill de Blasio voted to take over 5,000 cops off the street” in its first few seconds.

The ad then warns of de Blasio’s “recklessly dangerous agenda on crime,” referencing the candidate’s response to a recent violent biker gang attack that occurred in the city. Following the incident, de Blasio suggested that police “visit motorcycle clubs and talk to bikers,” as a “proactive approach” to “fight gangs.” Lhota’s ad, however, portrays de Blasio as easy on the bikers, and on crime.

The ad then takes a dramatic turn to several black-and-white photos showing poverty, rioting, crime, and a rather creepy-looking elderly woman standing on an old, graffiti-covered train. The message: Bill de Blasio will “take New York backwards.”

The over-the-top ad reflects Lhota’s frustration. Polls show that he is expected to lose November’s election in the deeply Democratic city, where most voters have a negative opinion of the GOP.

The night before the ad was released, Lhota struggled to gain any traction in a debate with de Blasio. The Democrat dominated the hour-long debate, using the time to link his “mainstream Republican” challenger to the national Republican Party, which has seen its image suffer nationwide following the effort to defund Obamacare and force a government shutdown.

In his closing remarks, the overwhelmingly favored de Blasio included a jab at Lhota, saying: “We don’t need Republican, trickle-down economics or Tea Party extremism.”

Those comments forced a visibly upset Lhota to demand that his opponent not “lump me in with people I am in constant disagreement with,” or, as he put it, “national Republicans.”

Lhota, desperate to distance himself from his tarnished party, then stated: “It’s unbecoming.”

Unfortunately for Lhota, the greatest obstacle he faces is carrying the burden of the R next to his name in a city both weary and wary of Republicans.

Photo: MTAPhotos via Flickr

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2013 The National Memo
  • Dominick Vila

    The best thing that Lhota can do at this point is be quiet and dignified. Portraying bikers as criminals highlights how out of touch this man is. Most bikers are responsible citizens who enjoy the freedom of riding their bikes and enjoying nature. Lhota is going to lose, and he is going to lose bad.

    • Jim Myers

      I certainly hope you are correct.

      However, nothing in politics is a given.

      Consider this. If it wasn’t for George W. Bush and DICK Cheney, Barrack Obama would NOT be President Of The United States today.

      • RobertCHastings

        And as my ex’s father used to say, “if a frog had wings, he wouldn’t bump his ass along the ground.” And if it had not been for Aaron Burr’s cowardly shot, Alexander Hamilton would probably have been the fourth or fifth president.

        • Jim Myers

          Very interesting comments.


          • RobertCHastings

            I am sure you can produce some similar comments, that are printable.

        • CPAinNewYork

          WRONG! Alexander hamilton could never become president, because he was foreign born and that is prohibited by the Constitution. In fact, some think that the motivation for the prohibition against a foreign born person becoming president was due to the low opinion that many of the framers of the Constitution had of Hamilton.

          • RobertCHastings

            WRONG! Read and understand Article II, if you are capable. While he was not a natural-born citizen, he was a citizen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution. IF, as you claim, the motivation for that clause was Hamilton himself, then the Founders didn’t do a very good job of writing it, did they? Perhaps they wrote it the way they did to actually reward him for all of his help in founding this country.

          • CPAinNewYork

            No, you’re wrong. The operative consideration here is one’s birth place. If one is foreign born, then he or she cannot become president. Period. Don’t you recall how the Republicans tried to prove that Obama was foreign born to stop him from being president? I don’t recall if they challenged his citizenship, but the thrust of their challenge was his birth certificate, which gives his birth place.

            You’re probably sitting at your computer red faced at your ignorance. But don’t feel too bad. I’m sure that you’ll find another opportunity to display your snotty nature.

          • RobertCHastings

            Article II, section 1, “no person except a natural born citizen , or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of the president.”
            As I stated previously, Hamilton was NOT a natural born citizen;, however, at the time of the adoption of the Constitution he was a citizen. The mere fact of his being a citizen “at the time of the adoption of the Constitution” made him eligible, once he attained the age of 35. I am sure you will find another way to display your stupidity.

          • CPAinNewYork

            He was NOT a citizen, he was an UNnaturalized immigrant.

          • RobertCHastings

            Burr, regardless of the fact that YOU like him, was a coward. According to published accounts of the duel, Hamilton intentionally shot wide of the mark. Burr, on the other hand, being the scoundrel that he was, shot arguably one of the most important of the Founding Fathers. Where did you come up with the “unnaturalized immigrant”? (my spell-check doesn’t even accept that one). And let us not forget that John Boehner’s father was no more than a tavern keeper, and the legitimacy of someone’s birth, especially in this country, should never prove a deterrent to advancement. I mean, look at you.

            The question regarding the possible presidency of Hamilton will be argued for years by better men than either of us, some pro and some con. On his merits, he deserved at least a shot at the presidency. After all, being the chief author of the large majority of The Federalist essays, he established the philosophical groundwork for the establishment of the United States and the logical underpinnings for the Constitution.

          • CPAinNewYork

            Let’s take your response point by point:

            I like Burr? Where did you get that unfounded opinion? WRONG! I don’t like Burr. I think that you are one of those individuals who tries to win an argument by lying about his opponents. You’d probably make an effective politician, especially one of the sleazy variety.

            Your spell checker doesn’t have “unnaturalized”? This site has no problem with it. The word is not underlined in red.

            Your comment regarding John Boehner’s father is also off the mark. I was quoting an enemy of Hamilton’s, who used the term “West indies tavern keeper” in his derogatory reference. I was not insulting any occupation. I think that you know I wasn’t.

            “…someone’s birth, especially in this country, should never prove a deterrent to advancement. I mean, look at you.” What a clever insult, but I’ll ignore it, since you know nothing about my birth.

            “….better men than either of us.” Speak for yourself. I have no problem discussing Hamilton’s fitness for the presidency, but since you obviously feel overmatched, I’ll graciously let it slide.

            The Federalist Papers were written by Hamilton, Madison and Jay. Why do you assert that Hamilton was the chief contributor? I think that Madison and Jay were pretty bright. I believe that Madison wrote a large portion of the Constitution and John Jay was the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

            I think that I’ve answered all of your points. I do regret that I probably gave the project more time and effort than it’s worth, but I did want to respond to your snotty missive. I’ll grant you that when it comes to snottiness and invective, you have the advantage of me.

          • RobertCHastings

            I have no issue with the intelligence of EITHER Madison or Jay.However, of the 86 issues of the Federalist, Hamilton wrote 51 and corroborated on two others, Jay wrote five,and Madison wrote the rest (about half the input of Hamilton). While both Jay and Madison were FORMALLY educated far beyond the attainments of Hamilton, Hamilton contributed, by all accounts, more to the Constitution, The Federalist, the young nation’s system of finance, and the very structure of the government of the new country than either of the others. As Washington’s right hand man throughout the Revolution and during Washington’s presidency, he was extremely influential on what the US came to be.

      • Landsende

        You should add Sarah Palin to those that helped get President Obama elected. A lot of voters favored John McCain, including me, until he picked Palin as his running mate. Every time she opened her mouth it made others question McCains judgement as she was clearly not qualified to be VP or if anything happened to McCain be POTUS. After this latest debacle by the tea party republicans I will not be voting for any republicans whether state or national until the tea party is no more.

        • Jim Myers

          I lost a lot of respect for John McCain when he became a George W. Bush surrogate. Prior to that, I held him in very high esteem, even though I often differed with his political views.

          He was the last Republican that I would have voted for as POTUS.

          But he lost that battle by incorporating stupidity, both by supporting the agenda of George W, Bush and by picking Palin as a running mate.

          I saw her as “Arm Candy” for John McCain, a last ditch effort to win over votes in a loosing battle.

          I never expect to vote for a Republican in a Congressional or Presidential election again.

          W’s father was the last Republican I ever voted for in a Presidential election. Huge mistake.

      • CPAinNewYork

        Would you explain that?

        • Jim Myers

          to CPAinNewYork –

          I will explain any comment I made on this forum. However, the Disqus link did not coincide with this range of comments.

          Ask me to explain a specific comment, and I will be happy to respond.

          (It may take a while. I do not devote nearly as much time to this site as I used to.)


          • CPAinNewYork

            My comment was meant for Robert Hastings.

    • CPAinNewYork

      Bikers were recently portrayed on the History Channel as violent psychopaths who form into “clubs” like the Hell’s Angels, Mongols, etc. Through their illicit drug trading, they’ve amassed fortunes with which they can buy politicians and high priced lawyers.

      I think that bikers are menace to decent people and should be suppressed with extreme prejudice.

    • JSquercia

      I think he playing on the recent Biker Incident involving a gang of them attacking that driver of the SUV . I have read that prior to that they were rampaging around Times Square weaving in and out of traffic but more disturbingly riding on the sidewalks endangering pedestrians . A couple of days later I read a letter to the Editor in the Daily News claiming to have witnessed similar behavior in the %0’s on the East side .

  • RobertCHastings

    The biker “gang” depicted in the video seen ’round the world behaved criminally, and should be prosecuted, as a group, for their behavior. The inescapable fact that 911 calls prior to the videoed incident complained of criminally threatening behavior makes it apparent that the gentleman in the SUV was indeed frightened for his own safety and that of his family. This is an obvious case of the “wilding” phenomenon that seems to occupy a place in the history of the City. When individuals lose their ability to think as individuals and succumb to the will of the mob, we saw on the video what the result is, and for Mr.Lhota to ascribe some sort of sheen to this behavior is reprehensible.

    • nirodha

      It’s kind of too bad that this biker gang/SUV incident didn’t happen in Florida. Can you imagine the horror on the bikers’ faces as the man in the SUV, fearing for his family’s lives, opened fire with an AK-47?

      • RobertCHastings

        Even New York’s self-defense laws will clear him. The danger was real,
        for him and his family- just look at the results. And the bikers have
        no recourse because the video shows them going after him even AFTER he
        had no place to go.

  • stcroixcarp

    To tie a republican candidate to the national republican party is undignified but to run a racist ad against your opponent is not? What exquisite double-speak!

  • Desire

    As for saying he wanted to take 5000 cops off the streets I would Imagine New Yorkers are sick of the cops taking over the streets these days I’d say that was a good thing less cops there are more cops today on one street then there were in a percent…

    • RobertCHastings

      The recent challenge to their stop-and-frisk laws will ease that. It’s great that someone outside the group was shooting with their Iphone.

    • JSquercia

      Apparently there was a SIGNIFICANT lack of police response and in fact one undercover cop PARTICIPTED in the assault on the driver of the SUV .I must add that it was ONE cop .
      I would watch the word “wilding” because as it turns out ALL those convicted of the rape of the Central Park jogger were EVENTUALLY cleared of the offense but ONLY after Serving Prison Time .