Today’s news:

Bloomy bucks mean bupkis in Brooklyn

The Brooklyn Paper

Mayor Bloomberg rolled to a third term on Tuesday, but he didn’t win Brooklyn.

Challenger Bill Thompson won a plurality of the ballots cast by borough residents, getting 49.8 percent of the vote to the 46 percent earned by Bloomberg, who spent $90 million on his re-election effort.

The close vote total revealed deep divisions in Brooklyn’s electorate, with the incumbent, who ran as a Republican, running strong in white-majority neighborhoods from Bay Ridge to Borough Park, as well as Park Slope, Windsor Terrace, Carroll Gardens and Cobble Hill, while predominantly black and Latino neighborhoods in central Brooklyn and Sunset Park came out strong for Thompson.

Preliminary returns show that the Assembly district covering Park Slope and Windsor Terrace voted 55–40 percent for Bloomberg. The neighboring district covering Carroll Gardens, Cobble Hill and Brooklyn Heights went 53–40 percent for the mayor.

But in Fort Greene’s 57th Assembly District, 73 percent of voters went for Thompson.

In the end, the early returns show that Thompson won 169,071 Brooklyn votes to Bloomberg’s 157,296.

Citywide, of course, the mayor beat Thompson 50.6–46 percent.

The close results betrayed the predictions of virtually all of the borough’s political elite calling the race wrong. Borough President Markowitz, for instance, told The Brooklyn Paper that Bloomberg would win by “eight to 10 percent,” while Gov. Paterson said Thompson would win.

On the night, the mayoral race was the only close contest in Brooklyn.

In three contested Council races, Democrats rolled over their competition:

• In the 39th Council District, which covers Park Slope, Windsor Terrace, Carroll Gardens and Cobble Hill, Brad Lander got 70 percent of the vote to Republican Joe Nardiello’s 16.6 percent and Green Party candidate David Pechefsky’s 7 percent.

• In the 34th Council District, which covers Bushwick and Williamsburg, incumbent Diana Reyna shot down a challenge from Working Families Party–backed challenger Maritza Davila, 60–34 percent.

• And in the 43rd Council District, Democratic incumbent Vince Gentile beat back Republican Bob Capano with 60 percent of the vote.

And in the lone borough-wide race, Borough President Markowitz rolled to a third term, trouncing Republican challenger Marc D’Attavio, 85–13.2 percent.

Pin It
Print this story Permalink

Reader Feedback

Bob from Kensington says:
Money CAN buy happiness. And Bloomberg is very happy.
Nov. 4, 2009, 3:03 am
al pankin from downtown says:
the brooklyn voters didn't show up to vote, they took Bloombergs advantage for granted and were too lazy to vote.could you imagine if thompson won, the city would have been called super welfare city instead of just plain old welfare city.
Nov. 4, 2009, 7:29 am
Dave from Bay Ridge says:
Being a Mayor, Govorner or President is basically being a CEO of a company. That is why I never understood why an average politician would be qualified to run the business of a city state or country. Most politicians could never run a successful business, so why would you want them to run the business of a city.......

For one, I think we are lucky to have a mayor who has proven himself in life to run the business of the city as opposed to some dopey politician who couldnt run a McDonalds.... and Im not referring only to politician Thompson... im referring to all of them
Nov. 4, 2009, 8:24 am
Fourth Estate from DUMBO says:
Dave, this isn't 20 minutes into the future, but we are on our way!
Nov. 4, 2009, 10:13 am
Lawrence from Crown Heights says:
From the last presidential election, we learned that most Brooklynites vote along race line so what's the surprise that Bloomberg didn't win Brooklyn? From this election, we learned that an Obama endorsement was no longer a guarantee of success. NYC needs a financial expert Bloomberg to fix the economy now. Many Americans lately realize that American traditions are being jeopardized by liberal or democratic government. Voters were out on Tuesday to voice their opinions.
Nov. 4, 2009, 2:04 pm
Dave from Bay Ridge says:
Very true Lawrence. Look at the John Lui win. They bussed everyone in from Chinatown which basically iced David Yassky's cake!!!!
Nov. 4, 2009, 3:24 pm
Felix Santiago from Pelham Pky, Bronx says:
I'm not surpised that it was a close race. The Dems failed to produce a charismatic candidate. Thomson is merely an old line politician with a very doubtful history due to his Bd of Ed background. The Bd of Ed always implies dishonesty, chronyism, and corruption (no matter who the chancellor is). Thomson was doomed to fail. Unfortunately, Brooklyn's racial lines election proves again that Brooklynites should read Brown v. Bd of Ed of Topeka (at least) and desist from being racists and /or revere racists.
Bloomberg is the spokesman for the elite and his progeny of socio/economic elitism continues until the yr. 2013. Woe be the plight of NYC's middle class.
Perhaps a Mark Green for the Democrats and a backing off the "race card" in Bkln. would have produced a NYC mayor empathetic with the needs of those who work to support both the elite crooks and the welfare state freeloaders which permeate our contemporary political/socio-economic scerario.
Nov. 4, 2009, 7:04 pm
Bruce G from NE Bronx says:
Whenever there is a black or Hispanic Democrat running you can bet that the Black/Hispanic population will come out and vote for that person. We fail to realize that we (this country) hasn't come very far in terms of racism, and the gains made (ie: Black President) do nothing for the average black/Hispanic working class person still feeling the pain of never being able to get above water. Welfare is not something most of its collectors like to receive... but the vicious cycle of living in a city that looks down on you, a country that won't let you become a citizen, and where you work to pay rent. Its no wonder why there are generations of defeated NYers living on welfare and the Bronx is still the poorest boro.
Nov. 4, 2009, 11:17 pm
Michael from Bay ridge says:
The title of your article implies that people in Brooklyn don't like Bloomberg, but what I extract from the contents of the article says that people were split - some preffering one candidate others preferring the other.
I think this headline is typical of the Brooklyn paper and of other Murdoch owned media outlets - falsely summing up a situation and trying to get a reaction out of people for no reason.
Poor reporting on top of poor writing - but what else can you expect from BP?
Nov. 5, 2009, 9:54 am
judahspechal from Bed_Stuy says:
All of commentin on race has no freakin clue. In your zeal to point out racial divide, clear shows how blind you all. You have no clue about race, and race relations. In fact I doubt u hqve any clue other than u r bring to the table. People in Brooklyn voted against the Billionaire, because in favors rich developers to the poor. And in what Democracy does the populace stands idle by while leaders change rules to benefit themselve. No one in this City who voted for Bloomberg, should ever be engage about any Undemocratic act. This includes Democracy party Bosses who failed to field a better candidate or support the one choosen by Democrats in the primary. Even the media sat on their laptop. Finally, why would any good businessman who quad. his fortune while mayor from $4bil _ $20bil not spend $100mil to buy this city. Don't be surprise if his fortunate doesn't triple by the end of his term, while the middle class is run out of town. Yet u want talk about racial divides? Give me a break.
Nov. 5, 2009, 2 pm
Judahspechal from Bedstuy says:
Democrats in the USA has no heart, they will lead u down a dark alley while tellin u it's ok, while Republicans are Social creeps. I am weepin for my Country, just as I would bleed for it. Get a clue Americans, please get a clue!!!
Nov. 5, 2009, 2:09 pm
glenn from UES says:
The headline and story simply indicate that despite his massive spending and lip service to the middle class Bloomberg received less votes in Brooklyn then Thompson.
The only thing it leaves out is the obvious evaluation that this mayoral election as a whole was "disgraceful". Thompson was a lousy candidate and whether you personally feel you gain by Bloomberg being in office that doesn't change the fact that our so called democracy was weakened a bit more. You know it, you just might not care. Which of course is an indicator of our democracy being weakened a bit more.
Nov. 5, 2009, 3:06 pm
Joe Nardiello from Carroll Gardens says:

Mayor Bloomberg 'lost' Brooklyn for 2 reasons:

1) People struggled with the issue of his 3rd term and the overture to do an end-around the public referendum on term limits. This issue won an election for Bill DeBlasio despite a scant record of accomplishment and a history of detachment from what I've seen across 1,000s of his constituents who cannot seem to get an answer regarding their local issues. Republicans for one group, stayed away from the polling all together -- voting at a rate of 20% or less, because they didn't "like" either choice for Mayor. Not Thompson, nor the independent running on their line. In fact the frustration over term limits boosted Thompson's numbers and limited the amount of voters for the Mayor and many other candidates, affected as the 'baby thrown out with the bath water'.

2) Mayor Mike has little attachment with the people of Brooklyn. Although he benefits from endorsements of popular pols like BP Marty Markowitz and others - there's not too many Brooklynites that feel a strong connection to him. As a former campaign volunteer of his in '01 and '05 and across '09 - I saw a strong lack of loyalty on his part, when he'd decided not to endorse my own campaign for City Council ( As a voter, and real Brooklyn member of the middle class -- I can say that we respect his achievements, and can balance his record of being a "good Mayor" that has been non-partisan, achieved more than the previous 2 mayors arguably combined, etc. -- but without that visceral sense of him being "our Mayor", and standing besides us in the teeth of a Recession (proposing absurdities like Congestion Pricing, East River tolls, allowing MTA taxes on each small business in NYC at an unexplained $70-$170 clip, supporting new Resident Parking Permit fees to tax us for parking they say is now "free for 100 years" to raise more revenue for the MTA's morass of mismanagement, rising heating/energy, housing costs are staggering, all with people losing jobs left and right.. what HELP and relief is there for the people who must struggle to meet rising costs?

Anyone who thinks this is about "race" is a fool. It's about the economy. It's a about people's lack of trust that politicians are working FOR THEM and not the other way around -- and Mayor Mike crossed over that line, with his 3rd term. Because of that, he is now surrounded by scores of politicians that simply want his job -- think they can be a better Mayor -- and will make his job much more difficult, across Year 3 to Year 7 of this Great Recession. People know who Mike Bloomberg is - and while everyone is impressed with his life story and his desire to serve NYC.. some began to question his motives because of the money he's spending (as in why would he need this so badly, to waste $100 million?). Some people believe he's making money because of his name recognition with ownership of Bloomberg LLP. (Others believe him corrupt, which I don't in the least.)

No one gave Thompson much of a chance, but should have seen that there was a groundswell -- as I said as evidenced by the election of a man that believes he's a "co-Mayor" now, in Bill DeBlasio. Brooklyn's voice was heard -- to work harder, Mr. Mayor and build a new staff around you that knows why they are there.
Nov. 6, 2009, 11:06 am
Fourth Estate from DUMBO says:
The king doesn't care how any of you think. He won, that is all that matters to him. He shows it by calling it a mandate, how the majority of New Yorkers back him, yet no where near a majority voted. He is already going back on his MTA pledge. It was just for show. Any long time New Yorker knows his pledge on the MTA was BS.....wonder how many of you actually believed him?
Nov. 6, 2009, 1:33 pm

Enter your comment below

By submitting this comment, you agree to the following terms:

You agree that you, and not or its affiliates, are fully responsible for the content that you post. You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening or sexually-oriented material or any material that may violate applicable law; doing so may lead to the removal of your post and to your being permanently banned from posting to the site. You grant to the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual and fully sublicensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part world-wide and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

First name
Last name
Your neighborhood
Email address
Daytime phone

Your letter must be signed and include all of the information requested above. (Only your name and neighborhood are published with the letter.) Letters should be as brief as possible; while they may discuss any topic of interest to our readers, priority will be given to letters that relate to stories covered by The Brooklyn Paper.

Letters will be edited at the sole discretion of the editor, may be published in whole or part in any media, and upon publication become the property of The Brooklyn Paper. The earlier in the week you send your letter, the better.