Astounding!
Mhmm...
Seemingly - how are these things connected?
Now, this would be the positive fallout
I've lived through a couple electoral cycles here, and am noticing a pattern.
National news channels (especially Republican ones), will make a huge deal about the NYC mayoral elections. The elections will be treated as a litmus test for where the Democratic or Republican Party is headed, and as a potential launching pad for a national candidacy. Probably because there aren't any midterms or presidential primaries to discuss on air.
Then, this person will inevitably bomb in the worst possible way on the national stage. Rudy Giuliani thought he could sell himself as "America's Mayor", and leverage 9/11 to his advantage. Mike Bloomberg thought he could leverage how he got us off Big Gulps and cheap cigarettes, and balanced the budget.
I think Bloomberg won only American Samoa, and Giuliani got 3% or something in Iowa.
Mind you - both guys entered the cycle being considered as potential frontrunners. Bloomberg had raised the most money any candidate had ever raised.
-------
On the Democrat side - the mayor's office seems to generate nonstop freaks. Bill de Blasio polled around zero, and couldn't even get into the primary debates.
-----//
In the end, it seems the governorship is where the more successful campaigns are launched - despite how much attention the mayor's race gets. FDR, Teddy, Cleveland, Van Buren - all former governors. Even the ones that lost, did significantly better than the best mayors ever did - Rockefeller, Pataki.
The fact that the last time a NY governor won was FDR, kinda tells you how much NY's role in the country has diminished.
I don't think a single senator or congressmen had ever successfully contested an election either.
Hmph...