That's a very interesting question, and one hard to answer at this point.
My guess is the answer would be: it means less than meets the eye. Blackwell
remains Majority Chair. Had she betrayed the Mayoral choice of the Democratic
City Committee, and that choice had won, she would probably be deep in the
doghouse -- might even lose her title. But she betrayed the Mayoral choice of
the Democratic City Committee to support one rank rejectee -- while another
rank rejectee won. A former colleague whose district abutted hers for many
years, so they had ample occasion to logroll together despite differing
temperaments and interests.
Nutter is clearly not a "team player", never was, but that doesn't mean he's a
lone wolf. As Mayor he will probably work with City Council by building
shifting tactical majorities with anybody in the room. He'll try never to call
anybody a nasty name, or put them in a partisan box where he's supposed to
punish them and never work with them.
Just because Blackwell is 2nd on the Council while Anna Verna is 1st, doesn't
mean they are Made Women in the same family, so that Blackwell could be
"disciplined" for stepping out of line. Quite the contrary: the Blackwell
faction and the Fumo faction are historically independent and coexist by mutual
respect. That did not change with yesterday's vote.
I see Knox as an interesting bet on Blackwell's part. This horse was running
strong but lacked an organizational jockey. Had the horse had the best legs,
she would have wound up in an unusually powerful position (and one that would
have benefited her constituents). Turned out the critter had the second-best
legs. She will move on, as the world will.
Remember: this was a five-way race. The winner won with one-third of the vote.
Two-thirds of the city's Democrats went with another candidate. There'll be
little revenge-seeking after this primary, because there's no majority to
punish the minority.
-- Tony West
Bruce,
I believe it means that she isn't a king-maker, at least not anymore.
Mario
On 5/16/07, B Andersen < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What does that say about the councilwoman who backed knox?
