The city voted against Mayor Bloomberg's personal crusade for non-partisan elections yesterday at the polls, with award for best headline going to the Daily News: "No Blooming Way." The Times has the good quotes though: One person who voted against it thought it was a "weird Republican trick," and another said, "I pretty much knew if Bloomberg was for it, I was against it." After spending $2 million of his own money, Mayor Bloomberg's personal wealth is just off 0.0004% according to Gothamist's calculations.
City Says No To Non-Partisan Elections
add to digg
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.usComments (1) [rss]
Post a comment (Comment Policy)
Tips
Newsmap
Contribute
Latest Tip:
time warner has been crap for us for the last month also.
[more]
Bridgewater Township, New Jersey had nonpartisan elections under the state's Faulkner Act, from 1975 to 1983. The county Republicans didn't like them because they diluted voting strength for the G.O.P. (they lost a freeholder seat), so the word was put out to eliminate them.
Newark and Jersey City are nonpartisan elections, but only Democrats run in them.
I believe every local office in Massachusetts is nonpartisan by law.
Just some interesting facts if the issue ever comes up at a party or other get-together (political science club?)