Hamlet on the Hudson: Mario Cuomo in 1992
- Thread starter hcallega
- Start date
To Run Or Not to Run, That is the Question
Ever since 1984, Mario Cuomo had been the superstar of the Democratic Party. His speech at the 1984 National Convention had been a rare bright spot in a generally abysmal year. An articulate, charismatic, and pragmatic liberal, Cuomo had been coveted by party leaders to run for President in 1988. However the New York Governor had not taken the jump, stating a need to focus on state political issues. But after that depressing election, one where defeat had been snatched from the jaws of victory, some within the party doubted that yet another northern liberal could take back the White House.
While there were few high profile candidates who jumped into the race for President in 1992, there were several “New Democrats”. Senators Bob Kerrey of Nebraska and Paul Tsongas of Massachusetts were both fiscal conservatives who campaigned largely on issues of economic growth and a balanced budget. Former California Jerry Brown launched into a fiery populist tirade as an opponent of NAFTA, the deficit, and high taxes. The only major voice on the left to declare early on was Iowa Senator Tom Harkin, a prairie populist in the mold of William Jennings Bryan. Then there was Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton. Clinton, a charismatic centrist from a Democratic-leaning Southern state, was quite popular among many party insiders. They saw his candidacy as a potential phoenix for the party. He couldn’t simply be branded as a “New England Liberal” or “Ivy League Elitist”. He had come from poverty to attain great personal success, and had paid his dues in the 1972 and 1976 elections, working hard for the ticket.
Subscribed. I've never seen a Cuomo TL before. Were I a Bush strategist, I'd reuse the '88 playbook, sans Willie Horton. After all, Cuomo is an ideological carbon copy of Dukakis.
Ah here we go, lol, i never heard back from you so, i figured that you wern't down for remaking it. There's been a lot of good discussion on how a Cuomo presidency would look back going back years on this board. And you of course can throw some questions to us while your writing it as well. Im excited to see where this goes and if our going to take this TL all the way up till 2012(20 years of butterfly effects is a nice endpoint)...Keep it comming
Btw, RB, remember that the GOP doesn't have Attwater during this election, so the drive to go negative won't be a strong without his influence. But who knows how differently the election will shape out(What are the best books on the '92 election...Isn't there one that they used to base Primary Colors off of?)
Oh, I almost forgot, HC...If you want to find more pictures of the candidates during 1992, set ur self up an free account with Corbis images and you should be able to find what you need.
Btw, RB, remember that the GOP doesn't have Attwater during this election, so the drive to go negative won't be a strong without his influence. But who knows how differently the election will shape out(What are the best books on the '92 election...Isn't there one that they used to base Primary Colors off of?)
Oh, I almost forgot, HC...If you want to find more pictures of the candidates during 1992, set ur self up an free account with Corbis images and you should be able to find what you need.
Just as long as the pic/press conference...doesn't leak out I think the Cuomo campaign will be a'ok.
Primary Season
"For the past eleven years, the Republican Party has held control over Washington D.C., and over those past twelve years we have deficits, poverty, and innequality increase across this whole nation. We have seen the streets of our great cities plagued with crime, while the federal governments response has been to cut funds to our cities. We have seen the deficit soar, simply to pay off tax breaks for the wealthy and priveldeged. We have seen the middle class abandoned, while big corporations are embraced. Quite frankly, we have seen too much. But no longer. Today we start anew. Today I declare my candidacy for President of the United States. As President I will fight to end poverty in this great nation, to cut the deficit, and to restore pride in all corners of our country. Today, with your help, we can change the course of this great nation."
-New York Governor Mario Cuomo, December 11th, 1991
-New York Governor Mario Cuomo, December 11th, 1991
And with that the entire landscape for the 1992 presidential election changed completely. All of a sudden a party that had lacked any clear frontrunner had one, and the likelihood an easy reelection campaign for President Bush went down the drain. But no one in the Cuomo camp was taking victory for granted. After all, 1988 had proved that public opinion could be swayed, in some cases with just one TV ad. They also knew that their candidate was to the left of most Americans, even most of the candidates in the Democratic field. To win, Cuomo would have to frame the election as a time for change, and a time for victory.
Learning from the mistakes of Ted Kennedy's Presidential Campaign in 1980, Cuomo came out early with a clear platform and set of ideas. Focusing on health care, education, and poverty, Cuomo carved out a spot as the candidate of the left. He proposed a fairly detailed health care plan which included a government funded public option, and proposed educational reform that would focus funds on struggling districts. Cuomo rarely mentioned social issues, knowing that any focus on his stance on the death penalty or gun control could doom him in Middle America.
The first primary contest was the Iowa Caucuses on February 10th. Cuomo, like most of the other candidates, didn't really contest it. Iowa Senator Tom Harkin was popular enough in the state already, and would win 69% of the vote. Cuomo would finish in second place with 8%. But for most candidates the focus had never been on Iowa, it had been on New Hampshire.
The Granite State was especially important to the 1992 Democratic Field. With two popular northeastern candidates, the polls showed a practical dead heat. While Cuomo led nationally by a fairly sizable margin, the voters in New Hampshire weren't convinced. They were receptive to Massachusetts Senator Paul Tsongas's message of a balanced budget and economic growth, and weren't as passionate about ending poverty as the New York Governor. However Tsongas lacked Cuomo's financial edge, and when the polls began to show a dead-heat, Cuomo went on the war path. Criss-crossing the state on a rented campaign buss, Cuomo spoke to crowd after crowd about the need for "an economic policy that helps every American, especially the Middle Class." He claimed that Tsongas's focus on a balanced budget would mean "cuts to education, defense, and entitlement spending" along with "tax increases on all Americans." Instead, Cuomo proposed "realing back the rampant corporate kick-backs" of the Reagan and Bush years. Cuomo would also launch a massive ad-blitz that portrayed him as the sort of compassionate candidate that could relate to the average American voter. After all, he "grew up on the floor above my parents grocery store" and "appreciated the values of hard work and persistence."
Prior to voting day, a televised debate was held with all of the major candidates. While Clinton, Brown, and Kerrey all impressed, the major focus was on Cuomo and Tsongas. The two "Mediterranean Men" clased over everything from health care to fiscal policy. Cuomo took the traditional Democratic line, while chatising Tsongas for "throwing out the baby with the bathwater". This was in response to Tsongas's attacks on the party's left for the string of recent defeats. Tsongas would respond by claiming "I'm not abandoning my party, or it's values. What I'm saying is that the American people do not want more government. They want better government." Tsongas would prevail in the debate, and would stop the bleeding of votes that had occured ever since Cuomo's blitz. The final results would reflect the close nature of the race, with Cuomo narrowly winning with 27% to Tsongas's 25%. Clinton would finish in third place with 18% of the vote, while the rest of the pack finished further behind. Cuomo had scored his first major win, but victory was far from certain.
I'm sure he thought about it, though he didn't end up running because he thought Bush was too popular to be beaten in 1992. His plan probably was to wait until 1996, where, after 16 years of Republican rule, the White House would be a lock.
Last edited:
Historico: When on the defensive Dynasticrats unleash their trademark Blitzkriegs, usually with a few good slapshots/sucker punches that hit directly in the bullseye zone come debate time.
The Battle Continues
Cuomo's victory in New Hampshire made it clear that he wasn't just a media creation. The man was for real, and his path to winning the nomination was clear. He had to keep up the momentum. His well groomed campaign had picked up the support of most liberal groups and unions following the New Hampshire victory. However the Democratic Leadership Council and other moderate organizaions were quick to prop up Governor Clinton as a dark horse in waiting. In the words of Al From, "Bill Clinton is the man of the future for the Democratic Party. Mario Cuomo represents the past. The old style liberalism of Cuomo and his supporters is dying out, and it's going to be the pragmatic policies of Clinton that will not only lead the Democratic Party, but this entire nation."
Cuomo's next challenge would be in the Maine Caucusses. Not only would he face off against Tsongas, but he would also to deal with the particularly difficult Jerry Brown. Brown, the former Governor of California, had also ran in 1976 and 1980. In both cases he had opposed Jimmy Carter from the left. But now he was running as a populist opposed to the tax-and-spend policies of Washington, aswell as a supporter of progressive policies such as a living wage and an opposition to NAFTA. Brown had run an ultra-grassroots campaign and appealed to the rough and ready voters of Maine. Of course Tsongas also appealed to the voters up north, due to his base of local supporters. To win, Cuomo would have to rely on high levels of support in Portland and among the progressive communities. The campaign also hoped to real in support among the Catholic French-Canadian community due to their shared faith.
But despite his best efforts, the voters in Maine weren't quite convinced. Brown would prevail with 25% of the vote, while both Cuomo and Tsongas captured 22%. Technically Tsongas received more votes than Cuomo, therefore knocking the Governor down to third place. But that didn't phase the campaign. If anything, the second place finish by Tsongas was crippling, as he was winless in his own backyard.
The next contest would be in North Dakota. However this race was not heavily contested, as it was only Bob Kerrey and Tom Harkin who strongly contested it. Kerrey would easily win with 35% of the vote, while Harkin finished a distant second and Clinton an even more distant third. So while Cuomo's victory in New Hampshire had set the tone for the race, it certainly had not dictated the following results.
On the Republican side, things had not been quite as crystal clear as initially thought. Conservative activist Pat Buchanan had performed quite well in the New Hampshire primary, and had poked a serious hole in the side of President Bush's credentials. Conservatives questioned his commitment to the ideals of Ronald Reagan, especially on issues of taxation. Protectionists, like Buchanan, were frustrated by his support for NAFTA. Overall, while Bush was still supported by a solid majority of Republicans, there was not the same level of confidence that followed him just four years earlier.
Entering March, the focus was on the upcomming Super Tuesday primaries. However unlike 1988 there were far less of these contests. The first major test would be on March 3rd, when voters in Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Maryland, Minnesota, Utah, and Washington. This would be a mixed bag for Cuomo, as the georgraphic nature of the states meant that it would be difficult for a sweep. In Colorado, Cuomo would narrowly emerge over a divided Democratic field. Much of his support came from Denver and the communties in the mountain areas. He also drew in strong support from union voters and latinos. In second place would be Brown, followed by Tsongas, Clinton, and then Kerrey. It was becoming increasingly clear that Kerrey and Tsongas's chances for the nomination were rapidly slipping away, while Clinton would need to sweep the south to have any chance of victory.
In Georgia and Idaho Clinton would win resounding victories, while Cuomo would capture Maryland, Minnesota, and Washington. Brown would steal a win over Tsongas in Utah due to Cuomo splitting the traditional liberal vote. Following these results, Kerrey and Harkin would withdraw from the race, while Tsongas held on for dear life. It was now a race between Clinton and Cuomo for who would be the Democrat's nominee.
Was a public option even considered in the early '90s? The modern public option - as it was conceived during the health care debate - seems to have emerged from this 2007 proposal.
I don't think Cuomo can ignore social issues forever - crime is going to come up as an issue, for instance.
I don't think Cuomo can ignore social issues forever - crime is going to come up as an issue, for instance.
Clinton has "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" (a perfect summary of DLC ideology) and can paint Cuomo as soft on crime. Cuomo will win the election, obviously, but it should be interesting to see who his Veep will be. It won't be Clinton, because there'll be too far too many bad feelings between them when the primaries are over. Bush will throw the cultural kitchen sink at Cuomo, and without Clinton, can throw the economic sink at him too.
Dukakis was a proto-DLC Democrat, though, wasn't he? Cuomo always struck me as the liberal type.
He wasn't a DLC Democrat as much as a pragmatic governor. He worked to cut spending and was supportive of pro-growth policies over the welfare state. The big problem was that he was a big social liberal, so he got pounded by Bush. As far as Cuomo, yes he was probably to the Duke's left, but not so much. Pretty ideologically simmilar to Obama or Hillary Clinton.