Our Views: Let’s keep N.Y. in the political mix

The Island Now

For the past two weeks, the North Shore and the rest of New York have been gripped by the presence of presidential candidates from both parties as well as their surrogates making their cases in the flesh and addressing issues of importance to New Yorkers in advance of the primary.

This includes an appearance by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Port Washington, Ohio Gov. John Kasich in Great Neck, businessman Donald Trump in Bethpage and Heidi Cruz, wife of Sen. Ted Cruz, in Mineola.

Outside of large money donors, this is usually not the case either in primaries or the general election in New York.

The last time New York played an important role in a presidential primary campaign was 1992 when Bill Clinton defeated Gov. Jerry Brown and then-Sen. Paul Tsongas. 

If you don’t think this is important, try explaining why a subsidy exists for ethanol other than Iowa holding the first caucuses each presidential election cycle.

With New York in play this year, candidates actually have to address New Yorkers’ concerns — from the economy to New York values to Hurricane Sandy relief.

General elections have been even worse for New York..

The last Republican to win New York was Ronald Reagan in 1984 — 32 years ago — and with Democrats holding a large advantage in registered voters New Yorker are often taken for granted by both parties in presidential elections.

The problem for New York and other states with large populations in which one party dominates is that the winner of presidential elections is not chosen by the candidate who gets the most votes but the candidate who gets the most votes in the Electoral College.

The Electoral College awards the votes on a winner-take-all basis for each state — no matter what the margin of victory.

This, along with the Supreme Court, is what allowed George W. Bush to defeat Al Gore in 2000 with fewer popular votes.

The Electoral College also results in presidential candidates spending less time, and addressing fewer concerns of New Yorkers, than residents of so-called swing states where contests are more competitive.

It also means that a vote cast in New York will be less meaningful than a vote cast in Florida. 

This is not the same as Donald Trump’s complaint about the Republican convention in Colorado after losing to Ted Cruz there or the GOP’s nominating process in general.

Yes a convention is a strange way to choose delegates and yes there are many odd and perhaps undemocratic rules in the process for both Democrats and Republicans.

But, as they say, them’s the rules. 

Political parties are like country clubs with rules all their own and Trump signed up for the GOP’s rules when he decided to run as a Republican.

To complain about those rules now after losing several contests is kind of like a gambler at one of Trump’s casinos complaining that he or she didn’t know the rules of the game after losing their money. 

It is especially odd given Trump’s complaint that our leaders are stupid and he is smart. 

If he and his team are so smart, why didn’t Trump and his team figure out the rules of the game and play accordingly? Cruz certainly did.

But that’s for Trump and the Republican party to figure out.

The general election is another matter. 

The rules are not those of a political party, but of the U.S. government and, as a democracy, ought to adhere to the concept of one person, one vote where everyone’s vote counts the same. 

The  Electoral College is an outdated system of electing presidents that undermines this concept.

Eliminating the Electoral College would thrust big states with the most voters such as New York, California and Texas back into the forefront of presidential races.

It would also ensure that  every citizen’s vote counted — and New Yorkers got to see candidates at least every four years.

Share this Article