Blue Bigots?

A bit of juicy drama unfolded in New York this past week, as longtime allies and congressional 'neighbors' Jerry Nadler and Carolyn Maloney faced off for the Democratic nomination to represent the redrawn NY-12 Congressional district.

Nadler's been in Congress since 1992, Maloney 1993. Their districts abutted each other, and together they represented the heart of Manhattan and the gentrified portions of Queens across these past three decades.

Then the 2020 census happened. The population exodus from New York to warmer (and redder) climes, an exodus that started before the pandemic, cost New York State a seat in the House and prompted redrawing of district lines. The state's Democratic Party, with full control of the government, sought to benefit itself in Congress by attempting a blatant gerrymander. The plan was to actually pick up four seats for the Blue Team by creatively inserting true-blue-voting neighborhoods into districts held by Republicans.

Unfortunately for Team Blue, the good people of New York voted for a Constitutional Amendment that established an independent redistricting commission that ensured both parties would have an equal say in the map-drawing.

The Democrats tried to game that commission by stalling out the commission, then drawing maps to their liking after its deadline passed. Unfortunately for them, the courts ruled that they violated the state Constitution, and a special master was appointed. He drew a map with logical boundaries rather than tortured 'salamander'-esque lines that favor their party. The new map projects to cost* the Democrats four seats in Congress rather than gaining four.

And, it pitted two long-time incumbents against each other. With Nadler's 10th District redrawn to encompass lower Manhattan and parts of Brooklyn (subsuming part of NY-7), he opted to run for the midtown district rather than have to pitch himself to the bridge-and-tunnel folks on the other side of the East River.

After a rather nasty campaign, which included Maloney calling Nadler "senile" and "half dead," Nadler thrashed Maloney 55% to 24%, with a third contender, thrice-also-ran Attorney Suraj Patel, drawing 19% of the votes.

Maloney, 76 years old, will find herself back in the private sector come January. Graciousness being an increasingly alien concept, Maloney fired off accusations of "sexist systems and misogyny."

In Manhattan.

In a district that runs roughly from 23rd Street to the top of Central Park, a district that includes some of the most progressive (and wealthiest) neighborhoods in the country. As if all those who voted for Maloney across thirty years were itching for an opportunity to vote for a man. As if the wokesters of Chelsea, the Upper West Side, and Morningside Heights wouldn't welcome the opportunity to be even woker by voting for a woman.

I didn't follow the campaigns, so I won't opine as to why Nadler won. The linked Post article reports that Nadler pushed his progressive bona fides, asserting he was lefter than Maloney. Truth be told, though, to an outsider they're virtually indistinguishable.

It's rather less likely that Maloney lost because too many of the 65,000 Democrats who voted in the primary are sexists. Or because of some sort of structural patriarchy. If this were the case, how did she win 15 terms in Congress? Did Manhattanites suddenly become what they've derided and decried for decades?

Doubtful.

Nevertheless, Maloney played the sexism card, and I'm sure her devotees not only bought it, but are echoing it to all in their left-spinning orbits.

Samantha Max @samanthaellimax

Maloney praises the NY women in politics who paved the way and criticizes the sexism and misogyny that she says still plays out in politics, including in this campaign.

To what end, one might ask?

Nothing that I can conceive. Best I figure, it's just habit. Immediately devolve everything to identity politics, because that's the only tool in their toolbox, and be a sore loser instead of a gracious one.

If even the most progressive amongst us are so easily accused of sexism, doesn't that render the accusation useless, and the accuser not worth listening to?

---

If you enjoy The Roots of Liberty, please subscribe (if you have already, thank you!), and  please recommend the blog to your friends! While I share it as much as I can on social media, subscribing ensures you won't miss a post.

If you really like The Roots of Liberty and want to help keep it rolling, please consider becoming a paying subscriber here at Substack, or at a lighter level as contributor to the blog via Patreon.

Thank you for your support!

Yours in liberty,

Peter.