Suozzi was never going to get teh support of party insiders.  Backing an candidate against a sitting incumbent is like a Mafia captain breaking the law of Omerta.

Nor was he ever going to win more than 20% of the votes of those who normally vote in Democratic Primaries.  Generally, only the special interests (along with the Gods, Gays, Guns and Abortion crowd) vote in primaries.  One reason we are in this mess.

So to have a chance, he would have had to attract a whole boatload of additional Democrats to vote in the primaries.

The way to do that was something I recommended back on the Politicker -- expand on Fix Albany and recruit and back candidates against the legislature throughout the state, running as a group.  (Would have helped petitioning too).  In NYC the candidates would be Dems mounting primary challenges.  Elsewhere, they would be Dems running against Republicans in non-swing seats.

Doing so, he could have stood with a Black reformer in Brooklyn, a Latino reformer in the Bronx, and Asian Reformer in Queens, a yuppie reformer in Manhattan, and various progressives who are otherwise irrelevant given the political demographics where they live, and perhaps generated some publicity.  Ideally, the candidates would be people who were completely outside the political sphere and had not run for public office before.  Instead of Spitzer or Suozzi, it would be promised change from within vs. a citizen housecleaning.  With economies of scale in petitioning and advertising, a campaign like that would not have cost any more than just running for Governor.

Who knows?  He may have done this, and may have candidates waiting in the wings.  But if you're as tuned is as you imply, if he had been recruiting, you would have heard about it.  And, or course, if he had done so and decided to drop out, he could still have had an impact rather than just going home a loser.

Are the polls of likely primary voters or everyone?  I'm surprised so few have heard of Suozzi's accomplishments, but perhaps with apathy, other people are getting what they deserve.

For once Rock, you've made some sense.  But, even with your suggestion to Suozzi, you're a bit too easy on him. 

It's not that he hasn't captured the masses imagination, it's that he has had no imagination.  I can enumerate time and again where Suozzi's shallowness has prevented him from catching on.  You start your missive by saying that he doesn't remember you, I believe that.  I've met him countless times and he doesn't remember me.  He doesn't care.

He is trying to be somebody on the premise that he has done something.  His turning around the finances of a county contrast the lack of reform he has made in county government.  His county is a huge patronage mill.  HUGE.  That is not the recipe for reform.  Would a reformist's county have hired Bobby Kumar?  He has called for the reduction of property taxes after raising taxes higher than any one county executive has in history.  He has had scandal after scandal, all due to his pursuit of power, and not for the people, but his own.  What this campaign has shown is that he is a sham, and the people will not be fooled.

I applaud you for asking for him to step aside.  He is running under false pretenses.  And, even if he should run again in four years, he should set real goals for the people, instead of himself.

By being willing to publicly say that the state government has been failing the people, and being openly willing to challenge incumbents, including those within his own party, Suozzi showed more courage and vision than any politician in this state since...at least since I was too young to notice. And he inhertied a situation full of unpopular decisions -- raise taxes, cut spending -- and made them. That's the reality.

Other than contributions to myself when I ran, I've only made two political contributions. Bill Bradely got one, Suozzi the other. No regrets.

What is your idea of doing something?  The state legislators who vote for every special deal 212 to 0?  Now there are leaders!

Rock and CI:

You act like calling for reform is some sort of brave and controversial act. Every good government group, think tank and commentator has called for reform. Easier said than done. Suozzi's heroic feat was to throw Soros money at a handful of legislative elections including going after 1 relatively unpoplar democraic incumbent. It's a lot of hype.

There is no question that Eliot Spitzer is ambitious. But he is also smart, driven, clean as a whistle, meritocratic and, above all, effective.

Please take my word for it. I'm someone who tries to think carefully about policy and politics, and I've seen eliot's work first hand. 

(You act like calling for reform is some sort of brave and controversial act.  Every good government group, think tank and commentator has called for reform. Easier said than done.)

They haven't been calling for reform.  They have been on their knees, begging for reform.  Begging people with no interest in reform however defined.

The system is so rigged in favor of incumbents -- the money, the petitioning and ballot challenges, the redistricting, the limited turnout in primaries -- that it takes incredible courage to challenge one.  Especially given that those who run the system consider it an unpardonable sin, even if you are supporting the same party.

I mean think about it.

No one has ever said that it is political suicide for an elected Democrat to back an INCUMBENT REPUBLICAN in the general election.  But on all the blogs, everyone asserts that it IS political suicide to back a DEMOCRATIC challegner in a primary.  What does that mean?  Suozzi challenged a bi-partisan oligarchy.

To everything there is a season,and a time for every purpose until heaven: a time to run,and a time to runaway.

As I said before, he who fights and runs away lives to fight another day.

THATS ALL I AM SAYING.