Paterson Approval Ratings Drop 20 Points at Record Low

Not good. The latest Marist College poll shows David Paterson has the lowest approval rating of any New York Governor in the poll's thirty year history. Cityroom at The New York Times:

Only 26 percent of the 1,045 registered voters surveyed said Mr. Paterson was doing either a good or excellent job, while 71 percent said he was doing a fair or poor job [Full poll details]. Even Eliot Spitzer had a higher approval rating a year ago, 30 percent, when he was the governor amid his prostitution scandal. The poll results indicate that voters believe Mr. Paterson is working hard and understands the state’s problems, but suggests people do not have confidence in his ability to lead.

Among Democrats, Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo trounces Mr. Paterson in a hypothetical primary matchup, 62 to 26 percent. In a general election, Rudolph W. Giuliani would beat Mr. Paterson, 53 to 38 percent, according to the poll.

Paterson "is even doing poorly among members of his party" with only 30% of registered Democrats saying he's doing an above average job.

Paterson's approval numbers dropped some 20 percent since the January poll. Not sure is this a reflection of the budget process, his admittedly inept handling of the Hillary Clinton replacement, or a combination of other factors. But it's still early and he can turn the numbers around.

Comments

[BLAthlete]

The Caroline Kennedy debacle ruined Patterson. If he would have handled the Senate seat quickly and properly, his approval ratings would still be strong.

[Bosie]

Of course the more the media talks about his low ratings the more the confidence in his ability to lead diminishes.

I think he's being bulldozed, because I have a hard time equating his ability to fulfill a senate seat to his overall performance. I may not know enough, but where's the hard evidence in his inability to lead?

[BLAthlete]

It doesn't, but as a political leader, he should have had enough foresight to know that his handling of the Senate seat -- you know, the same high-profile seat given up by Hillary Clinton -- would matter tremendously for him in the media as well as in the public eye. And for that alone, he has failed to be an effective political leader. Many past politicians have nosedived over far, far more trivial issues than this.

[Derrick from Philly]

This is sad news. I hope things turn around for Governor Paterson. That Cuomo can be a nasty b_t_ch (I loved his daddy--eventhough I'm told Cuomo senior did run a homophobic campaign against Ed Koch years ago).

Well, thank the Lord that Presidents and Secretaries of State don't have to take sides in their party's gubernatorial primary elections.

That's kinda' punkish of me, aint it?

[BLAthlete]

That's ANOTHER reason why Patterson screwed himself. If he would have picked Andrew Cuomo to replace Clinton in the Senate, he would have eliminated his most formidable opponent for a primary challenge in the upcoming Gubernatorial election. He's certanly no Clinton or Obama when it comes to political savvy, as nice of a guy as he may be.

[Rod Mc]

I agree totally. Picking Cuomo would have solved the primary question, but, it also gives Cuomo a national platform and closer to the White House. Which might not be what certain people would like.

But yes, Paterson is great on our issues and a great guy, but no Clinton, and certainly no Obama, when it comes to savvy. -RM