New York is waiting
Voters say they're still unsure about KG -- and even more unsure about Harold Ford.
Or, so it would seem from a Siena poll out this week.
The poll reports that voters continue to want someone other than David Paterson to be governor, continue to like Andrew Cuomo, continue to be unsure about Kirsten Gillibrand, and continue to think the state is headed in the wrong direction.
A few highlights after the jump.
(SRI has posted the full poll breakdown)
Governor
+ When asked about David Paterson running for governor, 64 percent of respondent said they would prefer "someone else" (only 19 percent said they'd want to see the governor elected).
+ 66 percent of respondents said they "don't believe the rumors" about Paterson.
+ Hypothetical Democratic gubernatorial primary: Andrew Cuomo over Paterson 64-22.
+ Paterson vs Republican Rick Lazio: 46-39 Lazio.
+ Cuomo vs. Lazio: 63-26 Cuomo
US Senate
+ When asked about Kirsten Gillibrand and the US Senate, 30 percent said they would vote for her; 40 percent said they'd like to see someone else; and 30 percent said they didn't know enough.
+ Hypothetical Democratic senatorial primary: Gillibrand over Harold Ford 42-16 (38 percent don't know).
+ KG vs. George Pataki (who has not said he's running): 47-41 Pataki.
+ KG vs. Republican Bruce Blakeman (who has announced he's running): 51-24 KG.
Supermarket wine, soda tax, cigarettes
+ 58 percent of respondents said they would like to see wine in grocery stores.
+ 59 percent said they opposed a "new state tax on soda and other sugared beverages."
+ 67 percent said they supported higher taxes on cigarettes.
Say Something!
We'd really like you to take part in the conversation here at All Over Albany. But we do have a few rules here. Don't worry, they're easy. The first: be kind. The second: treat everyone else with the same respect you'd like to see in return. Cool? Great, post away. Comments are moderated so it might take a little while for your comment to show up. Thanks for being patient.
Comments
The plan to put wine in supermarkets is an incredibly short sighted remedy. While the plan potentially raises revenue in the short term, it will have an extremely negative impact on the already existing liquor stores. Many families have worked for many years in making their store their most valuable financial asset. And now the state will step in and virtually destroy this for all. In addition, liquor stores closing will result in a loss of jobs (supermarkets won't hire additional clerks). Furthermore, allowing wine in supermarkets will allow for a greater occurrence of underaged drinking.
... said Bill on Feb 23, 2010 at 4:58 PM | link
Liquor stores are surviving under antiquated rules that are obsolete. Now I know that they have their limitations, but they have survived decades longer than other specialty stores that have been put out of business by department stores.
... said Mike on Feb 24, 2010 at 10:34 PM | link
I'd Still like to see supermarkets sell only NY wine, with wine/liquor stores selling out-of-state wine. Everybody wins!
... said -luke on Mar 1, 2010 at 11:12 AM | link