His Ratings Might Drop So Low That He’ll Just Stop Paying Attention To What Anyone Thinks

But now that I think about it, that was the problem in the first place:

Hizzoner’s approval rating tanked since last month, dropping from 44% in February to 40% this week, according to a new poll from the Marist College polling institute — and it hasn’t even snowed since then.

So the question is which is worse — a mayor who does what he wants because he believes he has a mandate or a mayor who thinks he should still be doing what he wants in the face of a very low approval rating.

Soon he might start sounding like 2006-Era Bush:

No, listen, you know, I know people make a big deal out of these things. If I worried about polls, I would be — I wouldn’t be doing my job. And, look, I fully understand that when you do hard things, it creates consternation at times. And, you know, I’ve been up in the polls, and I’ve been down in the polls. You know, it’s just part of life in the modern era.

I think the American people — I know the American people want somebody to stand on principle, decide, make decisions and stand by them, and to lead this world toward a more peaceful tomorrow. And I strongly believe we are doing that, and I’m — I got to tell you, I’m enjoying it. It’s a fantastic opportunity.

From Advising Hillary Clinton To Making Arguments For Bike Lanes

I don’t know, this Times article sounds to me like it’s a demotion:

In a calculated shift, City Hall has turned to its savviest political strategist, Deputy Mayor Howard Wolfson, to lead a stepped-up public-relations blitz aimed at strengthening support for the lanes and minimizing political fallout for Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg.

It is rare for a deputy mayor to step directly into a municipal dispute over street space. But aides to Mr. Bloomberg say they have been increasingly frustrated in recent weeks over a spate of negative publicity for the bicycle lanes, which have provoked a lawsuit accusing the city of misrepresenting traffic data and widespread criticism for Janette Sadik-Khan, the transportation commissioner.

The city, the aides concluded, had not been aggressive enough in making its case. “We allowed the other side to frame this debate,” Mr. Wolfson said in an interview. “That’s really the bottom line: our voice was missing here.”

But It Just Can’t Be, Not In A Decade That Produced Such An Infectiously Inspiring Jay-Z/Alicia Keys Song!

Four years ago the mayor warned that New York City would have to deal with one million more people by 2030. That shocking number was meant to justify large-scale infrastructure projects, and in fact precipitated an entire blueprint suitable for mayoral-sized (or presidential-sized) aspirations.

One million people is a lot of people — New York only grew by one million people between the 1930s and the present — so it was kind of baffling why anyone would believe the mayor.

So anyway, the 2010 Census Bureau figures are out, and it turns out that population growth hasn’t exactly kept up with that torrid pace:

The Census Bureau claims 8,175,133 people were living in New York when it counted heads last spring.

That’s the highest number ever, but still just a meager 2.1% increase from 10 years before.

So if New York only gained 166,855 residents between 2000 and 2010, that’s 16,685.5 a year, well below the 50-some-odd thousand per year needed to meet the mayor’s fear-mongering predictions. The Daily News piece seems to support the angle that the census is wrong — right, shoot the messenger.

Critics will argue that urban populations are chronically undercounted. Fine — but this is a census in which even Philadelphia gained residents, reversing a decades-long decline.

In New York City’s case, I don’t think it’s the Census Bureau’s fault more than it is a matter of opportunistic politicians ginning up crises to gain support for projects intended to help themselves self-aggrandize their way into a place in history. Maybe we should just build a bridge already and attach someone’s name to it — looks better on maps anyway.

So why is this such a big deal? For one, look at the Willets Point (.pdf), the city initiative that is using eminent domain to strip business owners of their livelihoods. One of the stated purposes of the plan is to fulfill the goals of PlaNYC:

The proposed Plan would be consistent with and vital to the advancement of several of the goals of PlaNYC, which aims to create a more sustainable New York by the year 2030.

Which is to say, if the “one million new people” is a mirage, and if goals like the redevelopment of Willets Point are key components of PlaNYC, then why should the City proceed with the eminent domain abuse going on there?

That’s when it goes beyond just one man’s “vision” for the future.

How Shaky Is The Back Part Of The Yankees Rotation?

So shaky that they’re actually considering picking up newly minted Mets cast-off Ollie Perez:

According to WFAN and SI’s Jon Heyman, the Yankees have discussed signing Perez as a cheap option, although Brian Cashman appears “not that enthused” about the erratic lefty.

Star Trek 2.0: Path Of Khan

How the worldwide push toward progressive transportation goals died for Bloomberg’s sins:

Connect the dots, and this becomes a much more significant story than the future of one bike lane in Brooklyn, or even the career of one official. New York City justly sees itself as the world’s greatest city: here, in some sense, people live the way everyone would live if they had the chance. How New York — the city that still has a uniquely low level of car ownership and use — manages its transport planning in the 21st century matters for the whole world: it is the template. If cycling is pushed back into the margins of that future, rather than promoted, along with efficient mass public transit and safe, pleasant pedestrianism, as a key part of that future, the consequences will be grave and grim.

[Via.]